POL200 Would the current contentious polarized dynamics in U.S. democracy be improved if there were multiple political parties present in the U.S. federal government?

The Question:

Would the current contentious polarized dynamics in U.S. democracy be improved if there were multiple (i.e., more than 2 major political parties) political parties present in the U.S. federal government? Why or why not? (600-800 words)

My Essay

“To judge from the conduct of the opposite parties, we shall be led to conclude that they will mutually hope to evince the justness of their opinions, and to increase the number of their converts by the loudness of their declamations and the bitterness of their invectives.”
~ Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers No. 1

Official Opposition

One type of government most common throughout much of Europe, South Asia and many former British Colonies is a Parliament. Dr. Lawrence Joseph says that “An official opposition in parliament plays a most significant role in the governance of a country.”

An official body purpose is to, literally oppose the government. Jay Makarenko, from Canada, sums it up for us: “In this role, the opposition takes on an adversarial role vis-à-vis the government…routinely criticizing government legislation and actions, as well as providing the Canadian public with alternative policies. In some cases, the opposition may even organize to bring down the government, by voting against key pieces of government legislation...

Germany’s Bundestag has a similar committee called Scrutiny of the government. This body of the government is similar to the Official Opposition noted above in that their function is, as the name implies, to scrutinize the government. There are permanent committees for oversight, as well as bodies which are established to scrutinize specific policy at need. A scrutiny committee is set up if a motion is supported by one quarter of the parliament. Compare this to the “simple majority” of just over half or the “super majority” which requires two thirds. That the scrutiny is easy to introduce gives easy access for the scrutinizing to begin.

Compare that with the US, where we have “watchdogs”, private organizations run by non-governmental groups. Missions range from fraud, waste, corruption, abuse of authority, illegal activity and so on. [Wikipedia]

Modern Opposition

George Anastaplo Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, writes “Loyal Opposition may be built into any system, such as that in the United States, which has an effective separation of powers.” Further, that by changing political parties by virtue of a newly elected president from a political party opposite the former, essentially, a Loyal Opposition is taking over. 

Pre-1804, the Presidential selection process was different than what we have now.  “The United States Constitution… originally provided that the Vice President would be the person who secured the second highest number of electors for the Presidency.”

What this means, is that the President and Vice President would be opponents. This assures that a Loyal Opposition be operating. Why, then, was it changed in 1804 in the 12^th Amendment?

Professor Sanford Levinson interprets the 12^th amendment for us. Firstly, the voting process was different than modern day. Each person voted for two candidates. The one with most votes became president and the runner up vice president. That system (to quickly summarize) in the late 1700’s lead to a tie, forced out the incumbent and ended up with “lame ducks” in the lead.  Indeed, the Framers’ system as Sanford says “[reflected] the desire… to avoid development of political parties and focus indeed on some notion of “best men.”

Maybe it’s all about Finance

NPR’s Ari Shapiro reflects that in a parliament, the majority is fairly stable. “It would be as if the American president’s party always controlled Congress” Current political environment events conclude that would be a less than ideal solution for modern times. Likely that’s where a strong opposition or scrutiny comes in to play in that system of government?

Shapiro’s interview with Boston University's Cathie Jo Martin, president of the American Political Science Association, she said “I think the campaign finance issue is probably the single most important difference between America and the rest of the world,"

Thomas Patterson investigates this under a header aptly titled “Unequal Access to Resources” wherein he says corporations have an advantage over citizens groups. Corporations, for example Ford, Chrysler and General Motors have successfully lobbied government to reduce fuel efficiency standards. Not a political party unto themselves, but certainly worth noting for the voice they give government and ideologically speaking, a direct opposition to the concept of governmental Scrutiny.

Paralleling that concept is a comment made by president Barrack Obama in 2013, prophetical for current events: “You have some ideological extremist who has a big bankroll and they can entirely skew our politics.”

Closing

I’m not convinced the current government should not have some built in opposition. Either a Loyal Opposition as many countries have, or a pre-12^th Amendment system. That the framers warned about the perils of parties, and that they built in a system designed to have opposition working together should not have been overwritten so hastily.

Bibliography

Anastaplo, George. "Loyal Opposition in a Modern Democracy." Loyola University Chicago Law Journal 35.Issue #4 Summer 2004 Article 2 (2004). <https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1253&context=luclj>.

Hamilton, Alexander. "The Federalist Papers No. 1." 1787. 5 Mar 2020. <https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed01.asp>.

Joseph, Dr. Lawrence A. The Importance Of Having An Official Opposition In Parliament. 20 May 2014. 6 Mar 2020. <https://thegrenadainformer.com/columnists/item/1547-the-importance-of-having-an-official-opposition-in-parliament>.

Levinson, Sanford. Common Interpretation: The Twelfth Amendment. n.d. 6 Mar 2020. <https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-xii/interps/171>.

Makarenko, Jay. The Opposition in the Canadian House of Commons: Role, Structure, and Powers. 30 Jan 2008. 6 Mar 2020. <https://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/opposition-canadian-house-commons-role-structure-and-powers.html#intro >.

Obama, Barack. "Press Conference by the President." The White House: Statements & Releases, 8 Oct 2013. <https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/10/08/press-conference-president>.

Patterson, Thomas. We The People. 13th. New York: McGraw, 2019. pages 265 & 267.

Shapiro, Ari. Would The U.S. Be Better Off With A Parliament? 12 Oct 2013. 6 Mar 2020. <https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/10/12/232270289/would-the-u-s-be-better-off-with-a-parliament>.

Wikipedia. 14 Jan 2020. 6 Mar 2020. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Government_watchdog_groups_in_the_United_States >.

723 words (irrespective of question restatements, opening quote and  Bibliography).
Mendocino College, POL200, Spring 2020, Professor Liljeblad