by Peter Joyce
The support traditionally enjoyed by the established political parties has been affected by the processes of dealignment and realignment.
* * *
DEALIGNMENT
There are two aspects of dealignment – partisan dealignment and class dealignment.
Partisan dealignment means that a large number of electors either desert the party to which they were traditionally committed or identify with the party which they historically supported far more weakly. A number of factors may explain this phenomenon. These include increased education and political awareness of many members of the electorate (making them prone to basing their vote on logical as opposed to traditional considerations) and perceptions that the party normally supported by an elector does not reflect his or her own views on key issues. For example, the loss of support experienced by the United Kingdom Labour Party in the early 1980s was attributed to the ‘swing to the left’ which occurred after the 1979 general election defeat causing what is termed an ‘ideological disjuncture’ between the views and values of the party and those of its supporters.
Political crises may also influence partisan dealignment. In America, between 1958 and 1968 key political issues such as the Vietnam War and the civil rights movement resulted in an increased number of voters registering themselves as independents. In France in the same period, however, the perception that the Gaullist Party would defend economic development and political stability in the face of civil unrest resulted in enhanced voter identification with that party.
Class dealignment suggests that the historic identity between a political party and a particular social class becomes of reduced significance. In the United Kingdom this might be explained after 1970 by the reduced intensity of class consciousness which arose for a number of reasons, including the increased affluence of the working class (which is termed ‘embourgeoisement’), the decline in the number of manual workers and the rise in the service sector of employment. This was perceived to have a particularly damaging effect on the electoral prospects of the Labour Party, which failed to win a general election between 1979 and 1997.
The twin effects of partisan and class dealignment have two main consequences for the conduct of politics. It results in third parties obtaining increased levels of support, and makes the core support given to established major parties less consistent from one general election to the next. These factors make voting behaviour more volatile.
REALIGNMENT
Realignment entails a redefinition of the relationship between political parties and key social groups within society which has a fundamental impact on their relative strength. Partisan and class dealignment, which entail the loosening of traditional bonds attaching individuals and groups to particular parties, may be the prelude to realignment.
The formation of new relationships is usually confirmed in what is termed a ‘realigning election’, which is seen as the start of new patterns of political behaviour. In the United Kingdom, the 1918 general election evidenced the desertion of the working-class vote from the Liberal Party to the Labour Party. The 1932 American presidential election, which witnessed the birth of the ‘new deal coalition’, was a further example of realignment. This coalition was composed of union members, ethnic minorities, liberals and intellectuals, and these newly established patterns of voter loyalties provided the Democratic Party with domination over Congress and the presidency for a number of subsequent decades. In both of these examples, however, the changes in voter loyalty which were evidenced at the realignment elections had been initiated earlier.
Subsequent examples of realignment have occurred. In America, the victories of Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984 were based on the existence of a new coalition. The preference of white male voters in the southern states of America for the Republican Party indicated a major shift in this group’s political affiliation which had taken place earlier in the 1970s. In the United Kingdom, the era of Conservative Party dominance (1979–97) rested in part on the defection of relatively affluent members of the working class in south-eastern England (who were dubbed ‘Essex Men’ and characterized by working in the private sector and owning their own homes) to vote Conservative. However, neither of these changes has been sufficient to bring about a substantial era of political dominance for the parties which benefited from them. In America, the Democrats succeeded in winning the presidency from the Republicans in 1992 and in the United Kingdom the Conservative Party was voted out of office in the 1997 general election. One aspect of Labour’s victory in 1997 and subsequently was alleged to have been the defection of white collar professional women (dubbed ‘Worcester Woman’) from the Conservative Party to Labour.
The continued vitality of established political parties
* * *
Insight
Established political parties have undertaken a number of reforms in attempts to counter their loss of electoral support.
* * *
Although the position of established political parties in many liberal democracies is weaker than was previously the case, it seems likely that they will continue to carry out important roles within liberal democratic political systems. One reason for this is that parties are adaptable and have understood the importance of reform.
Reforms to restore the vitality of parties may take a number of forms. They include attempts to increase the number of citizens joining such organizations. In countries such as America, where local parties have often been controlled by ‘bosses’, initiatives to increase party membership have sometimes been accompanied by reforms designed to ‘democratize’ the workings of political parties and ensure that members are able to exercise a greater degree of control over key party affairs, including the selection of candidates and the formulation of policy.
There have been problems associated with such developments. Increasing the membership of local parties has sometimes (although not consistently) resulted in accusations of extremists ‘taking over’ control of an organization, which in turn makes it difficult for parties to appeal to a wide electoral base in order to win elections. What is termed ‘coalition building’ in America becomes difficult if a party is associated with extremist issues. Similar problems beset the UK Labour Party in the early 1980s, which resulted in that party’s disastrous showing in the 1983 general election in which it placed a manifesto before the electorate based on left-wing principles. These policies emerged as a result of reforms designed to democratize that organization by giving rank-and-file members a greater role in party affairs, principally the selection of party candidates and the party leader.
In this concluding section we examine in greater detail the initiatives that have been developed by political parties in the USA and UK to address the issue of decline.
THE REFORM OF POLITICAL PARTIES IN AMERICA
American political parties are different in structure and organization from their UK counterparts. Americans cannot ‘join’ a party (in the sense of paying a membership subscription) as is the case in the UK. Instead they register as supporters of a party and this situation has historically meant that American political parties have a weaker form of organization than UK organizations. One consequence of this is that American elections are more candidate centred than in the UK. Incumbent office holders use their record as a source of electoral support and candidates may use personal organization and fundraising to underpin their campaigns.
Factors such as these have weakened the role of political parties. The weakness of American political parties was asserted in 1971 in David Butler’s The Party’s Over, in which he claimed that American political parties were being eclipsed by organizations such as interest groups as organs to bring about political change.
However, attempts were subsequently made to remedy this situation and the operations of parties have been subject to a number of reforming initiatives. In particular, changes were introduced to the process of nominating candidates and to the role performed by parties in election campaigns.
Re
form to the nominating process was initially pursued by the Democratic Party and arose following the chaos of the 1968 national convention. The McGovern–Fraser Commission, 1969, (and the subsequent commissions of Mikulski (1972/3), Winograd (1975–8), and Hunt (1981/2)) succeeded in introducing some important changes which were particularly concerned with broadening the representation of under-represented groups in the Democratic nominating convention (such as women, minority ethnic groups and young people). Reforms of this nature did, however, weaken the control exerted over the nominating process by party elites, and the Fairness Commission (1984/5) responded to this problem by increasing the representation of those termed ‘superdelegates’ who were loyal to the party leadership and not pledged to support any candidate. In 2008 approximately one-fifth of delegates to the Democratic National Convention were superdelegates.
A second reform to democratize the nominating process concerned the use of primary elections whereby voters at state level could choose the party’s candidate for the presidency rather than party leaders. This method of selecting presidential candidates emerged in the early years of the twentieth century but it was a reform that ran out of steam by the middle of the century. However, 1972 witnessed a considerable extension in the use of primaries by both parties. Although there was an attempt within the Democratic Party to use state caucuses rather than primaries during the 1980s (since this method of selection enabled local party leaders to exercise significant control over the nominating process), the extended use of primaries has become a fact of American political life. In 2004 primaries were used in 38 states by the Democrats and in 34 by the Republicans.
A final reform concerned the role of the National Party Committee. Until the 1970s the main function of this body in both parties was to organize the National Convention and its political role in the intervening years was limited. However, changes initiated within the Republican Party (initially by Bill Brock (1977–81) and subsequently by Frank Fahrenkopf (1981–8)) transformed the role of the National Committee, which became considerably involved in campaigning and electioneering at national and state levels. Legislation such as the 1974 Federal Election Act and its subsequent amendments had ensured that American parties did not dominate the election process as they do in other liberal democracies by imposing curbs on party fundraising activities. However, the National Party Committee’s ability to engage more actively in electioneering was aided by its capacity to raise what was termed ‘soft money’ (that is, receiving finance that was not tied to the campaign of any specific candidate and was thus outside the rules governing the financing of national election campaigns) until the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act eliminated this source of revenue. The Democratic Party adopted many of the reforms relating to the National Party Committee that had been pursued by the Republicans. The main motive for both parties pursuing reforms of this nature was the electoral fortunes of both parties (the poor showing of the Republicans in the 1974 and 1976 Congressional elections and the Democrats’ loss of the presidency in 1980).
THE UK
Both major parties in the UK implemented reforms towards the end of the twentieth century that sought to streamline party organization in the belief that a modern structure was necessary to attract new party supporters.
The Labour Party
A number of key reforms were embarked upon during the 1990s. These included:
1990: reforms were initiated affecting the power wielded by trade unions in Labour Party affairs. Traditionally, unions were able to dominate Labour Party affairs (especially the decisions taken at the annual party conference) as each union member was regarded as a member of the Labour Party and thus had a vote at the conference. In practice, the entire union vote was cast as a block by its leadership. In 1990 the National Executive Committee (NEC) voted to reduce the weighting of the union vote to 70 per cent of the entire conference vote and it was proposed to subsequently scale this down further.
1993: trade unionists were required to pay a levy in order to become full members of the Labour Party.
1997: the structure of the NEC was re-modelled, the new body consisting of 32 members.
1997: the Joint Policy Committee was established. This includes members from the NEC and – when in office – the government, whose role is to develop policy and plan campaigns and elections.
1997: the National Policy Forum was set up: this new body’s role was to review party policy through the mechanism of policy commissions.
The Conservative Party
Suggestions for the reform of the structure and organization of the Conservative Party were contained in the document, Fresh Future, published in 1997, which was responsible for creating:
A Board of Management (termed the ‘Party Board’). This is the ultimate decision-making body in the party with responsibility for all operational matters including fundraising, membership and candidates. It is composed of representatives drawn from each section of the party. It replaced the old National Union of Conservative and Unionist Associations.
The National Conservative Convention. This is composed of key local and regional officers of the party and its main purpose is to facilitate contact between the party members and the leadership.
The Conservative Policy Forum. This is designed to encourage political discussion at all levels of the party’s organization. It supplements the role performed by the annual party conference and the spring assembly.
Assessment of reforms
Many of the reforms pursued by UK parties during the 1990s were contentious and within Labour circles especially it was believed that a key aim was to enhance the control wielded over the party by its leadership. An important measure of these reforms is party membership. Although accurate figures are difficult to secure, it is believed that the Labour Party’s membership in 2010 is around 177,000 (which is below half of the figure it was 15 years previously) and the Conservatives’ membership is around 290,000. The UK’s other main party, the Liberal Democrats, has a membership of around 65,000.
Questions
With reference to any country with which you are familiar, analyse the evidence that suggests the major political parties are ‘in decline’.
Why has this development occurred, and what might be done to reverse this trend?
* * *
THINGS TO REMEMBER
A political party is an organization with a formal structure whose main role is to secure the election of its nominees to public office.
Political parties often reflect the divisions in society arising from factors such as social class, religion or racial and regional identity.
Political parties are vital to the operations of liberal democratic politics. In particular they are the mechanism through which the nation’s political leaders are chosen.
In the UK, leadership election contests enable rank-and-file members to play a part in the election of the party leader.
In America, political parties make use of primary elections to choose their nominees for public office at all levels of government.
Contemporary political parties sometimes fail to effectively perform their traditional roles that justify their importance to the conduct of liberal/democratic politics.
Established (or major) political parties have lost electoral support in recent years for reasons that include dealignment and realignment.
Established political parties have responded to their loss of support by pursuing reforms in areas that include the democratization of their operations and streamlining their organization and structure.
* * *
6
Pressure groups
In this chapter you will learn:
the role performed by pressure groups
the methods used by pressure groups to influence policy making
the advantages and disadvantages of pressure group activity.
Definition
* * *
Insight
A pressure group seeks to influence policy making
by directly or indirectly influencing the actions undertaken by the formal machinery of government (or on occasions by commercial organizations).
* * *
A pressure group (which may also be termed an ‘interest group’ or an ‘advocacy group’) is an organization with a formal structure which is composed of a number of individuals seeking to further or defend a common cause or interest. These groups operate at all levels of society. Some seek to influence the activities of local or central government. Others exist within the workplace in the form of trade unions. The factions or tendencies found within some political parties are further examples of such organizations. Many groups perform functions which are not political, for example by providing benefits or advisory services either to their members or to the general public. For the purposes of our discussion, however, we shall concentrate on those seeking to exert influence over national government policy making either by seeking to promote reform or by attempting to prevent it.
NGOs and social movements
In addition to the role performed by pressure groups, many reforms are promoted by organizations termed non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and ‘social movements’. It is not always easy to differentiate between them.
NGOs were recognized in the 1945 United Nations Charter, in which they were differentiated from governments as organizations that had the right to a voice in the newly created organization. NGOs are private bodies, free from government control, which seek to influence the content of national and international policy but do not seek to challenge governments in the sense of seeking their removal from office. They are typically non-profit-making and non-violent and do not have criminal associations. They may be based in a single country but increasingly operate in the international arena. Their effectiveness has been enhanced by contemporary technological developments (especially electronic forms of communication) and by their tendency to construct coalitions to bring about reforms in areas such as environmental policy, human rights and social reform. Around 10,000 NGO representatives attended the environmental conference held at Rio in 1992 and NGOs have been active in subsequent events of this type and also in promoting reforms to ban landmines and establish an international criminal court. The United Nations has also contracted NGOs to perform services that include the provision of emergency relief.
