Importance Of Political Parties And Differences In

Party Systems Essay, Research Paper

“ Never the less state as well as national parties continue to exist and function, and they show many signs of being stronger, more complex, and better financed than they were a generation ago. If this is true, it must be because the parties are doing a better job of serving the candidates.” (Political Parties. 48)

The author refers to political parties as doing a better job of serving their candidates. A political parties main focus is to obtain public office, if this is true, a party must do everything in its power to serve its candidates. Parties provide massive financial support to aid their candidates with numerous incurred expenses in running a campaign. They also perform many laborious and time-consuming tasks such as: mailings, advertisements, websites, scheduling, and registering and mobilizing voters. Parties are beginning to become more efficient in the “business” of politics.

I agree that political parties have become stronger, more complex, and better financed. It almost seems like the party that runs the better business during an election is the party that wins. Parties sell their candidates to us like mutual funds, with emphasis on track record, piece of mind, stability and the promise of growth. As much as parties serve their candidates lets just hope that candidates turned incumbents don’t blindly serve

their parties.

“Why multiparty is preferable. The most powerful argument for multiparty is that it is more natural.” (Multiparty Politics in America. 59)

The author describes how a well-practiced multiparty system would be better at producing majority rule than our presen

t bi-hegemonic system. In a bi-hegemonic system it is not necessary for either party to win a majority of the eligible votes, but only the majority of the votes cast. Party leaders consider it a waste of time and money to campaign for the habitual nonvoters (most likely the result of lack of agreement with either party platform). More of a platform selection should encourage better competition and voter turnout. Changes in campaign requirements would be needed to give minor parties a fairer chance in the United States. These changes would include: the abolishment of all laws that discourage the formation of new parties; public funding for all campaigns with spending limited to that funding; the prohibition of private donations and soft money; free access to the media and the forbidding of commercial advertising; and the change of the electoral system to one of proportional representation.

I agree that multipartyism is the best and most natural system for a true representation of public interest. The multiparty system is the predominant system around the world. In some cases the multiparty system can be extreme with more than 130 active parties as is the case in Poland. Thus, it is evident that realistic regulations be made to avoid such chaos. In the United States minor parties are denied the right to participate in presidential debates, as was the case for Ross Perot in the 1996 elections. His campaign was also denied the right to buy media time in the amounts and time he preferred. The implementation of a true and fair multiparty system in the United States would be a difficult task with the immense campaign reform, but should be done to give the American people a real choice at the polls.