Comparative Politics - Electoral systems Flashcards

Question

Similarities and differences between the UK and USA concerning campaign and party finance: Structural aspects of campaign finance cont. -

Answer 1

- State funding of campaigns - in the UK, far more is done by the government to assist with election costs on a politically neutral basis e.g. voter registration is undertaken centrally by the government, leaving no scope for party involvement; in the USA, much party energy and cash is absorbed by registration drives, especially with Democrats trying to win ethnic-minority votes - UK candidates are also legally entitled to free postage of one piece of election literature, which costs British taxpayers £42 million (2017 election) - no equivalents exist in the US and attempts at ‘matched funding’ are weakened by court cases such as the 2011 Bennet cases and by leading candidates reluctance to embrace voluntary caps on campaign expenditure - no major presidential candidate has accepted matched funding since 2008 - Pressure groups - UK pressure groups are much more tightly regulated in terms of their political activities, especially at election time; the Charity Commission seeks to ensure charities to not spend money on campaigning against or for particular parties or candidates as charities cannot have political purpose - UK charities cannot openly support or donate to parties; but, in the USA, many pressure groups can endorse, donate to and campaign for candidates using their political action committees (PACs) or associated 501/527 groups - Legal framework - spending in the UK, under the terms of the Communications Act 2003, means that TV airtime cannot be purchased for political ads, but instead major parties are allocated free slots for party election broadcasts, with no such restrictions in the USA - one estimate calculated $10.8 billion was spent on the 2020 election ads

Answer 2

- Interest groups and donors - far more influence in the US than the UK, as there is far more rationale for wealthy individuals and pressure groups in the US to donate and become actively involved in political campaigning (Sheldon Adelson and George Soros are frequent donors) - Opportunities are more restricted in the UK, but there remain many wealthy individual donors such as bankers who supported Cameron and Johnson and controversial donors such as the Leader’s Group (2003) donate millions to Conservative Party coffers, and some trade unions such as Unite fund Labour - In both countries, the wealthy donate out of political empathy but also out of a desire to secure policies favourable or not detrimental to their interests, and be presumed to enjoy a higher degree of personal contact with political figures - Electoral battlegrounds - spending is rationally focused on electoral battlegrounds, which is much easier to achieve in the US than the UK where vast sums are spent on campaigning and advertising in states such as Florida; it is less easy in the UK because expenditure is more tightly controlled but the advent of digital ads has made it easier for UK parties to spend money on nationally funded but hyper-local ad through buying data, especially in demographics to target voters

Answer 3

- Campaign finance occupies more of an explicit place in US politics and the fundraising also continues throughout terms with constant receptions, which Biden used in 2020 to gain funding through virtual fundraisers - Heavily influenced by 1st Amendment notions of individual rights and freedoms, extending to the freedom to make political donations, which since the Citizens United case has been viewed as a legitimate extension of political expression - there is however still a suspicion on government interference in the ‘right to spend’ - In the UK, political culture is more nuanced; there is a tradition of political donations, but there is more willingness to accept some state involvement in regulating campaign funding even if wholesale reforms to party funding including greater state funding remains stalled and there is less recourse to the courts to expand the parameters for spending - However, ‘Cash for Honours’ has been an allegation levelled at Conservative and Labour leaders, and the ‘spoils systems’ in the US enables presidents to give ambassadorships to generous donors - There is an expectation in the UK of equal campaign finance on the political playing field but in the US individual rights and initiative play more of a vital role

Answer 4

Theories of comparative politics: - Structural theory - how the different structures government of the constitutions and governmental systems compare - Rational theory - differing political choices that voters make in the UK/US, such as parties and pressure groups - Cultural theory - differing histories of both countries and how this has affected the doe of political debate and activity

Answer 5

Cultural aspects to third parties: - UK third parties have deeper historical roots than their US counterparts, with the LibDems tracing their origins to the beginning of parliamentary government and were dominant in the early 20th century - nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales can trace their roots to the interwar period and the nationalist / unionist has roots in the 19th century - Sinn Fein won its first Westminster seat in 1918 - In contrast, third parties are relatively new in the US, with the Libertarians founded in 1971 and the Green Party in the 1980s; in the US, third parties rise and quickly disappear, for example with Wallace and the American Independent Party - Regional and cultural diversity each have different effects in each country - in the UK, the distinct culture (language, legal and education systems) of the devolved regions provides a natural setting for third parties and the appeal of Nationalist parties - In the US, there is even more cultural, ethnic and regional diversity, but the country is so large and diverse that there would be too many third parties that would make national politics impossible - Or, you would have a two national party system with distinct regional characteristics; the US is therefore two-party and the UK multi-party as a result - Independence, one of the main parts of the UK third parties, is also impossible in the US as the American Civil War but an end to any secession from the Union

Answer 6

- Whilst FPTP allows for most elections in both countries to cement a two-party system, some aspects of the US structure promote two-party systems - Laws on ballot access - makes it hard for candidates from third parties to get on the ballot as large amounts of signatures are needed or a percentage of the votes in previous election - Lack of national election system - translates into a handicap for smaller parties, as many states have high thresholds; the third party presidential candidate filing fee for Oklahoma for 2020 was $35,000 Requirements in the UK are a lot lower, with candidates requiring a £500 deposit (refundable if over 5% of the vote is achieved) and a nomination form signed by just ten voters - Televised presidential debates are structured is a further obstacle for independents; to qualify for a debating slot, candidates have to poll on average 15% in five designated polls, creating a scenario in which they need publicity in order to get onto the debates to grow support and publicity, but a lack of publicity in the first place makes it hard to even register poll numbers

Answer 7

- Dominance of the two-party system creates its own reinforcement; high profile independently minded candidates like Trump and Sanders who could run outside the party label choose instead to run for the nomination of one of the two main parties; the existence of primaries and how they operate increases the incentive to run under the ‘mega-party label’ - Because of the emphasis on personalities, individual platforms and voter appeal, the primary system attracts a wide variety of candidates vying for nominations at all levels who often owe little to the central party organisation - It sometimes appears that US parties are comprised of independent political operatives with their own donor base, campaign team and particular message, and this is still reflected in the weaker party unity often shown in some Congressional issues despite a rise in hyperpartisanship - When party defections occur, they happen between Republicans and Democrats; Jeff Van Drew defected from the Democrats to the Republicans in 2020 In the UK, a lack of a primary system means that there is a lot more attraction for candidates to seek election via other parties than Labour and the Conservatives, and party defections usually involve the Liberal Democrats - Heidi Allen and Chuka Ummnna from Change UK in 2019 defected to the LibDems, and others stand as independents when disillusioned from their parties, including Labour’s Frank Field but this case defied harsh electoral logic, being defeated at the general election - Most disaffected UK politicians feel it makes sense politically and morally to leave main parties - Also makes rational sense in both countries to vote for the two main parties in order to not waste a vote, which is especially true in the US where every state is essentially a two-party contest at both state and national level, and whilst this is true for a majority of Labour/Conservative electoral battlegrounds, there are some states which have scope for tactical voting, benefiting parties such as the LibDems in particular - In 2019, Daisy Cooper defeated incumbent Conservative Anne Main in St Albans, helped by a collapse in the Labour vote there which fell by 8,000, suggesting a large chunk of Labour supporters switched votes

Answer 8

- This is the sharpest contrast between the two political systems - third parties are more important in the UK, and independents are more important in the USA; in the 2020 election, 98% of votes were for Trump and Biden, whereas only up to 80% of the vote was Conservative/Labour in the UK - However, the UK is somewhat two-party at the current time, with the three most recent elections seeing a third party balance of power between 2010-2015 and 2015-2017, corrected in 2019 with a return to Labour/Conservative dominance

Answer 9

- Resulted in a formal coalition in 2010-2015 between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, and this allowed a third party hand in policy with the LibDems in cabinet, seen in an alternative vote referendum and scrapping compulsory ID cards for voters - During May’s minority government, a less formal ‘confidence and supply agreement’ was established with the DUP (NI), with the deal securing a £1 billion funding package for Northern Ireland and an agreement to safeguard the union from the Conservatives - There is no historical parallel of third parties balancing the power in the US, with Congressional control residing with one of two main parties often with one chamber controlled by one party and the other chamber by the other, requiring a different approach to political compromises to pass legislation - The incentive is generally to try and secure bipartisan support, but third parties are entirely excluded from this system, and there is also no equivalent in the US of national elections being won by a third party such as the success of the Brexit Party in 2019 winning the final European Elections involving the UK

Answer 10

- In the devolved assemblies with their different electoral systems STV and AMS, the two main parties struggle to dominate, with the party system in Northern Ireland being entirely void of the main parties (they have no representation there) and in Wales and Scotland, Plaid Cymru and the SNP dominate their Assembly and Parliament respectively, even in a minority government - given the growth of power in devolved assemblies, third parties are additionally significant in these institutions (third parties significant on a level below Westminster government) - In contrast, no state government in the USA deviates from the norm of two party control, with a lack of representatives in major offices at any level - former Republican Senator Weicker won the 1990 Connecticut gubernatorial election for his newly formed A Connecticut Party, but like Wallace’s American Independence Party in 1968, the party was based around a single figure and had no longevity - For Libertarian and Green parties, any elected posts held by their members are at the lowest rung of local government such as district school boards or town councils - in 2020, Libertarian Charles Boust had an auditor post in Pennsylvania and former wrestler Jesse Ventura won a 1998 Governor’s race in Minnesota on the Reform Party ticket in a close contest but soon quit the party and became an independent - In contrast, UK parties have frequently run local council elections including major cities like Portsmouth and Liverpool - This lack of representation means that third parties in the USA struggle to have any significant impact on national policies and legislation - unlike the UK, there is no evidence of policy compromise and shifts to accommodate coalition partners - The closest to this in the US is co-optation of policies, where a main party adopts a third party policy e.g. Ross Perot’s plan to eliminate federal budget deficit, which was then adopted by both parties in 1992, and in 2019 the Democrats adopted the Green Party’s New Deal with its emphasis on tackling climate change, lessening the appeal of the Greens and a loss of potential votes for them

Answer 11

- There is also little incentive for potential candidates in the USA to run outside the two-party system, with the traditional broad appeal and looser central structure (big tent parties), with third parties and independents simply acting as ‘spoilers’ by splitting tickets in some crucial areas e.g. Ralph Nader, a Green candidate, won enough left-leaning votes in Florida to spoil the chances of Democrat Al Gore, leaving George Bush to take the swing state and the President - Gore was ironically a committed environmentalist - Battleground states in 2016 and 2020 also saw third parties take more votes in the three Rust Belt swing states than the winning margins of the two victorious candidates - There is also evidence of this in the UK, with votes for third parties clearly determining the outcome of the election often in a way voters regret - in 2019, former Labour leader Ed Miliband who was strongly Remain, kept his seat in Doncaster North with a majority of around 2,000 over the Conservatives, with the Brexit party coming in 3rd with over 8,000 votes, spoiling the ‘pro-Brexit’ cause

Answer 12

- Independents tend to be more prominent in the US than third parties, especially as they are often focused around their founder and so essentially operate as independents regardless - in 2020, the two senators not formally affiliated to either main party, King in Maine and Sanders in Vermont were elected officially as independents but had close relations with the Democrats and neither were opposed by Democrats in their Senate races - In contrast, very few independents are elected in the UK and when they are it is normally because at least one party has stood down for them - former BBC reporter Martin Bell stood and won in 1997 as an independent in the Conservative safe seat in Tatton - no Labour or Liberal Democrats contested the seat, but he was the first novice independent MP to be elected since 1951 - Party politics dominate the political landscape in both the US and the UK, but there is an additional obstacle in the UK that wealthy individuals wishing to run as independents are unable to spend unlimited amounts on their campaign - There are flurries of support for charismatic independents, but none have the support to win elected office; the UK system favours third parties, and the US system favours independents