Monday, November 4, 1996
PARTIES:
Democrats and Republicans usurp third-party issues to get
votesBy Anne Mai
Daily Bruin Contributor
The difference between a Republican and Democratic candidate
isn’t as clear as it used to be. To many disillusioned with this
year’s presidential race, it seems that the donkey and the elephant
have blended together as one, leaving what sometimes appear as only
trivial differences between the two major presidential
candidates.
Every election, voters are confronted with a new breed of
politicians who metamorphose into moderates in order to capture the
moderate swing vote, according to Gary Jacobson, political science
professor at UC San Diego.
"Parties blend their ideologies to win. The middle of the
spectrum is where the votes are," said Jacobson, adding that "most
strong presidents have not been ideologues. Most ideologues do not
win."
The cause of political centrism is due to too much emphasis on
polls and surveys, said Paul Frymer, political science professor at
UCLA. "They (politicians) take snapshot photos of where people
stand and they immediately stand in the middle of that."
However, as the steady march to the center of the political
spectrum continues, some have voiced concerns about the importance
of coherent parties and the durability of third parties.
"For democracy, it’s better to have a choice (but) we have an
electoral system that gives an incentive to being in the middle,"
Frymer said.
"It’s shameful. If we hold truth in elections as a standard,
it’s dismaying," said Jason Steele, Bruin Republicans chairman.
In spite of the merging ideologies of individual candidates,
students and professors agree that parties themselves still have an
important role in elections as a voting cue and an ideological
standpoint.
"Parties aren’t just political machines. They represent
ideologies. If you actually look at what parties believe in, there
is a very clear distinction," Steele said. "Like anything else,
(they) can be abused. (Sometimes) getting elected usurps
ideology."
However, politicians still have to outwardly observe party
ideology, according to Frymer.
"Clinton still has to pay lip-service to the liberals in his
party. To some degree, he is constrained," Frymer said.
The commonality of candidates’ stands often causes confusion and
apathy, Steele said. "What may contribute to voter apathy is the
incumbents taking credit for what Congress did," Steele said,
referring to voter confusion over responsibility for the
legislative process.
Merging political ideologies also pose problems for third
parties who are often perceived as fringe groups without a central
goal, Jacobson said.
"It’s easy to agree on what you don’t like; it’s hard to agree
on what you do like. This makes it difficult to put together
anything that doesn’t look like a fringe group," Jacobson said.
"If elections are about winning, they’re not going to survive,"
Frymer said, citing their inability to appeal to enough of the
electorate to gain a majority of the vote.
The political flexibility of the two major parties poses another
problem for third parties. "Third parties don’t last very long
because the major parties are so eclectic and absorbent. Everything
they come up with is owned by the major parties," Jacobson
said.
The difficulties faced by third parties makes it unlikely that a
third party will break off one of the parties, Jacobson said. "Why
would you bolt a party that you have control over?"
However, those in academia still believe that third parties
serve important purposes as informants and an outlet for anger.
"They bring matters to forefront that need to be discussed,"
Steele said, noting the deficit and internal reform as issues that
Perot brought up in the 1992 elections.
"It offers you a (means) of self-expression," Jacobson said.
Frymer agreed, saying "they’re offering an alternative (and a
way) to express dissatisfaction."
By preferentially endorsing candidates of a major party, third
parties also give cues to voters, Steele said. "It’s interesting to
note that the biggest third party bashes the Democrats far more
than Republicans."
In spite of their electoral disadvantage, third parties are
successful if they get their ideas across, Frymer said.
"Ross Perot may not be winning this year; both Republicans and
Democrats have taken over (his ideas). (But in this sense), he’s
won without winning."