From the beginning of our nation and its Constitutional system, there has always been a two major party system in place. The first two party competition was between the Federalist Party and the Anti-Federalist Party. After a short while, the Anti-Federalist Party crumbled and the Democrat-Republican Party was born.
George Washington and John Adams represented the Federalist Party. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison represented the Democrat-Republican Party.
These two parties disagreed on the size and scope of the federal government and the rights of the states to rule themselves. Contrary to politics today, the founders of both parties believed in a very limited federal government, with the Democrat-Republicans believing in the weakest federal government of all. The Democrat-Republicans were the closest group to a Libertarian Party by today's standards.
Having only two major parties forced all political factions and schisms to align themselves with one party or the other. The result was a system of checks and balances where neither party had too much power. By embracing the ideas that the first party rejected, the second party kept the first party accountable and vice versa.
So what changed all that? Where in the history of our nation did the two party system, which operated as a checks and balances process, get away from the people? I believe it started with the creation of a third and fourth major party.
A third or fourth major party embraces various ideas outside the political mainstream. This allows the first two parties to no longer address those same political ideas. In other words, the two major parties no longer have to address every issue important to the people. The result is a government that is fractionalized. The status quo becomes the political norm. The electorate becomes disenfranchised.
In 1992, the third party candidate, H. Ross Perot took enough votes away from then President George H. Bush, giving Bill Clinton a successful run for the Presidency. While many conservatives like myself were up in arms when H. Ross Perot essentially helped hand Bill Clinton the White House, the same principle works against liberals when an ultra-liberal candidate is in the race.
It takes 270 Electoral College votes to win the White House. In the 2000 Presidential race, George W. Bush won 271 Electoral votes, Al Gore won 266. Ralph Nader, the third party candidate, took enough votes away from Al Gore to clear the path for George W. Bush to win a close Electoral College election.
For instance, Ralph Nader's name on the ballot in New Hampshire took enough votes away from Al Gore that George W. Bush won New Hampshire and their 4 Electoral votes. If Nader was not on the New Hampshire ballot, Al Gore most likely wins New Hampshire and receives exactly 270 Electoral votes, enough to win the White House. George W. Bush would have received 267 Electoral votes and never have become President.
This explains why so many states today, where the polls show George W. Bush and John Kerry in a dead heat, are trying to keep Ralph Nader off of their Presidential ballots. Nader can be the spoiler again for the Democrats.
As a Constitutional Conservative, I do not believe anyone has the right to deny a person the run for President, provided that person meets all legal requirements. I just believe we must accept the cold hard fact that a third or fourth party hurts all Americans wanting to vote for a President.
We should not keep someone running for President off a ballot; we should simply pick one of the two major parties and vote accordingly. Otherwise, we end up with a disenfranchised electorate, which was the outcome in both the 1992 and 2000 elections.
The two party system works every time. Whether it is the Federalist candidate vs. the Anti-Federalist candidate, or the Republican candidate vs. the Democrat candidate, each party must embrace ideas that the other has rejected. This gives everyone in our nation a voice.
In summary, the two party system is truly the most fair and most representative way to elect a President of the United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment