Partisanship is the political ideology that divides the people of the United States into two parties, Democrats and Republicans, and it has plagued our government for long enough. Partisanship has plagued our nation because this idea, that appeared to be good at the start, has caused great turmoil in the government and has made compromises so difficult to come by. It has turned politics into a competition and both sides are more focused on beating each other rather than do what is best for the country and compromise. Since, young voters today are not very well versed on the important issues, in politics, it is necessary that high schools implement a required course that sets out to teach the students what they need to know, for elections, through a book that goes in-depth on the constitution and the news, to bring up current issues.
The first is “Bipartisanship” by an unknown source, which highlights the evolution of partisanship in the U.S. and shows how far apart the two parties are on some issues. The second is “On Partisanship” by S.W. of The Economist and this article is about how people are worried about the state of the government as a result of partisanship. Both of these articles reference how the founding fathers, specifically James Madison, did not think that political parties were a good idea for the young nation. Although they do differ on what they think about partisanship, S.W. says “The only way democracy works is for elected officials representing often radically divergent opinions to be forced—through conflicting election results—to hammer out compromises.”(S.W.) Whereas the other article provides information that partisanship is having an extreme negative impact on the compromising process, because they’re so...
... middle of paper ...
...isfy a nation that is hungry for a successful government that informs their public.
This enlightening course will result in a well-versed public that is ready to fix this uncooperative government. It will inspire new candidates for election that know what the public wants and needs and they will work to achieve these things. It will bring forth more moderate Democrats and Republicans which is what half of Americans wanted in the 2008 election. (Bipartisanship) These are the types of politicians that are needed in order to cure this plague!
Works Cited
S.W. “On Partisanship.” The Economist. The Economist, 17 Nov. 2010. Web. 21 Jan. 2014
“Bipartisanship.” InfoBase Learning. Issues and Controversies. 2Facts, 22 Feb. 2008. Web.
21 Jan. 2014
Although national political parties were considered “divisive and disloyal”, the first two-party system of the United States, Hamiltonian-Federalists and Jeffersonian Republicans, emerged during George Washington’s administration. The political division was later sharpened with Jay’s Treaty. They differ from each other in various aspects. Nevertheless, the political turbulent during the 1790s greatly expanded the public sphere.
The Founding Fathers were a revolutionary group, diverse in personalities and ideologies but shared the common goal of American liberty. They understood that the citizens should have a say in their government, and the government only obtains its power from the citizen’s consent. In order to avoid endless debates on issues that needed to be solved immediately, the revolutionary leaders compromised their beliefs. Joseph J. Ellis writes of the compromises that changed the constitutional debate into the creation of political parties in, The Founding Brothers. The 3 main chapters that show cased The Founding Brothers’ compromises are The Dinner, The Silence, and The Collaborators.
On the national civics assessment, “two-thirds of 12th graders scored below ‘proficient’…and only 9 percent could list two ways a democracy benefits from citizen participation” (O’Connor and Romer 4). The information provided clarifies just how little students know about democracy. Without education on the subject, they are unaware as to how their government contribution is beneficial and why it is needed in the first place. The students, because of their lack of understanding, therefore choose to not take part in their government and fail to carry out their duties as a citizen. The authors provide more research that shows “the better people understand our history and system of government, the more likely they are to vote and participate in the civic life” (O’Connor and Romer 8).
The articles bear similarity in that they both discuss matters relating to America’s political system. Both works address the apparent disinclination of Americans
8.In order for political success, both sides of the political spectrum must be critically examined in order to omit mistakes and for cultural advancement. Over two hundred years of United States politics have seen many changes. The names of parties may have changed, but the bi-partisan feature of the party-system has not. Republicans and Democrats are our two major partisan groups in present day America. Sometimes there are disagreement amongst party members that lead to dispute and a less concentrated effort. That is the beauty of a democracy, everyone is allowed to put their two cents worth in.
Was the formation of a two-party system in America inevitable? Despite George Washington’s warnings of the drawbacks in his farewell address, America continued on its path, and the system was established anyway. The emergence of a two-party system was inevitable in the United States for many reasons. One reason for the two party systems that formed were simply common issues of the day. This included the issue of federal power versus state power, which dominated American politics during the 1700s. America was also quite polar, meaning different regions tended to have different views and opinions from the others. Political parties often appealed to specific regions. Matters of the day were very influential on the types of political parties present in America, who tended to form around issues, rather than issues being assigned to them like in present day politics.
Partisanship is a natural phenomenon for Human beings; we seek out, long for, and align ourselves with others who share our views. Through these people, we polish our ideas and gain courage from the knowledge that we are not alone in our viewpoint. Factions give breadth, depth, and volume to our individual voice. James Madison, the author of the Federalist #10 underlined the causes of factions, the dangers factions can pose, and solutions to the problem.
In today's day in age, the Democratic and Republican parties seem to be completely diverse. These two parties have completely opposing views on topics ranging from social issues, health care, tax policy, labor and free trade, foreign policy, crime and capital punishment, energy and environmental issues, and even education. Once upon a time however, these two groups were not as polarized as they have become. Both were once a single party known as the Democratic-Republican Party, formed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1791. This sole party favored the idea of a decentralized, democratic government. They despised the idea of the U.S government becoming anything similar to England's monarchy system at the time. They also supported states’ rights as well as the literal and strict interpretation of the U.S Constitution. The group's purpose was to stand against the Federalists who were
The United States of America has engaged in the battle known as political polarization since before its foundation in 1776. From the uprising against the powerful British nation to the political issues of today, Americans continue to debate about proper ideology and attempt to choose a side that closely aligns with their personal beliefs. From decade to decade, Americans struggle to determine a proper course of action regarding the country as a whole and will often become divided on important issues. Conflicts between supporters of slavery and abolitionists, between agriculturalists and industrialists, and between industrial workers and capitalists have fueled the divide. At the Congressional level there tends to be a more prevalent display of polarization and is often the blame of Congress’ inefficiency. James Madison intentionally designed Congress to be inefficient by instating a bicameral legislation. Ambition would counter ambition and prevent majority tyranny. George Washington advised against political parties that would contribute to polarization and misrepresentation in his Farewell Address of 1796. Washington warns, “One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts.” Today, the struggle to increase power between political parties results in techniques to gain even the smallest marginal gains. To truly understand political polarization, we must examine data collected through a variety of means, the effects of rapidly changing technology, and observe what techniques are used to create such a polarized political system.
In discussing the problems surrounding the issue of factionalism in American society, James Madison concluded in Federalist #10, "The inference to which we are brought is that the causes of cannot be removed and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects." (Federalist Papers 1999, 75) In many ways, the nature of American politics has revolved around this question since our country's birth. What is the relationship between parties and government? Should the party serve as an intermediary between the populace and government, and how should a government respond to disparate ideas espoused by the factions inherent to a free society. This paper will discuss the political evolution that has revolved around this question, examining different "regimes" and how they attempted to reconcile the relationship between power and the corresponding role of the people. Beginning with the Federalists themselves, we will trace this evolution until we reach the contemporary period, where we find a political climate described as "interest-group liberalism." Eventually this paper will seek to determine which has been the most beneficial, and which is ultimately preferable.
There is much debate in the United States whether or not there is polarization between our two dominate political parties. Presidential election results have shown that there is a division between the states; a battle between the Democratic blue states and the Republican red states. And what is striking is that the “colors” of these states do not change. Red stays red, and blue stays blue. Chapter 11 of Fault Lines gives differing views of polarization. James Wilson, a political science professor at Pepperdine University in California, suggests that polarization is indeed relevant in modern society and that it will eventually cause the downfall of America. On the contrast, Morris Fiorina, a political science professor at Stanford University, argues that polarization is nothing but a myth, something that Americans should not be concerned with. John Judis, a senior editor at The New Republic, gives insight on a driving force of polarization; the Tea Party Movement. Through this paper I will highlight the chief factors given by Wilson and Judis which contribute to polarization in the United States, and will consider what factors Fiorina may agree with.
Today, political parties can be seen throughout everyday life, prevalent in various activities such as watching television, or seeing signs beside the road while driving. These everyday occurrences make the knowledge of political parties commonly known, especially as the two opposing political parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. Republican and Democrats have existed for numerous years, predominantly due to pure tradition, and the comfort of the ideas each party presents. For years, the existence of two political parties has dominated the elections of the president, and lower offices such as mayor, or the House of Representatives. Fundamentally, this tradition continues from the very emergence of political parties during the election of 1796, principally between Federalist John Adams and Anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson. Prior to this election people unanimously conformed to the ideas of one man, George Washington, and therefore did not require the need for political parties.1 However, following his presidency the public was divided with opposing opinions, each arguing the best methods to regulate the country. Ultimately, the emergence of different opinions regarding the future of the United States involving the economy, foreign relations, ‘the masses,’ and the interpretation of the Constitution, led to the two political parties of the 1790s and the critical election of 1800.
To truly understand my “mental story” in its entirety, it is important to look back upon my mentality when I chose to take AP Government and also what I previously knew before my first day of class. Politics was never my subject of choice. When I toured Georgetown and almost chose to pursue it, I convinced myself that the political scene and Washington D.C was not all that interesting to me. However, as the political scene began to somehow consistently appear on nearly every television channel, I decided that government and politics were areas that I might find interest in. As a naïve sophomore, I decided I would dedicate my senior humanities to studying government because I lacked a great amount of knowledge. The information I did know was limited, however. I knew Political figures are in a constant pursuit of power, and that democracy is the rule by the people. On the other
Changing America for the better starts with educating its populace. I firmly believe that Challenger School is one of America's greatest assets, which will provide its students with the tools to fix the problems born of ignorance, indifference, and greed. By fostering free thought, encouraging students to ask questions, and educating them about their constitutional rights, the young students of Challenger School will become the leaders and thinkers who improve
Politics and the Art of Compromise Politics is referred to as the "art of compromise". It is essential to a democratic society. Elected officials meet in legislative chambers to hammer out policies that all constituents can live with. Successful politicians learn early on the survival value of compromise. Economist Donald Wittman (1995: 154) correctly observes, "That is what good politicians do: create coalitions and find acceptable compromises."