Federalism and Voting n n n Federalism Division

Federalism and Voting n n n Federalism = Division of Power: The Federal Government has power and the State Governments have power. The Original Constitution is silent on voting requirements. The Founding Fathers left it up to the states. The state legislatures determine voting rules in primary and general elections. (They also draw district lines).

The Expansion of the Vote • • “Jacksonian Democracy”- end of property requirements to vote (the states) 15 th Amendment – exslaves 19 th Amendment women 24 th Amendment - no poll tax Voting Rights Act of 1965 26 th Amendment – 18 to vote Motor Voter Act Voter ID Laws: Fake Solution to a Fake Problem – You. Tube Democalypse 2012 - Right Said Fraud - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 10/02/12 Video Clip | Comedy Central

Election Problems: • Voter Fraud v. Voter Suppression • 2000 – Bush v. Gore - Florida

The Electoral College n n Electors = Number of Reps + Senators Winner-Take -All- except Nebraska and Maine U. S. Electoral College, Official What is the Electoral College? http: //www. 270 towin. com/

Mandate Theory of Elections Electoral Mandate – win by a considerable majority = the people’s support = govern more boldly. • Election of 1964 – LBJ (61%) • Election of 1984 – Reagan (58%) • Election of 2008 – Obama ? ? ? Obama: 52. 86% Mc. Cain: 45. 60% http: //uselectionatlas. org/RESULTS/index. html Coattail Effect: (D): Senate- 60 Seats/House- Majority

Federalist #10 Elections and Political Parties “Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency. ” -James Madison, The Federalist Papers

Political Parties, Personalities and Elections Critical Elections Party Realignments occur in critical elections. • major adjustments in the parties. • new issues emerge which shift voter support from one party’s advantage to another’s. • major policy change ensues and new party coalitions form.

Critical Elections in US History Most Recent Realignments • Civil War – Republican Dominance • Election of 1876/1896 – Laissez. Faire Republican Realignment. • 1932 -68 – New Deal Coalition Forms. • Era of Divided Government – Dealignment; Prevalence of Independents/Partisanship – Today, 2 opposing trends; No Dominant Coalitions. ? ? ? ? ?

Third Parties in Elections • Elections of 1912, 1948, 1968, 1992 the winning candidate received a plurality; third party candidate • Since, the US has single member districts the candidate that receives the most votes wins. • Parliamentary system – proportional representation.

Political Parties and Elections RNC and DNC – provide the platform and funds (hard money) to candidates to run for office. n Party Centered Campaign – run on the issues and ideals of the party (pre-packaged); party identification gives the candidate instant recognition, but less freedom. Problems: 1. candidate is associated with the failures of the party; 2. less responsive to the public will- bound by Party Doctrine Not the Current Model n

Political Parties and Elections n n n Candidate Centered Campaigns – current model that stresses how the individual candidate should be packaged; experience, values, character, and issue positions are presented on TV – very expensive. . . Soft Money – money given to political parties; not controlled by the candidate (commercials that don’t say : “Hi. I’m. . . and I approve this message. ”) Candidates compete in an Air War – that centers on personality and issues; rapid response attacks and counterattacks; debates and news coverage provide free air time Ground War – on the streets; get the vote out

Pro’s and Cons of Candidate Centered Campaigns Pro’s n n More responsive to the public More responsive to local concerns Easier for newcomers to compete Candidate has greater freedom Con’s n n n Superficial – emphasize personality and image over issues. Weaken accountability – blame others rather than assume responsibility as part of a party. Empower special interest groups that have money to give - Expensive

Money and Campaigns n n n Federal Election Campaign Act (1974) Initiated Public Financing of Elections- the Presidential Election Fund (Matching Funds provided by the government with strings attached). Led to the “Clean Elections” Movement. Provided for federal funding in the General Election- in 2004, Bush & Kerry got $75 million. Limited individual contributions to $1000 - in 2002 the amount increased to $2300. Required candidates to report all contributions and account for how the money was spent. Created the Federal Election Commission.

FECA Legal Loopholes 1. Soft Money- unlimited contributions to the Party. n n Mc. Cain-Feingold Act (2002) banned soft money & issue ads 60 days before a general election, unless the ad is paid for by a FEC regulated PAC. Created New Loopholes. . . 527’s Mc. Connell v. FEC (2003) said Mc. Cain-Feingold was constitutional in a 5 -4 decision. 2. Political Action Committees (PACs)created by interest groups to influence policy through campaign contributions.

How will the Tea Party Govern? § “You campaign in poetry, you govern in prose. ” –Mario Cuomo § Tea Party Sen. -Elect Lee Vows to Vote Against Debt Limit Increase | PBS News. Hour | Nov. 8, 2010 | PBS

Political Action Committees The Sky’s the Limit for the Amount PAC’s can Spend Buckley v. Valeo: $ = Speech PAC’s act independently of the candidate. PAC’s must register with the FEC. 527’s are like PAC’s, but don’t register with the FEC (non profit – register w/IRS) & can receive unlimited soft money contributions. § Examples of 527’s in the 2004 Election: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth & Move. On. org. Campaign Cash: How Are Political Donations Being Spent This Year? | PBS News. Hour | Sept. 21, 2010 | PBS § §

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission 2010 Rules that corporations may spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress. The court overturns Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, saying that “the expenditure ban invalidated" in Buckley v. Valeo applies to corporations and unions, not just individuals. The ruling does not affect prohibition on direct contributions to candidates from corporations and unions or the Mc. Cain-Feingold restrictions on soft money.

Changes in the Way Corporations and Unions Can Finance Campaigns Citizens United v. FEC (2010) Outside Groups Spend Big on Campaign Ads | PBS News. Hour | Oct. 11, 2010 | PBS How Does Outside Money Flow Into Campaigns? | PBS News. Hour | Nov. 2, 2010 | PBS § Changes in the Way Corporations Can Finance Campaigns - Graphic - NYTimes. com § Lobbyists Get Potent Weapon in Campaign Finance Ruling - NYTimes. com § Justices Overturn Key Campaign Limits. doc