The Nature of our Two-Party System
I was watching one of the presidential debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump last year. Rather than having a civilized discussions about policy and their viewpoints on issues facing society, the majority of the 90 minute debate was filled with back and forth attacks over an email server, tax returns, and even sexual relations from decades ago. I asked myself, is this really what the American people deserve to hear when deciding whom to elect as the next President of the United States?
This led me to think more carefully about the general state of our politics, and the two-party system that dominates it. Come election time, voters are fed only two options as to how the government should be run- Republican or Democrat. With so many complex issues facing our society, such as healthcare, immigration, terrorism, education, and many more, we are taught that there are only two solutions to every problem. Every side to an issue is either branded as either right wing or left wing. The complexity of issues are dumbed down to just two solutions. Should this two-party system really control our government?
First and foremost, I want to stress the significance of having different viewpoints represented in our democracy. The two-party system that is in place today prevents a president from gaining unchecked power, and gives voters options while electing members of our government. Our democracy has enabled the United States to become the most powerful country in the world, while providing immense opportunity to its citizens. Despite these strengths, our current system has room for further improvement. The power that political parties have in our government holds the nation back from the true democracy that our Founding Fathers envisioned.
It is a scorching hot day in the summer of 1787, and 55 men are arguing with each other vigorously as they begin to draft the Constitution of a newly founded nation- the United States. After 3 long months, the Constitution is ratified, and the foundation for our country is created, a foundation that would last for centuries. This document ensures the democratic nature of our government, and that the government would be run by “We the people”.
Now 250 years later as we look back to the founding of our country, it is important to consider whether our government is being run as our founding fathers intended it to run. In the farewell address of our first President, George Washington addressed the dangers of a two-party system, as having a government controlled by two major political parties shifts the focus from the national interest to the interest of the parties. Today it seems like our nation did not heed the warnings of our first leader- Republicans and Democrats are often so focused on attacking each other for the advancement of their party that they fail to account for what would be in the best interest of the American people as a whole.
Members of both political parties in our government are so fixated on the views of their party that they are unwilling to compromise in order to pass a law that would benefit the American people. For example, passing laws to improve the lives of Americans such as improvements to healthcare, education, or infrastructure are almost impossible to get through Congress because politicians are unwilling to compromise. Congressmen and women are unwilling to give up their stance on an issue because they don’t want to risk being alienated by the political party that they represent. For example, if a Republican decides to support Obamacare, they will instantly be outcast among the elites of the Republican party even though repealing the Affordable Care Act may take away healthcare from millions of people and supporting the bill may be in the best interest of the American people.
A modern example of a political candidate crossing party lines is John Kasich, the Republican governor of Ohio and former presidential candidate. He took a Democratic position and expanded Medicaid, the federal health care system for the poor in his state, which helped to balance the budget in Ohio and gave healthcare to many more people. The majority of Republican governors rejected this expansion, wanting nothing to do with Obamacare, but Kasich decided to accept the federal funding. As a result of this, he was hammered by the other Republican presidential candidates and never really had any shot to win the Republican primary. By trying to do what was best for the people of Ohio, Kasich became an outcast in the political landscape.
The gridlock in Congress and the inability to pass laws for the benefit of Americans has caused the approval ratings of our legislative branch to sink drastically. 80% of people disapprove of Congress, and last year 71% disapproved of the way Republicans in Congress were doing their job, and 65% disapproved of the Democrats. Is this gridlock, caused by the hostility of today’s political climate, the type of healthy, democratic government that our founding fathers envisioned when they were drafting the Constitution in Philadelphia 250 years ago?
Our two-party system has caused our elections to lose substance and takes emphasis away from the viewpoints that the candidates actually hold. In state and national elections, politicians like to give the impression that the American people have only two options when electing leaders- Republican or Democrat. Politicians will try to make their opposition look bad in the public image so that the only option for voters is to vote for them. Rather than spending time extensively laying out policy decisions, politicians would implement once in office that would have a direct impact on the voters, candidates bash their opponents, hoping that voters will vote for “the lesser of two evils” and vote them into office.
This was a common theme in the past presidential election, as many Americans were unsure of whether or not to vote for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump due to the fact that the two spent most of their time trying to make each other look bad rather than focusing on what they would actually do in the Oval Office. The American people were stuck, as they knew that those were the only two candidates that had a chance of winning the election, and a vote for a third party candidate would be insignificant in choosing a president. The majority of Americans were either forced to vote for a candidate that disagreed with them on at least one issue, or they didn’t end up voting at all. Does this system really give voters the opportunity to vote for politicians who are going to act in their best interest?
Political parties discourage voters and politicians from becoming educated on important issues that impact our country and our world. Our hostile political climate forces politicians to align their views with those of the political party that they represent, as from the moment you step onto office you’re either a Republican or a Democrat, you’re either on one side of the aisle or the other. Politicians who try to adopt varying viewpoints on different issues that they think would be in the best interest of the American people are destined for disaster in the current political climate because they would alienate both parties, and would alienate the voters from each party. For example, if a candidate for state or federal office supported raising the minimum wage but advocated against stronger gun control laws, he or she would be an outcast among Republicans for supporting raising the minimum wage, and would be an outcast among Democrats for supporting looser gun control. Even if these viewpoints would be in the best interest of Americans, because our political climate paints that there are only two choices in an election, this hypothetical candidate would have no chance of winning.
Voters are also influenced by the hostile political climate and often vote firmly red or blue without educating themselves on opposing viewpoints. People may only get their news from sources that support their political ideology (Ex. Fox News, MSNBC), limiting the need for education on all sides of an issue. Rather than carefully considering the different solutions to address issues and what impact that would have on them, voters find it easier and more convenient to vote solely for all members one party, even if a candidate may support a position that a voter may disagree with, should he or she educate themselves about the issues facing our nation. Does the current two-party system truly support educated, healthy debate about the betterment of our nation?
So what’s the solution to this problem of a two-party system, which directly poses a threat to the Enlightenment ideals of democracy that our founding fathers envisioned when crafting our founding document? A solution would not be an easy fix- our country is so rooted in the two-party system that has existed since the Civil War, and so much of how we elect political leaders is dependent on the existence of the Democratic and Republican parties, which have immense control over the political landscape of our nation.
The first step is for political candidates to spend more time discussing the policies they would like to enact rather than attacking the opposing candidates, which would lessen the hostility of our political climate, create healthy discussion and would more directly address issues that have an impact on the voters. Shouldn’t the American people should be more concerned about the quality of their kids’ education and the cost of their health care rather than what a candidate did with his real estate business 40 years ago?
Secondly, we need to be more accepting of political candidates who are willing to propose solutions to issues which are on all ends of the political spectrum and are willing to support the interests of the American people over the interests of a certain political party. If candidates like this without an affiliation to a political party get elected into public office, it would decrease the power of political parties in our democracy and would allow a wider range of viewpoints to be introduced to our government. Finally, it is important to understand that there are going to be different sides to every issue, but congressmen and women should be willing to compromise on issues in order to solve the issue of congressional gridlock and pass laws that would benefit the American people.
In the world that we live in today, it is important to take a look at the two-party system that dominates our government. With so many complex issues facing our society, it is imperative that we allow for a broader range of viewpoints to be represented in our government, rather than just having two solutions to every problem. What would happen if we were limited to just two options in other areas besides politics? What if you could only eat either cheese pizza or pepperoni pizza? What if you could only watch either football or basketball? What if you could only buy either iPhones or Androids? We couldn’t imagine having to make choices like these, but yet in politics we are forced to. Why do you think so many people hate politics? Because the American people are forced to choose a political party to support rather than choosing candidates who would best represent their needs in office. And that is why the two-party system that is in place today in the United States is not the best solution to the healthy, functional democracy that our founding fathers envisioned.
