Opinion Editorial | |
| Wednesday, August 11, 1999 | |
Electoral Reform Could Increase Third Party Influence |
Frustration with the virtual monopoly of the Republican Party and Democratic Party in their almost total control of the U.S. political system is fueling renewed interest in third parties on both the right and the left. But unless the election laws are changed, the chances of any of these parties being anything but spoilers are nil. The problem is that the Electoral College's requirement that presidential candidates get an absolute majority leaves little room for third parties. That is why many of those disenchanted with the two-party system are becoming more interested in a parliamentary form of government.
Under parliamentary systems, the executive and legislative branches of government are merged. The leader of the ruling party of the legislature is the head of government. Thus the nation's chief executive always has a majority in the legislature. Furthermore, elections can be called whenever the ruling party loses its majority or a vote of no confidence, and the head of government can change even without an election.
For these reasons, parliamentary systems are much more responsive to changes in public opinion than our system, where presidential elections take place only every four years and the legislature is elected separately. But the responsiveness of parliamentary systems is also their weakness. There is far less stability in parliamentary systems because although change can be instituted faster, it can also be undone more easily. It is more difficult to pass legislation in our system, but as a consequence legislative changes tend to have more permanence than in parliamentary systems.
Another perceived virtue of parliamentary systems is that they give greater voice to third parties. It is usually easier to elect candidates from third parties to the legislature, where they often are able to join the government as members of a coalition. Indeed, third parties frequently hold the balance of power in many countries such as Israel, which gives them disproportionate influence on policy. But again there is a price to be paid and that is instability and gridlock. In extreme cases like Italy there may be several different governments per year, none with a solid majority that could actually get something done.
One possible compromise that would increase the influence of third parties without radically changing our system of government would be to allow cross endorsement of candidates. Such a system has operated successfully in New York for many years. That state has not only a Republican and a Democratic party, but a Conservative Party, a Liberal Party and a Right to Life Party. Candidates for office may run on multiple tickets, with their votes on all tickets consolidated in the end.
This gives third parties great influence. Liberals can often derail a Democratic candidate by withholding their endorsement and the Conservatives can block a Republican by denying their line as well. It also provides for interesting alternatives, such as a Republican with Liberal endorsement or a Democrat also running on the Conservative line. And occasionally these parties are also able to elect candidates in their own right. For example, James Buckley was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1970 on the Conservative line without the Republican Party's endorsement.
There is no reason why such a system could not operate nationally. It preserves the essence of the two party system while providing a more meaningful outlet for those frustrated by the sameness of the major parties than current third parties, which now have no real influence. Allowing cross endorsement, at least in federal elections, could increase interest in politics, raise voting rates and provide an ideological conscience for Republicans and Democrats who now have none.
Source: Bruce Bartlett, senior fellow, National Center for Policy Analysis, August 11, 1999.
The National Center for Policy Analysis is a public policy research
institute founded in 1983 and internationally known for its studies on public policy issues.
The NCPA is headquartered in Dallas, Texas, with an office in Washington, D.C.
Julie Hillrichs, Dallas, TX 972-386-6272 Sean Tuffnell, Dallas, TX 972-386-6272 Joan Kirby, Washington, DC 202-220-3082 Internet: http://www.ncpa.org Home | Support Us | All Issues | Social Security Debate Central | Contact Us |