By Andrew Leung
image provided by Free SVG under the Creative Commons License
Browsing the New York Times, I came across an interesting interactive article titled “If America Had Six Political Parties, Which One Would You Belong To?” The article asked 20 questions on a variety of political issues and matches the reader with one of six hypothetical parties. The parties ranged from a reform-seeking Progressive Party and center-left-establishment New Liberal Party, to the populist Patriot Party.
The idea of moving beyond the current two-party system is not new, though for most of contemporary American history, almost every nationally elected official has been either a Democrat or Republican. Currently, only two senators and two House representatives identify as independents, and third parties like the Libertarian and Green Parties have no representation in Congress. Even with several elections where an independent or third-party candidate made significant headway, there hasn’t been a breakthrough overcoming the stable two-party firewall. Reasons may include better funding, name recognition, or perhaps general lack of motivation to see drastic changes in our government.
While the two-party system has worked to provide a legitimate government, several underlying issues cannot be denied. The increasing gridlock on Capitol Hill and greater polarization of both politicians and voter bases can be attributed to a seemingly binary choice: blue or red. Proponents of a multi-party system argue that a lot of gridlock and political turmoil could be resolved if more parties were in contention. One argument contends that multi-party systems decrease gridlock through greater use of coalition governments to pass legislation.
The favor towards the two-party system for a majority of American government can also be explained by the way in which representatives are elected to office. For federal elections in the United States, the standard election procedure uses the first-past-the-post method (FPTP), where one candidate who receives the most votes in a particular constituency is elected. So, if four candidates ran in a Senator race, and the results were split 40/30/20/10, the candidate with 40% of the vote would win. In elections, most of these contests will come down to the two strongest candidates, and these two candidates are almost always a Democrat and a Republican. Even if the Green Party, for example, had candidates that were consistently 3rd and pulled in 20% of the vote, they wouldn’t gain a single seat. This favoring of two parties is the basis of Duverger’s Law developed by French sociologist Maurice Duverger.
Most countries with a single ballot majority rule system have two dominant political parties. There are exceptions; for example, Canada uses a similar voting system as its southern neighbor, yet still has the presence of multiple significant political parties. While the moderate Liberal and Conservative Parties control the most seats, the progressive New Democratic Party and regional Bloc Quebecois hold significant power in the formation of a majority government.
Another popular system named proportional representation can favor the multi-party system. In proportional representation, instead of voting for a specific candidate, voters will choose a party on the ballot, and seats will be awarded in proportion to the percentage of voters each party received. For instance, if Missouri were electing 10 House members in a midterm election, and the vote was split 40% Republican, 30% Democrat, 20% Libertarian, and 10% Green, Missouri would send 4 Republicans, 3 Democrats, 2 Libertarians, and 1 Green to Congress. This method of electing members involves a multi-member constituency, as it is no longer a winner-takes-all contest and the constituency is now the State of Missouri instead of single congressional districts. There are advantages and disadvantages to the proportional representation system. For example, gerrymandering would be greatly reduced in proportional representation, but it also weakens the relationship between elected officials and their constituents.
Aside from completely overhauling the American electoral voting system (which would open an entirely different discussion on the Electoral College), the success of a third party or more in today’s political atmosphere is highly unpredictable. History suggests a third party not growing beyond a handful of representatives. Political science would also point towards a persistent two-party system due to the way representatives are elected.
Current data from surveys, however, may suggest a breakthrough for a potential third party rise, as a Gallup poll found that 62% of Americans would like to see a major third party in the mix (Gallup). News of former presidential candidate Andrew Yang planning to launch a new party next month could test the narrative that Americans are tired of the constant gridlock and polarizing negativity surrounding politics. While critics may argue over Yang’s bucket-list style approach to politics, it sometimes takes unorthodox ideas that seem ridiculous at the time to start a chain of events. Only five years ago did a relatively young French minister named Emmanuel Macron form his own political party, sweep the legislative election and become President of France.