POLI 100C POLITICAL PARTIES
9 February 2006

  1. Anthony Downs' An Economic Theory of Democracy

    1. The Rational Choice Paradigm -- Individuals are seen as maximizing their preferences in light of their beliefs. Downs uses strong form of Rational Choice (p.6).

    2. Basic Assumptions

      1. Methodological Individualism

        1. Group actions must be understandable in terms of individual choice. That is...

        2. We can understand social processes and outcomes in terms of people’s preferences and choices.

        3. This does not deny the behavioralist tradition – preferences come from somewhere!!!

        4. Outlaws anthropomorphic (attributing human – individual – qualities [characteristics] to collective entities) statements

      2. Purposive Action -- People’s actions are purposeful – An act or behavior can be interpreted as directed to the attainment of a goal.

    3. A Logical Framework

      1. Actions -- What you can do.

      2. Outcomes

      3. States of Nature -- Links Actions to Outcomes – an individual’s action plus other peoples decisions plus chance events of nature

    4. Preferences -- In this framework what Action we choose depends on our Preferences Over the Outcomes NOT Preferences Over Actions.

    5. Downs Makes Very Strong Assumptions about Rationality:

      1. Preferences are Complete

      2. Preferences are Transitive

      3. Preferences are Stable across Choice Situations (Independence Condition)

    6. Definition of Rationality – Given that an individual’s preferences are complete, transitive, and independent, then they will act in accord with their preferences for final outcomes and their beliefs about the effectiveness of various actions available to them.

    7. Downs: Definition of Political Party – A team of individuals seeking to control the government by gaining office in a duly constituted election.

    8. When a Party wins an election it IS the Government (Parliamentary type system)

    9. Goals of Party Members (attained by gaining office):

      1. Income

      2. Prestige

      3. Power

    10. Office is not sought as a means of carrying out policies – policies are means to the attainment of their private ends. NO IDEOLOGY HERE.

    11. Parties formulate policies to win elections; they do not win elections to formulate policies.

      1. Because Party == Government, the Government will act rationally to maximize political support.

      2. Note the Logic – Team of individuals seeking their own goals leads to a vote maximizing government.

      3. Hence you get a Market-Like Result. Orderly Representative Government emerges from individual-level self-interested behavior. (Downs is an Economist!)

    12. Downs’ Model of Voters –

      1. They are Rational

      2. They receive a constant stream of benefits from Government activity (police and fire protection, schools, health care, garbage disposal, water, electricity, flood control, military protection, etc.)

      3. Voter’s Decision: Expected Party Differential = Expected Utility Income from Incumbents (if reelected) – Expected Utility Income from Opposition.

      4. Voters have (symmetric) single-peaked utility functions over the policy space.

      5. Voter Information –

        1. Human Capacity for Absorbing Information is Limited;

        2. Hence, some means of Acquiring Politically Relevant information is needed;

        3. Acquiring information is costly -- hence, we will continue to invest resources in acquiring information until the marginal return from information equals the marginal costs of the information.

    13. Spatial Theory of Voting

      1. Citizens and Candidates are distributed over the policy space.

      2. Citizens have symmetric single-peaked utility functions.

      3. Citizens will vote for the candidate closest to them.

    14. General Result – Parties Converge to the Median Voter (not true in reality)

    15. Unimodal Electorate (Downs Figure 2, p.118) and ...

      1. Everyone Votes

      2. Individuals Abstain due to Indifference

      3. Individuals Abstain due to Alienation


    16. Bimodal Electorate (Downs Figure 3, p.119) and ...

      1. Everyone Votes

      2. Individuals Abstain due to Indifference

      3. Individuals Abstain due to Alienation


    17. Entry of New Voters -- British Example (Downs Figure 6, p. 129)



    18. The 2000 Presidential Election in the United States





  2. Sundquist: Party Realignment Theory
    1. Definition of Realignment -- "A realignment is a durable change in patterns of political behavior."
    2. A Model of Realignment – An Ideal Society that divides first over an irrigation system and then over a saloon.

      1. Downs Chapter 8 Figure 2 (p. 118) – One dimensional public-works dimension.



      2. Progressives vs. Conservatives – They eventually divide into two groups over a proposal to build an irrigation system.

        1. Progressives are activists and believe the role of government should be an activist one and the government should take risks to better society. Progressives see Conservatives as people without vision who are more concerned about personal short-run material satisfaction than long-run public good.

        2. Conservatives fear the consequences of these risks and are suspicious about the “new” society that the Progressives want to build. Conservatives see Progressives as reckless and profligate spenders of the people’s money.

      3. Saloon – Someone wants to build a saloon. This splits both parties.

    3. Realignment Scenarios (Spatial Theory Interpretation of Realignments -- Poole and Rosenthal Figure 5.1)



      1. No Realignment – The two parties take the same position on the issue and the salience of the issue declines as a result. (System freezes at B or C in Figure 5.1)

      2. Realignment in which Neither Party is Replaced – Pro-Salooners take over the Progressive Party and the Anti-Salooners take over the Conservative Party. (System freezes at D in Figure 5.1)

      3. Realignment in which One Party is Replaced – A new party enters – the Liberal Party – as Pro-Saloon and absorbs members of both the Progressive and Conservative party. (System freezes at D or E in Figure 5.1)

      4. Realignment in which Both Parties are Replaced – Two new parties enter – the Liberal Party and the Prohibition Party – System completely realigns on saloon issue. (System freezes at E in Figure 5.1)

    4. The Essential Dynamic – The Center Does Not Hold – The new issue produces two polar blocs and a centrist bloc. If the Centrists in both old Parties can retain control then realignment is avoided.

    5. Five Variables That Affect Realignment

      1. Breadth and Depth of the Underlying Grievance

        1. How long does the issue last?

        2. Is the Issue a Moral One? If it is perceived as “the forces of light” versus “the forces of darkness” then people are more likely to switch parties.

        3. Slavery vs. Abortion

      2. Capacity to Provoke Resistance –

        1. Is the issue zero-sum?

        2. Does solving one problem create a new problem? Does it create a new “injustice”? (Redistribution of Wealth; Affirmative Action)

      3. Leadership –

        1. The power and capacity of the established party leadership are matched against the strength and momentum of the issue.

        2. If the Issue is a moral one then compromise may be seen as reprehensible – one cannot compromise with evil.

      4. Division of Polar Blocs Between the Parties

        1. If the opposing blocs polarized around an issue fall mostly into the existing parties then realignment will be easy. The new issue is simply absorbed into the current alignments. (This is something like Figure 5.1 D)

        2. If the blocs are about evenly split between the parties the realignment will be delayed. (The A to E process shown in Figure 5.1)

      5. Strength of Existing Party Attachments – The weaker the identification that people have with a political party, the easier it is to separate them from the party and trigger a realignment. Factors:

        1. Age – Partisan attachments get stronger with age. Young people who do not remember the issue conflict that created the current alignment tend to be weaker party identifiers.

        2. Reference Groups – Most groups in society have some degree of partisan bias which sometimes is embedded in the group’s tradition and most people belong to one or more such references groups – family; racial; ethnic; religious.

        3. Personal (Economic) Philosophy – This causes cross-pressure – Catholic Businessmen (at least until the 1980s).

  3. The Realignment of the 1850s

    1. The Founders Tried to Duck The Issue:

      1. Section. 2. Clause 3: Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

      2. Section. 9. Clause 1: The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

      3. Amendment XIII. (ratified 6 December 1865)

        Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

        Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

    2. The Invention of the Cotton Gin by Eli Whitney in 1793







    3. The Formation of the Whig-Democrat Mass Based Political Party System








    4. The Economy Before the Civil War







    5. The Crisis Over the Extension of Slavery to the Territories





    6. The Election of 1860