Introduction
The US is known to have a two-party political system, which is currently represented by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Although some other parties emerge in the political arena, they almost never win the election. This paper will discuss reasons why third parties are not viable in the US, how this situation can be amended, and what consequences such amendments may have. It will show that a third party cannot succeed in US politics because of the Electoral College, single-member districts, and plurality voting, but this can be changed by altering the voting system.
The Historical Presence of the Two-Party System and the Role of Minor Parties
The two-party system has been present in the US almost since the beginning of the republic, and minor parties have existed to challenge the big two. According to the historian Richard Hofstadter, “Third Parties are like bees: once they have stung, they die” (as cited in McMath Jr., 2020, p. 221). It means that, although third parties usually do not win the elections, they generate new ideas, educate, and agitate, which is an important element of political life.
Comparing the US political parties to Canadian ones, Eidlin (2016) concluded that American politicians’ response to the Great Depression contributed to the strengthening of the two-party system and the weakening of third parties. In particular, the researcher found that, in contrast to Canada, the US Democratic Party considered the interests of farmers and labor groups, which discouraged these groups from forming their own party (Eidlin, 2016). Hence, throughout its history, the US has maintained its two-party system and discouraged third parties from gaining significant political power.
Factors Contributing to the Weakness of Third Parties in the US.
There are several reasons for the weakness of third parties in the US. First, the Electoral College requires that the candidate win a majority to win the presidency (Fresia, 2010). Due to this requirement, third parties have three options: lose everything because of unrealistic chances to win the majority, coalesce with a major party, or help win the party with opposing interests (Fresia, 2010). Second, third parties are not viable in the US because of single-member districts, which is a system in which the party with the majority of votes gets 100% representation (Fresia, 2010).
Third, the plurality voting system, also known as the “winner-takes-all” system, discourages voters from supporting independent candidates (Anderson, 2015, p. 1). Conroy (2015) also mentions such reasons as people’s disbelief in the possibility of a third party’s victory and less media coverage given to third parties’ political programs. Finally, since the late 19th century, the placement on the ballot was limited to parties meeting certain requirements, which made third parties’ participation in elections onerous and costly (Conroy, 2015; McMath Jr., 2020). Thus, the US political system was created to limit third parties’ power.
Challenges Faced by Third Parties in Participating Fully in US Politics
Several issues are linked to third parties’ inability to participate fully in the country’s politics. First, it has led to the “vote blue no matter who” movement, which means that people vote for the lesser of two evils, that is, the candidate whom they dislike less (Weidl, 2022, p. 2). Moreover, tired of being provided with binary choices, more and more Americans have become unaffiliated with any political party (“A call for nonpartisanship,” 2022).
Second, the plurality voting system resulted in third parties being considered “spoilers” in elections (Anderson, 2015, p. 2). A spoiler is a candidate who is unlikely to win but can split the majority preference for one of the candidates from a major party, which is why third-party candidates are viewed as a waste of time (Doherty, 2010). A famous example of a spoiler is Ralph Nader, who ran in the 2000 presidential election outside of the Democratic Party. Nader’s political program was aimed at protecting low-income individuals, who usually suffered when Republicans came to power (Domhoff, 2010). Due to Nader’s participation, the election was won by the Republican candidate, George W. Bush, which damaged Nader’s liberal cause.
The Consequences of Third Parties’ Limited Influence and Calls for Political Reform
Third parties’ limited influence on political life has negative consequences, and there have been calls to reform the US political system. Some issues with the two-party system are societal polarization and the inability of the government to meet the unique needs of all Americans, which it is believed to represent (“Does America need a third party,” 2022; Montlake, 2022). Scholars suggest two ways in which this system can be changed to fix these problems: shifting from plurality voting to either proportional voting or ranked candidate voting (Anderson, 2015; Lemieux, 2016).
Proportional voting allows parties to earn seats in Congress depending on the share of votes received. In ranked candidate voting, voters rank several candidates in order of their preference. Both systems can provide a greater representation of the interests of diverse Americans than the plurality system does. However, these changes are difficult to implement because of constitutional provisions. In particular, Article II authorized the states to select the electors who formally choose the president (Lemieux, 2016). Hence, Congress can only incentivize the states to adopt legislation leading to a new voting system.
Conclusion
To sum up, third parties in the US serve to educate, agitate, and generate new ideas, but they almost never win the elections. The main reason for this is the plurality voting system, under which the party that gets the majority of votes receives all representation. This system leads to a polarized society and prevents the government from representing the interests of diverse population groups. Changing this voting system to proportional voting or ranked candidate voting is seen as a possible way out for third parties, but such changes need substantial legislative efforts from states because of constitutional provisions.
References
Anderson, J. B. (2015). A viable third party would alleviate government gridlock. In M. Haerens (Ed.), Government gridlock (pp. 1-5). Gale.
A call for nonpartisanship. (2022). Newsday. Web.
Conroy, S. (2015). There are major obstacles to a viable third party in the United States. In M. Haerens (Ed.), Government gridlock (pp. 1-6). Gale.
Does America need a third party? (2022). Wall Street Journal. Web.
Doherty, B. (2010). Third parties in the U.S cannot win, but they are still worthwhile. In N. Berlatsky (Ed.), Does the two-party system still work? (pp. 46-51). Greenhaven Press.
Domhoff, G. W. (2010). Third-party campaigns can hurt liberals and everyday people. In N. Berlatsky (Ed.), Does the two-party system still work? (pp. 23-36). Greenhaven Press.
Eidlin, B. (2016). Why is there no labor party in the United States? Political articulation and the Canadian comparison, 1932 to 1948. American Sociological Review, 81(3), 488-516. Web.
Fresia, J. (2010). The U.S. electoral system must be reformed to make third parties feasible. In N. Berlatsky (Ed.), Does the two-party system still work? (pp. 17-22). Greenhaven Press.
Lemieux, S. (2016). Revise the electoral system to encourage all voters to support their first choice. In Gale opposing viewpoints online collection (pp. 1-3). Gale.
McMath Jr., R. C. (2020). Third parties. In P. Baker & D. T. Critchlow (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of American political history (pp. 219-245). Oxford University Press.
Montlake, S. (2022). Voters say they want a new political party. Will forward be it? The Christian Science Monitor. Web.
Weidl, E. (2022). Strengthen democracy through ranked choice voting. The Daily Iowan. Web.