Elections and Campaigns

1
Elections and Campaigns

• Wilson Chapter 8
• Klein Oak High School

2
Congressional vs. Presidential 1

• Two phases
• getting nominated and
• getting elected
• Getting nominated
• Getting your name on the ballot
• An individual effort
• U.S. parties now stress label more than
  organization
• Parties used to play larger role

3
Congressional vs. Presidential 2

• Presidential races are more competitive than
  House races.
• White House has made more partisan changes than
  the House.
• Winning margins are narrower for presidential
  races.
• Term limits cut a presidents incumbency
  advantage.
• e.g. Al Gore in 2000

4
Congressional vs. Presidential 3

• Fewer people vote in midterm elections.
• Candidates must appeal to more partisan and
  activist voters.
• Congressional incumbents can serve their
  constituents.
• Credit for government grants, programs, etc., can
  be claimed by Congress member via mailings and
  visits home.
• President cant (power is not local) and must
  communicate by mass media

5
Congressional vs. Presidential 4

• Congressional candidates can campaign against
  Washington.
• President is held accountable.
• But congressional candidates suffer when their
  partys economic policies fail.
• Power of presidential coattails has declined
• Congressional elections have become largely
  independent of presidential election.
• Reduces meaning (and importance) of party

6
Running for President 1

• Getting mentioned as being presidential caliber
• Using reporters, trips, speeches
• Sponsoring legislation, governor of large state
• Setting aside time to run
• Reagan six years
• Mondale four years
• May have to resign from office first (Dole in
  1996), though many campaign while in office

7
Running for President 2

• Money
• Individuals can give 1,000,
• PACs can give 5,000 in each election to each
  candidate.
• Qualifying for matching funds for primaries
• Candidates must raise 5,000 in twenty states in
  individual contributions of 250 or less

8
Running for President 3

• Organization
• large paid staff
• e.g., Kerry Campaign Staff
• volunteers
• advisers on issues

9
Running for President 4

• Strategy and themes
• Incumbents defend their record challengers
  attack incumbents.
• Setting the tone (positive or negative)
• Developing a theme trust, confidence, etc.
• Judging the timing (early momentum vs. reserving
  resources for later)
• Choosing a target voter whos the audience? Who
  will change their vote?

10
Primary and General Campaigns

• What works in a primary election may not work in
  a general election, and vice versa.
• Different voters, workers, media attention
• Must mobilize activists who will give money,
  volunteer, and attend caucuses
• Activists are more ideologically stringent than
  are the voters at large.

11
Iowa Caucuses

• Held in January (text is wrong) of presidential
  election year
• Candidates must do well or be disadvantaged in
  media attention, contributor interest
• Winners tend to be most liberal Democrat, most
  conservative Republican

12
The Balancing Act

• Being conservative enough or liberal enough to
  get nominated
• Then move to center to get elected
• Apparent contradictions can alienate voters from
  all candidates.
• Even primary voters can be more extreme
  ideologically than average voters
• e.g., McGovern in 1972

13
Two Kinds of Campaign Issues

• Position issues
• rival candidates have opposing views,
• voters are divided and a partisan realignment may
  result
• Position issues in 2000 social security,
  defense, public school choice systems
• Valence issues
• candidate supports the public, widely held view
• Dominated the 1996 election
• Increasingly important because television leads
  to a reliance on popular symbols and admired
  images

14
Television

• Paid advertising (spots)
• Little known candidates can increase name
  recognition through the frequent use of spots
  (example, Carter in 1976).
• Probably less effect on general than primary
  elections because most voters rely on many
  sources for information
• News broadcasts (visuals)
• Cost little
• May have greater credibility with voters
• Rely on having television camera crew around
• May actually be less informative than spots and
  therefore make less of an impression

15
Debates

• Usually an advantage only to the challenger
• Reagan in 1980
• reassured voters by his performance
• 1988 primary debates with little impact on voters

16
Slips of the Tongue

• Risk in debates and visuals
• Forces candidates to rely on stock
  speechescampaign themes and proven
  applause-getting lines
• Sell yourself as much or more than ideas

17
Ross Perots Campaign

• depended on television.
• CNN appearances
• Infomercials
• Televised debates with major party contenders

18
The Computer

• Makes possible direct-mail campaigns
• Allows candidates to address specific voters via
  direct mail
• Mailing to specific groups, so more specific
  views can be expressed

19
Gap Between Campaigning Governing

• Has been widening in recent years
• Party leaders had to worry about their
  candidates reelection so campaigning and
  government linked
• Todays consultants work for different people in
  different electionsno participation in
  governing.

20
The Sources of Campaign Money 1

• Presidential primaries
• part private,
• part public money
• Federal matching funds for all individuals
  donations of 250 or less
• Gives candidates an incentive to raise money from
  small donors
• Government also gives lump-sum grants to parties
  to cover convention costs.

21
The Sources of Campaign Money 2

• Presidential general elections
• all public money
• 1996
• 61.8 million for major party candidates,
• 29 million for Perot

22
The Sources of Campaign Money 3

• Congressional elections
• all private money
• individuals,
• political action committees, and
• political parties
• Most money comes from individual small donors
  (lOO200 a person).
• 1,000 maximum for individual donors
• Benefit performances by rock starts, etc., can
  raise large amounts of money.
• 5,000 limit for PACs
• but most give just a few hundred dollars
• Incumbents receive one-third of their campaign
  funds from PACs and spend little of their own
  money.
• Challengers must supply much of their own money.

23
Campaign Finance Rules 1

• Watergate and illegal donations from corporation,
  unions, and individuals
• Brought about the 1974 federal campaign reform
  law and Federal Election Commission (FEC)

24
Campaign Finance Rules 2

• Reform law
• Set limit on individual donations (1,000) per
  candidate per election)
• Reaffirmed ban on corporate and union donation...
  
• but allowed them to raise money through PACs
• PACs in turn raised money from members or
  employees
• Set limit on PAC donations (5,000 per election
  per candidate)
• Primary and general election counted separately
  for donations

25
Campaign Finance Rules 3

• Supreme Court ruled that limits could not be set
  on campaign spending by an individual candidate
  unless federal funding was being received.
• Buckley v. Valeo
• Limit of 50,000 on out-of-pocket spending by a
  presidential candidate who accepted federal
  financing

26
Campaign Finance Rules 4

• Law did not limit independent political
  advertisingno consultation with candidate or
  campaign organization
• Typically done by ideologically oriented PACs
• Sometimes negative or attack advertising is
  involved

27
Campaign Finance Rules 5

• Loopholes in the law
• Allows soft moneymoney for local party
  activities, e.g., getting out the vote
• Allows bundling
• The practice of pooling individual contributions
  from various people -- often those employed by
  the same business or in the same profession -- in
  order to maximize the political influence of the
  bundler. (source)

28
Effects of Reform

• Goal To expose and publicize fundraising
• Successful, but it has limitations
• greatly increased power of PACs and thus of
  special interests
• shifted control of money away from parties to
  candidates
• given advantage to wealthy challengers
• given advantage to ideological candidates
• penalized candidates who start campaigning late,
  who dont have war chests
• helped incumbents and hurt challengers

29
Campaign Finance Reform

• Further reforms may be unconstitutional and also
  unsuccessful.
• Popular, questionable reforms
• Cut individual donations
• Free advertising for candidates
• Ban soft money
• Federal funding
• Abolish PACs

30
Money and Winning 1

• Presidential candidates have similar funds
  because of federal funding, but parties may have
  different amounts of soft money.
• Other factors whose influence on the presidential
  campaign is usually overstated
• Vice presidential nominee
• Political reporting
• Religion of the presidential candidate
• Abortion as a single issue
• New voting groups
• Party affiliation, state of the economy, and
  candidate character influences voting in
  presidential elections.

31
Money and Winning 2

• Congressional racesmoney has a greater effect
• Your teacher disagrees with Wilson on this.
  Recent economic studies show little correlation.
• Challenger must spend to be recognized.
• Jacobson big spending challengers do better
• Big spending incumbents also do better and higher
  spending has become the norm.
• Your teacher questions whether the money
  produced success or, more likely, likely success
  attracted money.

32
Money and Winning 3

• Money doesnt make the only difference.
• Party, incumbency, and issues also have a role.
• Advantages of incumbency, in fundraising
• Can provide services to constituency
• Can use franked mailings
• Can get free publicity by sponsoring legislation
  or conducting investigations

33
Money and Winning 4

• Ideas for reform
• Unlikely Congress wont agree since incumbent
  had advantage
• The constitutional right to campaign involved
• Public financing of congressional races would
  give incumbents even more of an advantage.
• Abolishing PAC money might allow fat cats to
  reemerge as a major force
• Shorter campaigns might help incumbents.

34
What Decides Elections?- an overview

• Party Identification
• Issues
• The Campaign
• Finding a Winning Coalition

35
Party Identification

• Why dont Democrats always win?
• Democrats less wedded to their party than are
  Republicans
• GOP does better among independents.
• Republicans have higher turnout.

36
Issues 1

• Its the economy, stupid!
• V. 0. Key most voters who switch parties do so
  in their own interests
• They know what issues affect them personally.
• They have strong principles about certain issues
  (abortion, etc.).
• Prospective voting is used by relatively few
  voters.
• Those voters know the issues and vote
  accordingly.
• Most common among activists and special interest
  groups

37
Issues 2

• Retrospective voting practiced by most voters,
  and decides most elections
• Judge the incumbents performance and vote
  accordingly
• Have things gotten better or worse, especially
  economically?
• Reagan in 1980 debate
• Examples presidential campaigns of 1980, 1984,
  1988, 1992, 1996
• Usually helps incumbent.., unless economy has
  gotten worse
• Midterm elections voters turn against
  presidents party
• 2002 exception (war)

38
The Campaign

• Does make a difference
• reawaken voters partisan loyalties
• let voters see how candidates handle and apply
  pressure
• let voters judge candidates characters and core
  values
• Tend to emphasize themes over details
• True throughout American history
• What has changed is importance of primary
  elections
• Gives more influence to single-issue groups with
  loyal members who vote as a block

39
Finding a Winning Coalition 1

• Ways of looking at various groups
• How loyal, or percentage voting for party
• How important, or number voting for party

40
Finding a Winning Coalition 2

• Democratic Coalition
• Blacks most loyal
• Jews slipping somewhat
• Hispanics somewhat mixed because of underlying
  ethnic differences
• Political power does not yet match numbers.
• Turnout will increase as more become citizens.
• See box, The Hispanic Vote.

41
Finding a Winning Coalition 3

• Republican Coalition
• Party of business and professional people who are
  very loyal
• exception 1964 (AuH2O!)
• Farmers are often Republican, but are changeable.
  
• Representatives of different segments of the
  coalition stress loyalty or numbers, because can
  rarely claim both

42
Party Realignments 1

• Definition sharp, lasting shift in the popular
  coalition supporting one or both parties
  occurring during an election or early in a
  presidential administration
• Issues that distinguish the parties change, so
  supporting voters change for each party.
• 1800 Jeffersonians defeated Federalists
• 1828 Jacksonian Democrats came to power
• 1860 Whigs collapsed Republicans won (Lincoln)
• 1896 Republicans defeated William Jennings Bryan
  
• 1932 FDR Democrats came to power

43
Party Realignments 2

• Kinds of realignments
• Major party is so badly defeated that it
  disappears and new party emerges
• 1800
• 1860
• Parties continue, but voters shift from one party
  to another
• 1896
• 1932

44
Party Realignments 3

• Clearest cases of realignment
• 1860 slavery
• 1896 economics
• 1932 economics
• 1980 not a traditional realignment
• Dissatisfaction with Carter led to Reagan
  victory.
• Also left Congress Democratic

45
Party Realignments 4

• Major change in 19721996 shift in presidential
  voting patterns in the South
• Southern whites
• fewer Democrats,
• more Republicans,
• more independents
• Southern white independents vote Republican.
• Given votes of independents, southern whites are
  now close to fifty-fifty Democratic, Republican.
• In general, party de-alignment, not realignment,
  because party labels lost meaning for so many
  voters.

46
Party Decline

• Fewer people identify with either party.
• Increase in ticket splitting, which creates
  divided government
• Seeing the effect of a change from the
  party-column ballot to the office-bloc ballot

47
Guess which one is the party column ballot and
which one is the office bloc ballot. The image is
taken from Magruders American Government.
48
Effects of Election on Policy 1

• Argument Public policy remains more or less the
  same no matter which official or party is in
  office.
• Depends on the office and the policy
• Voters must elect numerous officeholders.
• Parties have a limited ability to build
  coalitions of officeholders.
• Winning coalitions may change from policy to
  policy.

49
Effects of Election on Policy 2

• Comparison Great Britain, with parliamentary
  system and strong parties, often sees marked
  changes, as in 1945 and 1951.
• Conclusion Many American elections do make
  differences in policy, though constitutional
  system generally moderates the pace of change.

50
Effects of Election on Policy 3

• Why, then, the perception that elections do not
  matter?
• Because change alternates with consolidation
• most elections are retrospective judgments about
  the incumbent president and existing
  congressional majority.

51
The End!