The Party’s Over

Political parties used to be vibrant organizations that heavily influenced who won  a party’s nomination for office and then conducted the election campaign. No more.  Parties have ceded power largely to big money candidates, interest groups and the  relatively new and secret independent funders of TV campaign blitzes. On balance, I  believe this represents a loss to the healthy functioning of our democracy. 

Political parties evolved naturally in our new nation as a means of organizing  people of shared values around a single candidate for an office, which increased chances  of success over the possibility of multiple candidates with shared values. The political  party also provided a handy cue for voters, who would not have known the party’s slate  of candidates. 

The heyday of the party organizations was the 19th Century, when party leaders  controlled the nomination process through limited participation caucuses and  conventions. By the end of the century, however, Progressives began to chafe over being  kept out of the processes. They championed primary elections, widely adopted in the  early 20th Century, as away of challenging “political bosses” (to this day a reliable  epithet). 

The old political party organizations did have advantages. When in power, a party  controlled appointments to government jobs, which developed a corps of reliable precinct workers. They also tapped the workers for regular contributions, which provided the  party funds. These funds supported loyalist candidates who had worked their way up the  ranks, making it possible for non-wealthy candidates to succeed. 

A great strength of party organizations was their desire to win, which generally  meant the nomination of moderate candidates. 

Since the advent of the primaries, party organizations have been in decline. First,  civil service laws took ever more jobs away from political appointment, reducing the  number of party precinct workers and the funds they generated. 

Over time, changes in primary election laws further reduced the party  organization’s hold on power. In many states, voters were no longer required to register  with a political party and could vote in any party’s primary. And this year, Illinois Gov.  Pat Quinn amended a bill so that the primary slates of all parties would be on one ballot,  making it possible for a Democrat to vote in a Republican primary. (This action will  probably be rejected by the legislature this November.) 

Actions like this have left party organizations generally weak, much less capable  of dominating the nominating process than in earlier generations. Many local party units  gave up trying years ago. 

This leaves the party organization simply a medium in which candidates seek to  be nominated for office. As a result, Tea Party candidates are actually running against  the Republican Party organizations of “professional politicians and bosses”—and are winning.

And now independent, secretly funded non-party groups are spending more than  the political candidates and parties on campaigns to elect philosophical soul mates,  primarily on the right. 

The weakness of party organizations also enhances the ability of really wealthy  candidates to succeed. For example, former eBay CEO Meg Whitman spent $71 million  of her own money in winning the recent California GOP primary for governor. This  deflects many talented non-wealthy candidates from ever entering the fray. 

Certainly, some old party organizations were run by true bosses such as the late  Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley. Nor do all super-rich candidates win. Witness Jeffrey  Greene spending $23 million of his own money in a recent loss to Rep. Kendrick Meek for a U.S. Senate nomination in Florida. 

But the political party, at least as a vital organization, is basically over. Political  organization leaders are being replaced by campaign consultants, their wealthy patrons, and the super-rich. Campaigns are no longer about party labels, which are often shunned by candidates. Instead, we have vitriolic campaigns that try to destroy the persona of the  opponent. 

I don’t see a return to strong parties. The symbol of the “evil political bosses”  resonates too well with the public. But we may rue what we’re getting in place of  effective party organizations.