O P I N I O N

FORWARD FOCUS

By Brian Chicoine

In following the 2024 presidential campaign, I find myself longing for the days when those seeking political office talked more about the issues than trying to score political points by pointing out the personal imperfections – most of the time some character flaw rather than their abilities – of their opponents, or worse that of their opponents families. I remember when people debated issues, didn’t yell or act hateful, maybe disagreed but respected the other, and when “politician” wasn’t seen as a bad word. 

My favorite political book of all time is “Tip and the Gipper,” written by Chris Matthews. The author writes about the relationship between late President Ronald Reagan and late Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill. In brief, the two were political opposites with Reagan being a California Conservative Republican, (yes, California used to be a “red state”), and Tip O’Neill, a Massachusetts Liberal Democrat. They hated each other’s political philosophies, but hated stalemate even more. They were political rivals, but deeply respected each other as well as their respective offices, and were friends, (after 5PM). The two didn’t suspect the worst of each other, and they debated the issues like gentlemen. (Mr. Matthews wrote the book having first-hand knowledge, having worked for former President James Earl “Jimmy” Carter, and later for O’Neill). 

Writing about the book reminds me of the first time I did any political work. It was for the Concord Coalition. I remember being in the office for the first time, back when the coalition started, and two of the founders, late Senator Warren Rudman [R-NH], and late Senator Paul Tsongas [D-MA], were there. Even though the two were “from opposite sides of the aisle,” they got along very well, respected each others’ views, and worked together to try to bring forth solutions to the nation’s problems, (in the case of the Concord Coalition…the solvency of social security). Back then, Republicans and Democrats often felt that they both had the best interest of our country at heart, but just had different ways to achieve goals. 

Not anymore. Now it’s pretty much hatred towards the opposing view – and the person, character assassination, government shut-downs, and court cases. Is this division because of political parties, or are political parties an excuse for bad behavior? I personally do not like being “pigeonholed,” and believe that today’s bad behavior by both major parties have driven people to become independent or unaffiliated when it comes to voting. There seems to be a push for us to have a two-party system, so much so that “third party” candidates are even prevented from participating in national debates. But why? Why is it when nationally 34% of voters are “unaffiliated,” do we still have a two-party system?     

I have written a brief history of the political party system in the United States. I am sure that the intent of the founding fathers originally in favor of political parties was good, but it may be time to scrap them as too many people align with a party instead of an actual solution. As long as people look at “party first,” the solutions to our problems may escape our grasp. 

(For the record, I ran as a Republican for NH State Representative back in 2020. The reason that I chose a party is pretty much the same reason that many people do. Because to run for office as an Independent requires a lot of extra things that are not required of those who declare a party. My concern – especially being a first time candidate – was that I’d be spending so much time completing the extra stuff that I would not have time to organize or get my message out. It should not be this way…it should be about the issues and whether the candidate can get the job done regardless of their party affiliation – or non-affiliation).    

The Purpose of Political Parties

Despite the opposition, political parties have played a crucial role in American democracy. They serve several key purposes:

1. Organizing Elections: Parties provide a structured way for voters to choose among candidates, simplifying the electoral process and offering clear policy alternatives.
2. Aggregating Interests: Parties bring together diverse groups with shared interests, creating coalitions that can advocate for specific policies and represent a broad spectrum of society.
3. Formulating Policy: Parties develop platforms that outline their policy positions and legislative agendas, providing voters with a coherent set of ideas and proposals.
4. Facilitating Governance: By organizing and unifying elected officials, parties help ensure that the government operates efficiently and coherently, with a clear direction and purpose.
5. Political Socialization: Parties play a role in educating and mobilizing citizens, encouraging political participation and fostering a sense of civic engagement.

The Birth of Political Parties

The inception of political parties in the United States can be traced back to the early days of the Republic. Initially, the Founding Fathers were wary of political factions, fearing they would lead to divisiveness and weaken the unity of the nation. In his farewell address in 1796, President George Washington famously warned against the dangers of political parties, describing them as sources of factionalism and discord. He believed that parties would prioritize their own interests over the common good, ultimately threatening the stability of the fledgling nation.

Despite Washington’s warning, political factions began to emerge during his administration. The key issues that fueled the formation of these factions included the scope of federal government power, economic policies, and foreign relations. These disagreements laid the groundwork for the first American political parties: the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans.

The Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans

The Federalist Party, led by Alexander Hamilton, advocated for a strong central government, a robust financial system, and close ties with Britain. Federalists believed that a strong national government was necessary to maintain order, protect property rights, and support economic growth. They drew their support from urban areas, merchants, and financiers.

In contrast, the Democratic-Republican Party, led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, championed states’ rights and a limited federal government. They feared that a powerful central government would become tyrannical and infringe upon individual liberties. The Democratic-Republicans were more agrarian, drawing support from rural areas and farmers. They also favored closer ties with France, reflecting their revolutionary ideals.

The Evolution of Parties in the 19th Century

The early 19th century saw the dissolution of the Federalist Party and the rise of new political coalitions. The “Era of Good Feelings,” marked by the presidency of James Monroe, was a period of relative political unity with the Democratic-Republicans dominating the political landscape. However, this unity was short-lived, as internal divisions within the Democratic-Republican Party led to the emergence of new factions.

By the 1820s, the Democratic-Republican Party had splintered, giving rise to the Jacksonian Democrats and the National Republicans. Andrew Jackson’s Democratic Party, which evolved into the modern Democratic Party, appealed to the “common man,” advocating for westward expansion, a laissez-faire economy, and opposition to elitism. Jackson’s populist policies and strong personality solidified the Democrats’ position in American politics.

On the other side, the National Republicans, led by figures like Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams, eventually merged into the Whig Party. The Whigs promoted a platform of modernization, economic protectionism, and federal infrastructure projects. They drew support from industrialists, merchants, and those favoring a more active government role in the economy.

The Birth of the Republican Party and the Civil War

The mid-19th century saw the disintegration of the Whig Party and the rise of the Republican Party. The primary catalyst for this realignment was the issue of slavery. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, which allowed new territories to decide the issue of slavery through popular sovereignty, ignited fierce debates and violence, known as “Bleeding Kansas.”

The Republican Party was founded in 1854 by anti-slavery activists and modernizers. It quickly gained prominence by opposing the expansion of slavery into the western territories. The party’s platform also included support for protective tariffs, a transcontinental railroad, and free homesteads for settlers. The election of Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president, in 1860 led to the secession of Southern states and the onset of the Civil War.

The Civil War and Reconstruction era cemented the Republican Party’s dominance in American politics. The Republicans, often referred to as the “Party of Lincoln,” championed the abolition of slavery, the preservation of the Union, and the passage of the Reconstruction Amendments, which aimed to secure civil rights for former slaves who were recently freed.

The Gilded Age and Progressive Era

The post-Civil War era, known as the Gilded Age, was characterized by rapid industrialization, economic growth, and political corruption. Both the Republican and Democratic parties were heavily influenced by business interests, leading to widespread political patronage and graft. During this period, the Republicans generally supported high tariffs, gold standard monetary policies, and business-friendly regulations. The Democrats, on the other hand, favored lower tariffs and were more inclined to support agricultural interests and the silver standard.

The Progressive Era, which spanned the late 19th and early 20th centuries, brought significant changes to both parties. Progressives sought to address the social and economic issues caused by industrialization, advocating for reforms such as workers’ rights, women’s suffrage, and the regulation of monopolies. The movement attracted members from both parties, leading to a temporary blurring of party lines.

Notable progressive leaders included Republican Theodore Roosevelt and Democrat Woodrow Wilson, both of whom implemented substantial reforms during their presidencies. Roosevelt’s “Square Deal” and Wilson’s “New Freedom” aimed to curtail corporate power and protect consumers and workers.

The New Deal Coalition and the Post-War Era

The Great Depression of the 1930s and Franklin D. Roosevelt‘s New Deal fundamentally reshaped American politics. Roosevelt’s Democratic Party formed the New Deal Coalition, an alliance of diverse groups including labor unions, urban residents, African Americans, and Southern whites. The coalition’s support for expansive government intervention to combat the Depression and provide social safety nets led to decades of Democratic dominance in national politics.

The Republican Party, meanwhile, struggled to redefine itself during this period. It eventually emerged as a staunch opponent of the New Deal, advocating for limited government and free-market principles. The post-World War II era saw the Republicans regain some ground, particularly with the election of Dwight D. Eisenhower, who maintained many New Deal programs while promoting infrastructure development, such as the Interstate Highway System.

The Modern Political Landscape

The latter half of the 20th century and the early 21st century have witnessed significant shifts in the American political landscape. The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s led to a realignment of party support, with blacks and other minorities increasingly identifying with the Democratic Party, while many white Southerners shifted to the Republican Party.

The Republican Party, under leaders like Ronald Reagan, embraced a platform of conservatism, advocating for lower taxes, deregulation, a strong national defense, and traditional social values. The Democratic Party, meanwhile, moved toward a platform of social liberalism, supporting civil rights, environmental protection, and expanded social programs.

Today’s political parties continue to evolve, reflecting the changing demographics and priorities of the American electorate. Issues such as healthcare, immigration, climate change, and economic inequality dominate contemporary political discourse, with both parties offering distinct visions for the nation’s future.

Opposition to Political Parties

Throughout American history, there have been notable figures and movements that opposed the existence of political parties. Beyond George Washington, other Founding Fathers like John Adams and Thomas Jefferson also expressed concerns about factionalism. Adams feared that parties would lead to the “tyranny of the majority,” while Jefferson worried about the corruption and manipulation of public opinion by organized political groups.

The Anti-Federalists, who opposed the ratification of the Constitution, were skeptical of a strong central government and the potential for political parties to entrench power. They feared that parties would undermine the principles of republicanism and civic virtue.

In the 19th century, the Populist Movement emerged as a reaction against the two-party system, advocating for the interests of farmers and laborers against what they perceived as the corrupt alliance of big business and established political parties. Although the Populists achieved some electoral success, their influence waned as their platform was absorbed by the major parties.

Conclusion

The history of political parties in the United States is a testament to the dynamic and evolving nature of American democracy. While parties have often been sources of division and controversy, they have also provided essential mechanisms for political organization, representation, and governance. 

One question remains though: Do political parties add to divisiveness? 

As always, feel free to email your comments to me at [email protected].