Polarization and Parties in State and Local Governments

A word about public speaking:




CA GOP PLATFORM

CA DEM PLATFORM

A final look at DC polarization

State Governments

• GOP gains after 2010
• One-party states

Polarization (See ch. 8 of Green) -- updated data here 

Meth Labs of Democracy

Union power in CA

An example:

The union, backed by an army of 325,000 teachers and a war chest as sizable as those of the major political parties, can make or break all sorts of deals.

Perhaps no one felt CTA's power more than Schwarzenegger. In 2005, he asked voters to decide on a batch of ballot measures that struck at the heart of the union's power.

He wanted the authority to bypass Proposition 98. He proposed restricting unions' participation in politics. And he asked that teachers be required to work longer before winning tenure.

The union responded aggressively, approving a dues hike for an instant multimillion-dollar cash infusion. It spent nearly $60 million on a punishing "No" campaign. On election day, all of Schwarzenegger's proposals tanked.

During 2009 budget talks, Schwarzenegger pushed again for flexibility in education funding, which could have meant teacher layoffs. As Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders argued in the governor's conference room, Susan Kennedy, his chief of staff, received an email on her BlackBerry.

It was from [Joe] Nuñez, the CTA lobbyist, Kennedy recalled. 

"Don't go there," it read.

Democrats in the room, Kennedy fumed, were emailing Nuñez real-time updates on the budget talks.

"It was almost as if CTA had a seat at the table," said Kennedy, herself a Democrat.

How the 2012 Republican Convention Rule Committee Could Impact the 2016 Republican Nominee

At the 2012 Republican National convention, the rules committee passed a law that prevented any candidate with fewer than eight states won to be eligible for the Party’s nomination. At the time, this served to keep Ron Paul from overshadowing Mitt Romney on the Party’s largest stage. A Libertarian with strong grassroots support, Paul, threatened Romney’s presence at the convention. In order to prevent Paul from taking the stage, the rule committee passed the eight state rule.[1]

Four years removed from the 2012 convention, the eight state rule could have a much more profound impact at the 2016 convention. If Trump cannot clinch the 1,237 delegates necessary for the nomination, the 2016 Republican Convention would be the first contested convention since 1976. But with the current eight state rule in place, Ted Cruz and John Kasich would not be eligible for the Republican Party’s nomination, as Trump is the only candidate that has won more than eight states.

Currently, many GOP committee members are eager to overturn the rule at the 2016 convention, “ ‘I’m not a big fan of the eight-state threshold. I think that’s an artificial number,’ said David Wheeler, a rules committee member from South Dakota.”[2] Morton Blackwell, a veteran National Committee man, took a different stance on the matter, “Any proposed change will be viewed as to which candidates would be helped and which candidates would be hurt. It’s a classic example of changing the rules in the middle of the game.” He goes on to state that, “It would be widely and correctly viewed as that outrageous power grab.”[3]

In the case of contested convention in 2016, the obscure rule from 2012 will have a drastic impact on the who becomes the Republican’s nominee.

---

[1] http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/republican-convention-rules-trump-cruz-221355

[2] ibid

[3] ibid

Different Perspectives on National Parties and Polarization

The Arrows of Progressive Ambition

This graphic illustrates general patterns, not immutable laws. Once in a while, a statewide official (e.g., John Garamendi) runs for the US House, but the arrow usually goes in the other direction.

The table also leaves out local offices, since their placement on the graphic depends on the size of the community.  Janice Hahn is giving up a House seat to run for LA County Supervisor.  That decision puzzles people who do not understand that supervisors have vast powers in districts that are larger than many states. 

Congress is more polarized than it was 40-50 years ago, but a look even farther back yields a different picture:

CA GOP PLATFORM

CA DEM PLATFORM

Does Sanders' Fire Still Bern?

After Bernie Sanders emerged victorious in several Western states such as Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington in the past couple days I wondered how those victories affected chances to win the Democratic nomination over Hillary Clinton. But it still seems like he has a ways to go before he can unseat Hillary Clinton. 

First, Bernie Sanders claimed that he only lost in certain states because he chose not to campaign there. But Gabriel Debenedetti poked holes in this claim, pointing out that, "Sanders invested in television ads and spent three days in Florida shortly before it voted...(and) he visited Texas for two huge rallies just three days before the primary."1  So it seems like Sanders can't necessarily rely on the fact that he has campaigned in upcoming states for sure victory. 

With Wisconsin up soon on the schedule, Sanders is hoping that the Wisconsonians, who are unhappy with Governor Scott Walker, will connect with Sanders' message. Independents can also vote so that may help Sanders too, since he will be hoping "independents and middle-class white voters turn out for him."1  Since the state is 86% white and has a "strong radical tradition"2 he could use those to his advantage.  However, Wisconsin looks promising for Clinton too since she had success in neighboring Ohio and will be hoping for a "big turnout from minorities in Milwaukee."1 She also seems to have the support of many labor unions

Sanders is also in such a big hole that it will take many more victories for him to dig himself out of it. He still trails Clinton by 268 delegates, so he needs to obtain 57%2 of the remaining delegates from the 18 states yet to vote in order to make a comeback. He doesn't necessarily have an advantage in those states either. Sanders tends to do well in caucuses since they require more passion and organization, which he has. But, "the only caucus states left are North Dakota and Wyoming. All the rest are primaries, in which Clinton has performed much better."2  After that come some more diverse big states, which plays into Clinton's strengths and the polls have reflected that so far. So in conclusion, it seems like Sanders is still a long shot to secure the nomination

 1.http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/bernie-sanders-wisconsin-democrats-clinton-221307

2. http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/can-bernie-sanders-really-win-the-nomination?intcid=mod-most-popular

Political Motive Asymmetry

In his speech, Speaker Ryan says, "In a confident America, we also have a basic faith in one another. We question each other’s ideas—vigorously—but we don’t question each other’s motives. If someone has a bad idea, we don’t think they’re a bad person. We just think they have a bad idea." 

It is true, however, that many Americans not only have a lack of faith in politics but also have a general lack of trust in people who may disagree with them on policy issues. Arthur Brooks, in his recent TED Talk, discusses political motive asymmetry, the phenomenon of assuming that your ideology is based in love and your opponent's ideology is based in hate.  

For conservatives and liberals to work together on important issues like poverty, it is crucial that they get past political motive asymmetry. If liberals continue to believe that conservatives simply do not care about the poor, there will be no way for the two sides to work together for a solution and for politics to become "ideas, passionately promoted and put to the test." If conservatives continue to believe that liberals have an agenda of purposefully inhibiting peoples' self-sufficiency, work ethic, and independence from welfare, the two sides will never trust each other enough for debates to be about ideas rather than motives.

There is a need, as Brooks discusses, for there to be more people who blur the lines between conservatives and liberals. He writes, "if you're a conservative, be the conservative who is always going on about poverty and the moral obligation to be a warrior for the poor. And if you're a liberal, be a liberal who is always talking about the beauty of free markets to solve our problems when we use them responsibly." Perhaps this can be one solution to the problem of political polarization or gridlock we see in politics.

FOR TUESDAY, PLEASE READ CH. 6, 7, AND 9 OF GREEN -- PLUS SPEAKER RYAN'S SPEECH

SIMULATION

Roles

Voting alignments in Congress  -- 

PIE: connect to what we discussed on February 16

POG:  group scorecards (see Brewer & Maisel, pp. 115-116)

Presidential leadership

• Larry O'Brien
• Nixon reflects on the 1972 election

"The greatest measure of the nineteenth century. Passed by corruption, aided and abetted by the purest man in America." -- Thaddeus Stevens said it in the Lincoln movie, though it is not clear that he said it in real life.

Parties in Government

Presidents and political networks

Edmund Burke:

But whatever the distinguished few may have been, it is the substance and mass of the body which constitutes its character and must finally determine its direction. In all bodies, those who will lead, must also, in a considerable degree, follow. They must conform their propositions to the taste, talent, and disposition, of those whom they wish to conduct: therefore, if an assembly is viciously or feebly composed in a very great part of it, nothing but such a supreme degree of virtue as very rarely appears in the world, and for that reason cannot enter into calculation, will prevent the men of talent disseminated through it from becoming only the expert instruments of absurd projects! [emphasis added]

Hill leadership

• House
• Senate

Gingrich

• Gingrich's backstory
• The special case of the Contract with America (Newt at 47 minutes in)

Voting alignments in Congress

Presidential leadership

• Larry O'Brien
• Nixon reflects on the 1972 election

State Governments

• GOP gains after 2010
• One-party states

A Look into Trump's Foreign Policy

Donald Trump endorsed a noninterventionist approach to foreign policy affairs Monday during his day-long stay in Washington D.C. His three main concerns included U.S. involvement with NATO, our military presence in Asia, and the relationship we hold with Israel.

He expressed a negative view toward the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) indicating that, "We certainly can't afford to do this anymore," because, "NATO is costing us a fortune, and yes, we're protecting Europe with NATO, but we're spending a lot of money." Trump's belief is centered around the thought that the U.S. receives little to no support from the other member of NATO.

Trump also spoke out against U.S. military presence in Asia explaining his belief that our involvement in the region is actually making our country weaker. He pointed to South Korea and explained how, "We're constantly sending our ships, sending our planes, doing our war games - we're reimbursed a fraction of what this is all costing."

On top of this, Trump delivered a speech in front of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee later that night pledging his allegiance toward Israel and taking a hard line when it comes to peace talks with the Palestinians. Toward the end of his speech, he reassured the crowd by vowing, "When I become president, the days of treating Israel like a second-class citizen will end on Day One."

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-whirlwind-day-in-dc-showcases-trumps-unorthodox-views-and-shifting-tone/2016/03/21/ef06d276-ef7b-11e5-85a6-2132cf446d0a_story.html

Challenging the power of the Speaker

In chapter 11 of Brewer and Maisel, they recount the Speakership of "Czar" Cannon (Ill, 1903-1911). With the new division of the Republican party through the rise of the Progressive movement, "preferences within the majority party in the House shifted from homogeneous to heterogeneous. Speaker Cannon, however, refused to acknowledge the new wing within his party. He wielded his exclusive power to appoint committee seats and chair positions, and he exercised his power as the chair of the Rules Committee to reward loyalists and punish traitors" (345). Eventually, the Progressive Republicans worked with Democrats to strip Speaker Cannon's position on the Rules Committee. 

This is very similar to the recent division created within the Republican Party with the rise of the Tea Party movement. The House Freedom Caucus represents the ~40 members of the House most tied to the Tea Party. This NPR article, titled "What Kind of Speaker Does the House Freedom Caucus Want?" explains that the Freedom Caucus members were frustrated that Boehner would not let them have more input on which bills get a vote and what amendments get added. They also wanted better committee assignments in the more powerful committees, such as Appropriations, Rules, and Ways & Means.  It was largely the Freedom Caucus' opposition to Speaker Boehner that led him to resign. In resigning, Boehner said, “It had become clear to me that this prolonged leadership turmoil would do irreparable harm to the institution.” 

The frustration of a new subgroup within the Republican Party towards a Speaker that would not let them have more of a voice is not a new phenomenon. Moreover, it reminds us that such a subgroup has the ability to undermine even the power of the Speaker.  

I was also curious about how the Republican Party might respond to Donald Trump steamrolling his way through the party. I thought by now the other candidates might come together like the Avengers and rally together against him. One scenario that seemed to me pretty likely now that Rubio has dropped out is that he and Cruz could form an alliance, especially since "Cruz and Rubio have similar conservative voting records in the Senate."[1] Maybe if they worked together they could unify their voters According to a Politico article, "Erick Erickson... said he thought it would be “very effective in stopping Trump.” 2

It seems like the chances of that happening are not great though. A seemingly possible scenario is Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz joining forces but so far Rubio seems reluctant to do so. Ted Cruz is at least interested in a unity ticket, even taking preliminary polls about their chances.  While it is still possible that Rubio might at least endorse Cruz, he is pretty adamant that he doesn't want a unity ticket. Although, at least some politicians think it could be an effective strategy. Doug Deason said, “If he (Rubio) had signed on before the first Super Tuesday, Cruz would have won all of the Texas votes and a lot more delegates. They may have very well won Florida.”2 Rubio seems to have had too much confidence in himself though. Since Rubio said, “I’m not running for governor. I’m not running for reelection to Senate.”3 I wonder what he will do next, especially since he seems pretty opposed to Donald Trump.

1.http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/marco-rubio-nears-ted-cruz-endorsement-220952

2. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/exclusive-marco-rubio-rejected-unity-ticket-with-ted-cruz-221066

3. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/marco-rubio-vice-president-220936

Trump and the GOP House Majority

        After doing light research on the research paper topics and browsing through the news, I found this article from Politico interesting.With nearly 700 delegates, Donald J. Trump is on his way to securing the 2016 GOP Presidential nomination. Although his success in the race thus far is a surprise in itself, many media outlets, such as Politico, claim that Trump's strong presence in the primaries may negatively affect the GOP elections in the House, perhaps costing them their majority. Although the Republicans currently have a 30-seat majority in the House, many of the Republicans who are on the November ballot with Trump are experiencing backlash for Trump's harsh comments on racism, immigration, Islam... just to name a few. Politico names a few vulnerable House Republicans such as Robert Dold and Carlos Curbelo, who are taking hard hits with Trump's attacks against women and Hispanics.
         According to a Politico article, polls are accurately reflecting these effects. For example, "The respected Cook Political Report downgraded Republicans' chances in 10 districts last Friday." The Republican party, however, has been equally aware, and outside groups have increased their fundraising and outreach efforts to try to better the Party's reputation and to wash off the affiliation with Donald Trump.
       It is extremely interesting to me (and even a little scary for that matter) that one individual can create a ripple effect within the Republican party across all political levels. It will be interesting to see how these levels. This probably brings upon a lot of frustration among Republicans, who want to keep the majority in the House and remain steadfast on their beliefs, but do not want to compromise the presidential spot for the next four years.

Source: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/trump-gop-house-majority-jeopardy-221004

Research Assignment

Pick one:

• If you are taking part in the legislative simulation, analyze your experience. Consider your role's relationship to the party system.  Even if you are playing someone who is not officially partisan, does the person's positions serve one party better than the other?  In this light, how well did your positions and goals match those of your real-life counterpart? What methods did you use? In the circumstance that you dealt with, would your counterpart have done the same? How did the simulation both resemble and differ from the real world?  
• Appraise President Obama's performance as leader of the Democratic Party.  What were his goals for the party?  In light of political and institutional constraints, how well did he perform?
• During President Obama's second term, are parties in government at the federal level more or less polarized than they were during his first term?
• Which party will control the Senate next year?  In your answer, take account of broad political and historical trends, along with the makeup of the Senate class up for election in 2016.    You may consult sites that rate Senate races, but do not take their judgments as gospel.
• Write on another topic of your choice, subject to my approval.

The specifications:

• Essays should be typed (12-point), double-spaced, and no more than six pages long. I will not read past the sixth page. 
• Cite your sources. Please use endnotes in the format of Chicago Manual of Style. Endnotes do not count against the page limit. Please do not use footnotes, which take up too much page space. 
• Watch your spelling, grammar, diction, and punctuation. Errors will count against you. Return essays (in Word format) to the Sakai dropbox for this class by 11:59 PM, Friday, April 8. Papers will drop one gradepoint for one day’s lateness, a full letter grade after that.