Public and Private Watchdogs

Watchdogs that keep on eye on how public officials behave arose out of the need to preserve ethical conduct and accountability. Without watchdogs, democratic nations would have experienced tremendous abuse akin to what is usually found in authoritarian countries where a select few enjoy unfettered access to anything unconstitutional. Watchdog organizations, whether in the private or public sector, exist to defend certain causes that can have tremendous effects on society if not contained. Keeping watch over the private and public sector may seem to some as an act of violation of inalienable rights, breach of trust, and outright dictatorship, yet, if left unattended, certain acts may have consequences that cannot be remedied. Rao (1998) argues that there are many watchdogs out there to protect consumers, the welfare of women, children rights, civil rights, animal welfare, and the environment. Hibbs, Rivers, and Nasilatos (1982) argue that the performances of public officials tend to be evaluated relatively by the public and not absolutely as expected. Democracy will remain a mere framework in paper form in the absence of accountability and increased incompetence of public servants (Bovens, 2005).

Public and private watchdogs, if effectively managed, can help alleviate many problems associated with public and private official corruption and as well save the dignity of organizations that would otherwise have been left to suffer in silence. The case of the Watergate Scandal is a prime example of a scandal that received wide publicity. Public awareness of scandals like that of Watergate opens avenues for healthy discussions and deliberations. In recent years, according to Goel and Nelson (1996), exposure of government officials engaging in corruption has significantly increased in the U.S. due to the hard work and determination of academics engaged in strenuous research. In the U.S., excessive government spending has been the major cause of the explosive corruption witnessed in the military and the defense industry (Goel and Nelson, 1996). Bovens (2007), in a research on accountability in the European Union, perceives enormous deficit in accountability practices within the EU governing body resulting from poor policies.

References

Bovens, M. (2005). The Oxford handbook of public management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, Vol. 13, No. 4, July 2007, pp. 447–468.

Goen, J.K. and Nelson, M.A. (1996). Corruption and government size: A disaggregated analysis. Public Choice 97: 107-120, 1998. Kiuwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands.

Hibbs, D.A, Rivers, R.D., and Vasilatos, N. (1982). The dynamics of political support for American presidents among occupational and partisan groups.  American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 26, No. 2 (May, 1982), 312-332.

Rao, H. (1998). Caveat emptor: The construction of nonprofit consumer watchdog organizations.  American Journal of Sociology, VOL. 103Issue 4 (Jan., 1998), 912-961.

Media, Media, Media

The media has long been the main dispenser of news and information and the sole channel that connects the government to its citizens through constant relay of uninterrupted coverage that can either be presented as classified, unclassified, one-sided, or unbiased. According to D’Agostino (2011), the introduction of new media has been the cause of the marginalization of conventional varieties of media including print and television. Youth proclivity toward modern communication and the proliferation of the internet resulted in diminished demand for television and print media (D’Agostino, 2011). Baum and Kernell (1999) contend that growing demand for cable television and citizen dissatisfaction with the political system has resulted in presidents and presidential contenders losing a sizable number of viewers. In the past, heads of states relied heavily on prime-time television to convey their messages to their audiences though that has changed during the last 30 years.

The fall of prime-time television viewership started with the presidency of Ronald Reagan (Baum & Kernell, 1999). A 1969 prime-time television press conference conducted by Richard Nixon showed 59% of Americans owning television watching the event while in 1995, when Bill Clinton responded to a reporter regarding the relevancy of his leadership at a time when Republicans crafted what they termed as “Contract with America”, Nielsen Media Research found only 5.9% of the population tuning to the event (Baum & Kernell, 1999). While Fox News may be hostile to Obama’s policies, MSNBC is always on guard defending the president. 

Surprisingly, network television dissatisfaction with presidents have become so dire that the 42-second sound bites enjoyed by presidents in 1968 fell to a mere 7-second sound bite in 1996 (Baum & Kernell, 1999). In general, to the ordinary citizen, the media has come to be viewed as a destructive force that causes social dissection and political division. Network television and cable news networks are similar somehow in that both have become avenues for dispensing biased information that does not augur well with the general population. The advancement of information technology has enabled the public to view the media differently. In modern times, social media has taken over the role of network television and cable news to connect society to issues of national importance and also enhance social networking. Network TV and Cable have the tendency to increase coverage especially during presidential elections when competition for electoral superiority drag political party stalwarts to opposing directions. Despite the similarities and dissimilarities of the media in ideological concepts, opposing networks can be good sources for educating the mass and creating political awareness (Mutz, 2001).

References

Baum, M.A. & Kernell, M. (1999). Has cable ended the golden age of presidential television? American Political Science Review, Vol. 93, No. 1

D’Agostino, M. (2011). Reviving democracy through new and traditional media. Public Administration Review, 71 (2), 306-307.

Mutz, C.D. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. American Political Science Association, 95 (1) 97-114

Governance and Privatization

A modern democratic government that values the lives and living standards of its citizens has to have some form of privatization so as to deliver services in a manner consistent with the demands of those it serves. Privatization allows private enterprises to deliver services where the government failed to penetrate. It is not a bad idea for a government to contract out some task to some of its citizens that have the courage and capability to deliver on time. It has been acknowledged that a government cannot deliver on its own without help from the citizenry. Martimort (2005) contends that privatization is the delegation of a task and that the trend skyrocketed in the last few decades after dissatisfaction with government monopolies increased among unstable citizens who perceived government services as inferior. Privatization evolves out of state inability to provide necessary services and products, hold-ups resulting from underinvestment, budgetary constraints resulting from political and economic plunders, governmental fragmentation, and lack of benevolence on the part of governments (Martimort, 2005).

There are problems associated with privatization that deserve to be tackled if business is to be made to persist as usual. Some problems associated with privatization include lack of faith and commitment and the inability of politicians to deliver the right services to public. Schmidt (1995) argues that privatization got heightened in countries where enterprises were state-owned and that privatization got off the ground with tremendous speed in the 80s. Privatization came to the fore when William’s (1985) theorized what he referred to as ‘selective intervention’. According to Boycko, Shleifer, and Vishny (1995) privatization evolved after public government enterprises became ineffective due to meddling by politicians. In the U.S., private enterprises have transformed into restorers of law and order with some even getting contracts that are meant to correct prisoner behavior and contain overcrowding in dungeons. Others private investors have been fortunate enough to be rewarded with contracts meant to oversee subsidized public housing. These corrective endeavors serve as guiding lights for the ordinary citizen after government bureaucracy became inefficient in its commitments.

The main objective of politicians when soliciting votes is to find alternative jobs for their votes. It is this mindset that leads to the abandonment of vital services demanded by the public. Privatization is another form of political reformation since it deals with altering the living conditions of the suffering mass. Allowing the well-organized and responsible ordinary citizen to partake in the transformation of other citizens is a good idea. Many countries have been inspired by the art of privatization and the benefits that come with it. Britain under Margaret Thatcher experienced economic growth after the prime minister embarked on the privatization of its airways in the 80s. The Czech Republic under Vaclav Klaus and Mexico under Carlos Salinas also experienced massive privatization in their times (Boycko, Shleifer, & Vishny, 1996). Privatizing prison houses and public housing are noble ideas and should be encouraged.

References

Martimort, D. (2005). An agency perspective on the costs and benefits of privatization. Journal of Regulatory Economics. Retrieved from http://idei.fr/doc/by/martimort/agency_p.pdf

Schmidt, K.M. (1995). Incomplete contracts and privatization. Journal of Economic Literature Classification, L33, 150. Discussion Paper No. A-480.

Williamson, O. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. Free Press: New York.

Boycko, M.., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R.W. (1995). A theory of privatization. The Economic Journal, 106, 309-319.

Presidential Powers

Power in the American presidency depends on the type of leader in office, how much leadership qualities one displays, the nature of experience, and how existing knowledge is displayed during tenure of office. Moe and Howell (1999) are of the opinion that the power of the United States president has grown to a higher degree as can be seen from how the top leadership in the nation applies the use of unilateral power and the power to initiate new laws. Despite Congress playing a great role in shaping presidential power, the party the president hails from and the party that dominate the two Houses can affect governance and decision making matters in the administration of the United States. However, challenges do exist-challenges that curb the powers of the president-and this depends on the political thoughts of the presidency and the amalgamation of Congressional leaders. In modern times, the proliferation of assortments of ideological foundations inherent within decision making leaders has had adverse effects on the American presidency. Two tangible tasks espoused by an American president include the veto power and the power to make appointments. Through the use of the executive order, American presidents have the power to make laws (Deering & Maltzman, 1999). Also known as presidential legislation, the executive order is a tool applied by a president in the case of an opposition congress playing games contrary to presidential rules and regulations.

According to Cooper and West (1988), in the last few decades, the American governing system has undergone dramatic changes notably with the rise of presidential power and the decline in Congressional power. Institutionally, the American presidency was not created to be political, but in essence, foundationally formulated to incline to the managerial role and thus was to remain objective in general context (Cooper & West, 1988). Power wrangling or fight for supremacy, has been evident in the past between the Presidency and the Supreme Court, at times resulting in political miscalculations. In Boumediene v. Bush, the Supreme Court claimed that neither the President nor Congress had power over the legal execution of matters pertaining to Guantanamo Bay detainees (Devins, 2009). This incident happened at a time when presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and John McCain were passionately appealing for the closure of the much debated Guantanamo Bay Prison. Despite Bush vacating the presidency without fulfilling his dream of closing Guantanamo Bay Prison, to this day, tensions do exist between the Presidency, the Congress, and the Supreme Court over how to handle the Prison. In the meantime, the power of the U.S. President seems to be on the rise despite opposition from the Judiciary and the Legislature.

References

Moe, T.M. & Howell, G.W. (). The presidential power of unilateral action. JLEO, V15 N1, 132. Oxford University Press.

Deering, CJ. & Maltzman, F. (1999). The politics of executive orders: Legislative constraints on presidential power. Political research quarterly, VOL. 52, No. 4 (Dec., 1999), 767-783.

Cooper, J. & West, W.F. (1988). Presidential power and Republican government: The theory and practice of OMB review of agency rules. The journal of politics, Vol. 50, No. 4 (Nov., 1988), pp. 864-895.

Gevins, N. (2009). Talk loudly and carry a small stick: The Supreme Court and enemy combatants (2010). Faculty Publications. Paper 33. http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/33 

Voter Motivation and Voter Turnout

Voting in Iraq

Voter motivation which is an act of pulling electors to a cause from a micro to a macro level so they can cast their votes still remains an essential factor in contemporary democratic elections. Understanding the philosophy of voter motivation to garner victory can be a vital tool and a way of triumphing over political opponents. In present-day American elections, parties compete to attract as many voters as they can by using all sorts of tactics at their disposal. Cases of voters turned away for failing to furnish birth certificates, identity cards, and other documents demanded by officials manning election stations in various parts of the U.S, pop up in the media now and then to arouse public opinion. Turning away eligible voters challenges the concept of direct democratic participation. Election irregularities are common in almost every democracy mainly due to humankind’s irrationality and hostile responses become part of the ordinary citizens’ ways of voicing political discontent. Some form of racial prejudice surfaced among black and white voters in the presidential election of 2008 when the Republican Party fielded political heavyweight John McCain against the youthful politician and challenger Barack Obama of the Democratic Party such that former president Jimmy Carter, in the glare of the media, came in support of Obama (Paine et al, 2010).

One tactical measure to enhance voter turnout would be encouraging voters to come to the polling stations to cast their ballots. Libertarian paternalism is famous for its self-conscious influencing application that is known as “Nudge” where attempts are made to move people to a certain direction that elevates their living standards without promises of economic incentives attached. In such cases, what is essential for the voter is not concern for party arrangements but concern for policy results (Kedar, 2005). Another important means would be boosting voter education so that people can have understanding of how the electoral systems work. Broad experimental literature is available that document how the ordinary American citizen is ignorant of the policies and the politicians that shape the nation. According to Kaplan (2008), though not an aberration, the number of Americans having significant knowledge of politics is alarmingly low and below the level required for an advanced democracy such as the U.S.

Political science scholars, borrowing a leaf from the application of bargaining theory, often cite the need for the allocation of distributable goods and resources and the examination of institutional designs as factors that alter voter behavior (Kedar, 2005). To the contrary, other political scientists reference proximity theory which is voter endorsement of the candidate sharing similar political views. Regardless of which theory is right, one major aspect that voters put into consideration when voting for a particular candidate, is the state of the economy. According to Hudson (2010), creating better voting procedures has been shown to increase voter turnout. People often vote according to their social and economic statuses. Improved voter turnout can be realized through civic engagement and through empowering citizens to have a say in political discourses. A reduction in adherence to class prejudice and lessening all sorts of barriers that restrict voter involvement should be top priorities for congressional leaders if they are to receive the trust and support of their constituents. Advancing mobile and internet democracy could also be used to eliminate political misconceptions and allow for the retention of diminishing party loyalty.

References

Hudson, W.E. (2010). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future (6^th. ed).  Washington, D.C: CQ Press.

Caplan, B. (2008). Majorities against utility: Implications of the failure of the Miracle of Aggregation. Department of Economics, Center for Study of Public Choice, and Mercatus Center: Fairfax, VA: George Mason University.

Kedar, O. (2005). How voters work around institutions: Policy balancing in staggered elections. Electoral Studies, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Retrieved from http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~okedar/files/ES-06.pdf

                                              

Payne, B.K., Krosnick, J.S., Pasek, J., Lelkes, Akhtar, O. & Tompson, T. (2010). Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 American presidential election. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 367–374.

A Comprehensive History of Somalia: A Book Review

Adan Makina

June 14, 2012

A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history-Mahatma Gandhi

When Ismail Ali Ismail started writing his newly published book that synchronously details the history of Somalia and the Somali people, he had one thing in mind: the delivery of a sequence of events that is free from preconceived notions, preferential treatments, tribal inclinations, and irrelevant gossip. The book, Governance: The Scourge and Hope of Somalia, is a comprehensive history of Somalia and the Somali people and traces the root causes of the miasma and mendacity that have become the hallmarks of the ongoing irremediable Somali intransigence that is like a malignant cancer consuming the very core of Somali political fabric to this day. The book was published by Trafford Publishing in 2010 with the assigned International Standard Book Numbers being ISBN 978-1-4269-1980-0 for its soft cover and ISBN 978-1-4269-2099-0 for the hard cover. An academic, a public servant of previous Somali governments, and a long time diplomat assigned to various official responsibilities, Ismail’s knowledge of the Somali people and their political ideals may be described as unrivalled and as well unparalleled.

Unlike litigious historical chronicles penned down by past and present opinionated foreign or Somali writers, Ismail’s penmanship will remain evident in its nature of journalism and scholarly research for quite some time. His energy to write has been fuelled by a passion to expose the truth about a people and a nation whose history has become negligible.

What makes the book most attractive is the magnificence and eloquence of language and its cheerfulness and eagerness to marvelously calibrate undiagnosed historical phantasms. Like a camel herder traversing a desert storm in search of sustenance, the author perilously struggled to scramble through bookshelves and internet sites with the sole aim of unearthing and putting together a historical exegesis of profound importance to anyone interested in deciphering the circumstances surrounding Somalia’s exhaustive political entanglement. Voluminous and over four-hundred pages, Governance: The Scourge and Hope of Somalia, has a lot to tell the reader from the beginning chapter to the end.  It is a well researched book that has been written with good intentions. Almost every chapter begins with an ayah (verse) from the Holy Qur’an followed by eye-catching remarks by distinguished historical figures espousing unblemished character, dignity, and great wisdom. In giving a broader meaning to the term clash of civilizations, the author explains how the struggle between Islam and Christianity affected the people of the Horn of Africa. 

The might of Somali pastoral democracy and Somali past history stretch back several millenniums as opposed to the unfounded and untested lexicon of exaggerations that populate imperial libraries. The author illuminates the might of former sultans whose tutelage, according to territorial and ethnographic location, varied in the manner of their sovereignty and hierarchical applications across the expansive Somali peninsula.

The author uses numerous scholarly references to disentangle causes of past Somali obduracy and other malevolent historical dynamics that accelerated the rupturing of the once homogeneous Somali pastoral society. It is quite painful and mind-blowing for modern Somalis to experience the worst form of divisions, tribalism, and shocking forms of slaughter using all avenues of destruction including the application of modern war machinery while during the Somali Youth League (SYL) era there was little or no resistance among the few concerned nationalists whose unity rested on getting rid of the shackles of colonialism. Somalis are volatile, violent, and virulent when fighting among themselves and peaceful, graceful, and generous, when dealing with foreigners sharing equal thoughts and processes.

Somali volatility preceded the colonial administrations of Britain and Italy respectively. For centuries, tribal animosity and blood feuds have been the hallmarks of the unmarked greater Somali tribal territories where violence triggered by flimsy altercations led to unstoppable virulence spreading like wildfire and consequently consuming inhabitants of homesteads and kraals scattered countrywide. Periods of peace and prosperity allowed peripatetic nomads in search of pasture to traverse extensive territories and open a path for European explorers dedicated to charting avenues for future jingoistic imperialism followed by malevolent colonization. News of Somali valor and perseverance against European colonialism pilfered through Somalia’s southern neighbors Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania resulting in the historical events that became known as Mau Mau, Maji Maji, and Hehe rebellions. To the Arabs of South Arabia, the message was simple and clear: “if Somalis are free, why not us”.

The first chapter of the book scrutinizes the near century of colonial governance where Somalia was divided along colonial powers England and Italy leading to the pitiless British Somaliland and Italian Somaliland mandates that resulted in the partition of Somali territories the same time leaders of the mighty African continent were engaged in struggles for self-determination. In making comparative investigations of the two distinct administrations, the author pinpoints the lugubrious nature of the Italian colonial administration and the noninterference of the British in the Somali social makeup. The Italians callously manipulated Somali sovereignty by imposing a variety of restrictions that were meant to dismantle existing Somali social structure.

Thus, the very authoritarian fabrics of Rome transcended the borders of Italy finally arriving as anarchical condiments in areas of the mighty African continent where Italian totalitarianism reigned supreme. Italy’s loss of Libya and Eritrea culminated in Italian ersatz imperialism to grab the agriculturally fertile southern Somalia territories straddling the meandering Juba and Shebelle rivers. Despite pilfering Somali natural and human resources for close to a century, colonial powers Britain and Italy did little to diffuse to the Somalis the virtues of democratic organization, authority and control, and the principle and conduct of governance. Naturally, Somalis are an egalitarian society and it is incomprehensible for the British and Italians to abandon Somalia without injecting an iota of reliable governance.

Perhaps, what southern Somalis inherited from the Italians is nothing but pasta di semola di grano duro and pasta di soia. And as for the northern Somalis, what they inherited from the British is nothing but the leaves of Camellia sinensis, otherwise known as tea that was introduced in East Africa by British barons who oversaw the cultivation of vast tracts of land around the White Highlands-land that straddles the lush green Rift Valley in Kenya. The Rift Valley originates in Jordan and ends in the lower Zambezi Valley Mozambique in southern Africa.

Somali stiff resistance to colonialism paved the way for self-determination and complete independence for the northern British Somaliland and the southern Italian Somaliland territories that had been separated for quite some time. The proclamation of independence on the 1^st of July, 1960 heralded an era of unification a

nd the intermingling of two homogeneously related communities but ideologically clothed in contorted English and Italian administrative styles. The sudden separation from British and Italian apathy led the two Somalis to chart a new avenue for a honeymoon that would last less than a decade. Unfortunately, Africa’s first democratic government headquartered in Mogadishu-“the seat of the Shah”-crumbled after a coup d’état orchestrated by a group of military officers took the nation by surprise at a time when military leadership was a political fashion in Africa and some parts of Asia.  

There is a lot to learn from Ismail’s penmanship. The book is comprehensive in context as it dwells into the historical aspects of the collapse of the military junta in 1991 consequently plunging Somalia into myriads of problems that include foreign interference in the form of humanitarian missions, warlord supremacy, extremism and religious anarchy, tribal hostilities, maritime depletion, armed insurrections, prolonged droughts and environmental degradation, political obscurantism in almost every conceivable canton, piracy, assassinations, and the meteoric rise of Islamists.

If you are writing a paper for your college on Somalia or if you are in the process of preparing a thesis or dissertation that is exclusive to Somalia, the book, Governance: The Scourge and Hope of Somalia, is one important document you would want to consult and reference before embarking on your erudite and scholarly journey to academic success. Adding it to your exotic library for future use could be an added advantage.

Adan Makina

WardheerNews

adan.makina@gmail.com  

Party Seniority System

Despite undergoing superficial reforms in the past and experiencing elemental institutional changes meant to inject quality leadership styles, nowadays, America’s political alignments seem to be mired in gridlocks, decline of party memberships, unnecessary squabbles, and poor command structure that has its roots in disagreements between party members who are mainly obsessed with the old seniority system. According to Crook and Hibbing (1985), the US House of Representatives’ strict adherence to the ranking system makes matters worse for the effective management of party institutions. The selection of committee members from the old political elites who sit on ranking committees remain a contentious issue among scholars, the media, and political observers watching from the sidelines. The effective use of persuasion, mobilization, and coordination that was once the hallmarks of American political systems has been replaced by political misguidance that tends to do more harm than good to party loyalists and the general voting population. Fighting over voters and misguiding them so they can change party allegiance, attempting to alter voter party preferences, and altering voter participation in elections are some of the factors that plunge voters into confusion and party politics into oblivion (Cox, 2006).

It is parties that make democracy possible and it is the people that control governments (Cox, 1977). When a government manipulates its citizens, then the people become powerless subjects who can be driven anywhere. Nowadays, there seem to be a decline in American party discipline and that could be a sign of bad organization and lack of coordination among party leaders and party politics. Ideological differences could also set the stage for unnecessary differences and general decline in discipline among party members. Katz and Mair (1995) argue that parties have become cartels and that parties can achieve perfection when they effectively relate their activities to the societies they represent and serve.

America’s two biggest parties-Democratic and Republican parties-seem to be divided along ideological lines with one party always seeking a weak spot in the other while forgetting the general welfare of the nation and society. Party divisions often lead to social divisions, and social and economic decline since members may be reluctant to agree on important national issues. Bartels (2000) asserts that the rise of independent voters may be attributed to the decline of political parties. Voting at the presidential and congressional level has seen drastic rise due to partisan politics and the trend has been more visible in the 1950s and 1980s respectively (Bartel, 2000).

References

Bartels, L.M. (2000). Partisan and voting behavior, 1952-1996. American Journal of Political Science, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp. 35-50.

Cox, G.W. (2006). Swing voters, core voters and distributive politics. University of California, San Diego.

Crook, S.B. & Hibbing, J.R. (1985). Congressional reform and party discipline: The effects of change in the seniority system on party loyalty in the US House of Representatives. British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 207-226.

Katz, R.S. & Mair, P. (1995). Changing models of party organization and party democracy: The emergence of the cartel party. Party Politics, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 5-28.

Pomper, G.M (1977). The decline of the party in American elections. Political Science Quarterly, Volume 92, No. 1.

Workforce Bureaucracy

As years progress, the nature of bureaucracy and the workforce that surround them either undergo transformation or may remain stagnated depending on the effectiveness of the leadership empowered to implement strategic planning initiatives. Popular leaders of aforetimes viewed American government bureaucracy from a different perspective. In the era of Wilson, there was constant competition among groups competing for scarce resources. On the other hand, there were the political spoilers who took advantage of the patronage politics that was rampant in the infant American democracy.  Wilson complained bitterly about the massive influx of European immigrants flooding the country. Currently, according to Rosenbloom (2009), approximately 20 million serve as employees of the 88,000 governments. This is a large force that needs to be handled with prudence. To overcome tensions in the nation’s superfluous bureaucracy and keep a lid over future racial altercations, the best method would be to create a harmonious balanced bureaucracy drawn from people of walks of life. To be surrounded by ‘gentlemen’ as was during the reign of Washington can be a recipe for disaster in modern American politics. Washington believed in the use of politics to select the best candidates to run the affairs of his government.

To ensure citizen safety and protection, agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Center for Disease Control (CDC), Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) among others, should be run by the best of the best.  Selecting personnel should be based on merit and not on political inclination and favoritism. One factor that seems to be the cause of the problems associated with public personnel administration is related to shifting policies and alliances. Diminishing political participation result from the lack of national political coherence and meddling by greedy bureaucrats, lobbyists, and industrial magnates driven by the urge to either climb the ladder of success or cause political and social disunity and entanglement.

Rosenbloom (2009) feels the term “merit” to be a misnomer. The examination factor used to generate the best public service personnel demonstrated that it was a means to marginalizing select communities like Latinos and African-Americans whose representation in the workforce was limited. In essence, the merit factor was a handicap to equal employment. To ensure American public service personnel stay up to the task, the laws and regulations that call for equal pay for all citizens regardless of age, creed, color, national origin, political and religious affiliation, sex and gender should be enforced.

References

Rosenbloom, D.R., Kravchuk, R.S., & Clerkin, R, M. (2008). Public Administration: Understanding Management, Politics, and Law in the Public Sector. New York: McGraw-Hill

Voter Inclination to Party of Choice

American voter inclination to party of choice has been experiencing changing trends in the last few decades. According to voter demographics, majority of voters filing up to cast ballots at the county, state, and federal level elections hail mainly from the elderly population (Dubin & Kalsow, 1996). Voting trends among absentee voters have significantly changed in the last 30 year in California especially after the liberalization of absentee voting laws and applications (Dubin & Kalsow, 1996). However, differences in voting patterns do exist among voters in the general and primary elections. According to Dubin and Kalsow (1996), there has been a dramatic increase in voter registration from the beginning of 1970 up to early 1990s when data collected revealed a hike from 4% to 20%. The most lavish campaign in the history of the U.S. Senate was during the epic battle between Dianne Feinstein and Michael Huffington. Huffington accused his opponent of taking advantage of the fraud fraught registration and absentee vote.

Political ideals and ideological differences in American voting system are centered on liberalism and conservatism. Supporters of the Republican Party are more inclined to conservatism while followers of the Democratic Party give preference to liberalist views. Regardless of whether it is a political Armageddon between an incumbent and a challenger or a Republican against a Democrat vying in a hotly contested race, in essence, party affiliates and opponents tend to espouse contrasting ideologies (Snyder & Ting, 2003). Political maturity is taking roots in American politics with the old tradition of sticking to historical party loyalty becoming a thing of the past especially among young voters though a good proportion among older folks may not be susceptible to change. According to Shachar (2003), even to this day, voting successively for a single party without any lapse remains a habit among voters in most countries where democratic elections are the norm.

Party labels, though not having much significance as in the past, remain in effect especially among Independent, Democratic, and Republican followers or supporters. Party labels are mainly used as distinctive brand names to differentiate one party from the other. A party that populates the House may have leverage over other parties especially when the Speaker hails from the party that dominates Congress. That’s why the Speaker of the House wields considerable power in American politics. Usually, as it is in modern American politics, the Speaker’s power is elevated when there is a secure party majority in the House (Cooper & Brady, 1981). Despite having legal powers, having a majority in the House gives the Speaker the clout to maneuver, implement, and organize regulations. In modern American politics, Tip O’Neill may be remembered for the power he wielded when he was the Speaker of the House. 

References

Cooper, J. & Brady, D.W. (1981). Institutional concept and leadership style: The House from Cannon to Rayburn. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 75, No. 2, pp. 411-425.

Dubin, J.A. & Kalsow, G.A. (1996). Comparing absentee and precinct voters: A view over time. Political Behavior, Vol. 18, No. 4.

Snyder, J.M. & Ting, M.M. (2003). Roll calls, party labels, and elections. Political Analysis, Vol. 11, No. 4: 419-4444. DOI: 10. 1093/pan/mpg025.

Shachar, R. (2003). Party loyalty as habit formation. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18: 251–269 (2003). DOI: 10.1002/jae.698.

Professionally Managing a Public Workforce 

Favoring close friends and relatives and extending protection to persons found to be towing the line can set bad signals in any institution including that of the United States federal service. Several studies have been conducted since the 80s with the most notable one being the Volcker Commission that was given the task of finding solutions to the poor state of affairs in many federal offices and their service personnel (Lane, Wolf, & Woodard, 2002). Formerly crafted as a competent force that was to provide the best applicable service to the republic, the U.S. federal service employees’ commitment to work ethics and obligation to the service of the nation dwindled such that, research conducted to tame such anomalies, uncovered fundamentally intractable problems that went unnoticed for many years. Some important aspects that may be blamed for the decline of the federal service include poor strategic planning initiatives that remained in place for a long time and neglect of performance management (Lee & Jimenez, 2010). Deficiency of knowledge and lack of the relevant skills needed to perform primary tasks and work incompetence are some other vital signs that continue to resonate in many federal offices.

In modern governance, professionally managing a public workforce requires a working knowledge of organizational management. According to Rosenbloom, Kravchuk, and Clerkin (2009), those holding top positions in government usually hail from the middle class even though, in the early years of the federal government formation, they tended to have been drawn from the upper class. Leaving public administration in the hands of a class that shares common interest, heritage, race, and religion is against the equal employment opportunity policies and guidelines set forth as a guiding beacon for the United States and contrary to state laws and stipulations. It sets a bad precedent for any healthy democracy especially when career federal employees engage in corruption and subversion. When top echelons of the state accord career federal employees assured safety and protection, established norms and values diminish from daily official practices. Often, there are political downfalls associated with abuse of public trust. Safeguarding an incompetent workforce could result in loss of prestige and dignity for top officials.

Corruption and subversion may be a problem in the U.S., but elsewhere in developing countries, it is business as usual. In some third world countries, notably in Asia and Africa, accumulation of wealth and property become the main priority for incumbents until the arrival of a successor. Those having power of authority may construct houses within short periods or buy them in cash and grab farmlands from original owners before vacating office. Accepting gifts in return for a favor is contrary to the customs of public administration. According to Lewis and Cho (2011), a tsunami of American federal career employees continue to age every year with no replacement of fresh blood in sight. The authors argue that many federal employees in the top hierarchy and those holding important occupations will retire soon even though strategic alternative sources have not been put together so far. Regardless of stringent regulations, public officials, whether in developing or developed countries, continue to engage in official malpractices on a daily basis. Embezzlement of state coffers, abuse of office, and granting of governmental contracts in return for hefty commissions, will have to addressed and tackled as the world moves to a globalized form of governance.

References

Lane, L.M., Wolf, J.F., & Woodard, C. (2002). Reassessing the human resources crisis in the public service, 1987-2002. The American Review of Public Administration. Vol. 33, No. 2, 123-145. DOI: 10.1177/0275074003251625.

Lee, G. & Jimenez, B.S.  (2010).   Does performance management affect job turnover intention in the Federal Government? The American Review of Public Administration 41(2) 168-184. DOI: 10.1177/0275074010368991

Lewis, G.B. & Cho, Y.J. (2011). The aging of the state government workforce:

Trends and implications. The American Review of Public Administration.

41(1) 48–60.

Rosenbloom, D., Kravchuck, R., & Clerkin, R. (2009). Public administration: Understanding management, politics, and law in the public sector (7th ed). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.

Keeping an Eye on Public Officials

Public officials are there to serve society and that society has the right to know how public officials perform and conduct the businesses entrusted to them. Civic engagement enhances close cooperation between the one providing service and the one receiving services. This form of collaboration is known to exist in governments where there is law and order and where governance is “for the people, by the people, and of the people”. Unlike in authoritarian regimes where an official becomes the sole owner of a public office, to the contrary, in modern democracies, public offices exist to serve every citizen without regard to race, creed, color, religious or political affiliation, sex or gender. Citizen networks have become a global phenomenon mainly due to the proliferation of the internet and globalization (Deibert, 2000). Advocacy groups, associations, and interest groups have the responsibility to monitor and expose aspects they deem unconstitutional and degrading the dignity of their nation’s sovereignty. Since the legislative and executive branches of government have limited capability to keep an eye on all administrative agencies within their scope, it becomes paramount for organized citizens to mobilize and actively engage officials to advance public policy issues.

For the last few years, citizen networks have emerged as a global force to combat government corruption and official unprofessional conduct. The strength of these networks can be reflected in the debilitating effects witnessed in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt and the massive mobilization of interest groups that converged in major U.S. cities challenging Wall Street and others. Lobby groups are becoming diversified and their members increasing in numbers (Hudson, 2010). Citizens can now partake in referendums, perform virtual communities, mobilize supporters without fear of legal ramifications, and volunteer to pursue a just cause. Watchdog organizations and whistleblowers are vital to the running of a nation because they expose what would have otherwise remained unknown and hidden from public scrutiny. Social networks connect segments of society by creating awareness that lead to broader participation.

Associations like the National Rifle Association (NRA), the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), and Communities Organized for Public Service (COPS) exist as pressure groups to ensure the passing of a legislation exclusively to serve member interests. According to Hoefer (2005), social welfare organizations may have considerable knowledge of the jobs they perform and yet remain flawed in public policy issues. There are some barriers that restrict organizations from carrying out lobbying activities in offices having jurisdiction over legislation. Long distance travel, shifting policies, and financial expenses are some limitations that bar organized groups from challenging responsible legislatures.

References

Deibert, R.J. (2000). International plug ‘n play? Citizen activism, the internet, and global public policy. International Studies Perspectives. 1, 255-272.

Hoefer, R. (2005). Altering state policy: Interest group effectiveness among state-level advocacy groups. National Association of Social Workers, Vol. 50, No. 3.

Hudson, W. (2010). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’ s future (6^th ed.). Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Interest Groups and their Role in Elections

Interest groups survive in the American democratic system mainly to provide financial resources during election campaigns and to restrain elections from holding government hostage. In 2008, the electorate rose up once again to put the government under control (Hudson, 2009). Hudson (2009) again argues that the current president, Barack Obama, faced stiff opposition and political huddles from government establishments in the 2008 election even though he had claimed victory. Citizen participation in government functions is a challenging aspect in modern American democracy. While in some democracies governments register eligible voters to partake in the selection of the right representatives, the American system is quite different since it is based on a system that gives electors freedom of choice during voting times. 

The actions of courageous activism, the right to voice concerns by speaking loud and louder through street matches and sit-ins, may be credited for spearheading many rights we currently enjoy in the American democratic system (Young, 2001). Through deliberative democracy, parties have been able to break gridlocks and agree on many contentious issues in peaceful discussions. However, there are times when deliberative democracy causes tensions among peaceful citizens (Young, 2001). At times, proliferation of interest groups with divergent views may cause in inaction and failure. Mostly, citizens deliberate on burning issues requiring corrective measures. These are issues that can cause tremendous hardships on the well being of society. Deliberative democracy brings awareness and increases political participation mainly in contemporary politics where the spread of the internet has been found to increase social awareness.

Public interaction with public administrators, if effectively maintained, with trust and confidence in mind, can result in the creation of client-customer alliances. The public can also interact with public administrators as regulatees (Rosenbloom, Kravchuk & Clerkin, (2009). Until the 80s, the role of interest group was largely ignored by economists studying aspects of public policy (Mitchell & Munger, 1991). Interest groups partake in government to survive and enhance interrelations. It would have been almost impossible to enact social policies like welfare in Europe with political party mobilization remaining out of the spectrum (Hudson, 2009). Working class and low-income communities have been able to survive for such a long time in democratic countries with help from social and labor organizations. Interest groups are known to take impressive actions when it comes to fighting for the welfare of society mainly by challenging government policies that contravene human needs.

References

Hudson, W.E. (2009). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Mitchell, M.C. & Munger, M.C. (1991). Economic models of interest groups: An introduction survey. American Journal of Political Science, Volume 35, Issue 2, 512-546

Rosenbloom, D.H., Kravchuk, S.K., & Clerkin, R.M. (2009). Public Administration: Understanding management, politics, and law in the public sector. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Young, I.M. (2001). Activist challenges to deliberative democracy. Political Theory, Vol. 29, No. 5, 670-690.  DOI: 10.1177/0090591701029005004

Power of Interest Groups

Little evidence exists to suggest that interest groups had a hand in the election of Obama though there had been significant involvement of interest groups in the hotly-contested presidential election of George W. Bush. Mitchell and Munger (1991) contend that interest groups may succeed in challenging government policies but fail to manage their own economies. Because interest groups are driven by need, they have the tendency to seek total maximization of the possessions they seek to acquire. According to Hudson (2009) people engaged in such activities are usually more affluent than the rest of society. Interest groups compete for representation in governments which at times lead to increase in the size of governments especially in Western democracies (Coughlin, 1990).

Burstein and Linton (2002) claim that no modern democratic nation is without political interest groups, political parties, and social movement organizations. While political parties impact policy implementations, social movement organizations affect policy only to the extent of presenting necessary information to the elected officials they presume to have their interests at heart. Interest groups played a great role in the elections that brought George W. Bush to power and not in the election of Obama. Celebrity endorsement of Obama in 2008 became a common phenomenon with celebrity like Oprah Winfrey going public with her pronouncements. Oprah’s endorsement of Obama created significant shift in voting strategies with many undecided voters switching party inclination and voting patterns (Gartwaite & Moore).

The use of technology started with Franklin Roosevelt who reputedly became the first U.S. president to frequently use the radio during election campaigns, during the depression, and at the time of the devastating World War II (Norquay, 2008). Roosevelt was followed by President Kennedy who became famous for partaking in the first televised debate of 1960. Others famous for using technological applications in their campaigns were George McGovern known for using the telephone, Bill Clinton who became famous with cable television and George W. Bush who applied micro-targeting techniques to gather information about voter level of income and voter location.  Obama’s campaign became famous for its use of social media to capture the hearts and minds of millions of Americans of voting age. By creating and devising www.my.barackobama.com , his campaign became a force to reckon with. Started with the help of twenty-year old computer whizzes, it transformed into a venture that had never been seen before in modern elections (Norquay, 2008). By formulating the novel idea of internet use, the Obama campaign erased organizational demands and every kind of uncertainty.

References

Burstein, P. & Linton, A. (2002).The impact of political Parties, interest Groups,

            and social movement organizations on public policy: Some recent evidence and theoretical concerns. Social Forces, 81(2):380-408

Coughlin, P.J. (1990). Electoral politics, interest groups, and the size of government. Economic Inquiry, Vol. XXVIII, 682-705

Garthwaite, C. & Moore, T. (2008). The Role of Celebrity Endorsements in Politics:

            Oprah, Obama, and the 2008 Democratic Primary. Washington, DC: University of Columbia, Department of Economics. Retrieved from http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/stuff_for_blog/celebrityendorsements_garthwaitemoore.pdf

Hudson, W.E. (2009). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Mitchell, M.C. & Munger, M.C. (1991). Economic models of interest groups: An introduction survey. American Journal of Political Science, Volume 35, Issue 2, 512-546

Norquay, G. (2008). Organizing without an organization: The Obama network revolution. Policy Options (2008). Retrieved from http://www.earnscliffe.ca/pdf/oct08_norquay.pdf

Interest Groups

While interest some groups may exist to alleviate human suffering, act as vehicles that attract public awareness, and spread the word of democracy, at times, it is worth restraining their proliferation if found to be acting in ways that contravene constitutional guidelines. Some interest groups apply undemocratic means to achieve their objectives while others uphold the constitution and struggle in ways that make the life of the ordinary citizen better and comfortable. In the United States, the First Amendment gives citizens of the nation the right to join organized groups. Federal legislation can only be used to curtail interest groups only when found to be harboring signs that may endanger the nation’s security and interests.

In democratic governments, interest groups emerge mainly when frustrated by strict government regulations. When a government fails to deliver the right resources to its citizens, its working relationship with society dissipates. The framers of the constitution basically believed in the efficacy of restraining interest groups (Macey, 1986). However, that has changed as modern governments nowadays give preference to select groups of people driven by self-interests. Coalitions or political groups have become so widespread such that they have the ability to convince lawmakers to regulate laws to their favor. When such problems occur, it is prudent to curtail such groups through federal legislation.

Generally curtailing the influence of all interest groups through federal legislation is not beneficial to U.S. democracy. Genuine interest groups that serve the general interests of society can be quite beneficial. Diamond and Morlino (2004) are of the opinion that denying interest groups their rights opens the gates to illiberalism, lawlessness, and abuse of power. A true democracy is one that entertains diffusion of the elite and popular groups. Political participation, political competition, and accountability promote fairness and also elevate the political, social, and the economic status of the ordinary citizen who is governed by democratic laws.

References

Macey, J.R. (1986). Promoting public-regarding legislation through statutory interpretation: An interest group model. Columbia Law Review, Vol. 82, No.

Diamond, L. & Morlino, L. The quality of democracy. (2004). Journal of Democracy Volume 15, Number 4.

Partisan Politics

Partisan politics in America has been gaining ground and growing phenomenally in recent years due to citizen political independence and disloyalty to party politics. Partisan politics is the cause of many social divisions and the death of coalitions. It sets a dangerous precedent when people are divided along socio-economic statuses, religious denominations, racial belonging, gender and sex, and political and religious affiliation among other factors. Partisanship in the political arena is more visible in the Republican Party that has been afflicted by resistance, dissent, and erosion of political ideals. Unequal distribution of resources, growing influence of business magnates, proliferation of interest groups, and racial divisions necessitated the breakup of political bipartisanship.

                                                  

Political participation and bipartisanship can be effective tools when it comes to bringing people together to share their political ideals and hammer out their differences. Carsey and Layman (2006) contend that partisanship has been perceived by various scholars as informational and a bulletin that can be used as a shortcut to interpreting party and issue preferences. It is dangerous when parties get caught up in gridlocks and fail to steer important national issues. Baker (1984) argues that republicanism pinpointed the dangers posed by power to the advancement of liberty and admonished the significance of joining together in unity for the stability of institutions. With unsolvable colliding political differences becoming the norm, partisanship, negative policy attitudes, and casual relationships dissipate from the democratic spectrum. Even among states, there are visible disproportional distribution of parties with religious, racial, status and class being the cause.

The decline seen in parties is according to Hetherington (2001), attributed to political independence. Americans have become neutral when favoring one party over the other (Hetherington, 2001). Gender gaps or voting behavior seen among men and women of voting age and noted in modern political commentaries never existed prior to the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 (Kaufmann & Petrocik, 1999). Partisanship emerges when party leaders, party platforms, and candidates take different directions eventually leaving party followers in confusion. Political parties are falling into traps owned by business magnates that have the power to manipulate political settings of any party. A story is related by Hudson (2009) of the powerful car magnate and how he was able to stage-manage the town of Pullman in Illinois. Pullman governed the people and the town according to his wishes. The same applies to political parties that are subservient to big corporations. In fact these corporations have a hand in the alienation of societies and the division of party members. Bickering of party members and their failure to agree on important national issues is responsible for the existing partisanship that is degrading the selfless discussions that would lead to policy formulations. According to Fiorina and Abrams (2008) literature review of party polarization started a few years ago and that in 2004, a map that appeared after the elections branded red states as ‘Jesusland’ while labeling a combination of blue states with Canada, the ‘United States of Canada’.

References

Baker, P. (1984). The domestication of politics: Women and American political society, 1780-1920. The American Historical Review, Vol. 89, No. 3, 620-647

  Carsey, T.M. & Layman, G.C. (2006). Changing sides or changing minds? Party identification and policy preferences in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 464-477

Fiorina, M.P. & Abrams, S.J. (2008). Political polarization in the American public. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 11, pp. 563-588

Hetherington, M.J. (2001). Resurgent mass partisanship: The role of elite polarization. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 95, No. 3

Hudson, W.E. (2009). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Kaufmann, K.M. & Petrocik, J.R. (1999). The changing politics of American men: Understanding the sources of the gender gap. American Journal of political Science, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 864-887

Party Discipline 

The notion of having consensus as a fundamental pillar in political settings has been taken for granted and debated over and over, again and again since the era of deTocqueville (McClosky, 1964). Lack of discipline in major political parties and erosion of consensus among party members can be a recipe for disaster if not contained with some sort of stringent regulations and rigorous disciplinary measures. Indiscipline among elected members by and large opens unnecessary challenges that may tarnish existing elemental ideological foundations and result in deviation from democratic norms and expectations. Changes in people’s habits, ideas, and beliefs and contamination of driving political principles explicitly intensify peculiar dominant ideas. In some democratic governments, especially those practicing parliamentary democracy, a member of the legislature who is found tarnishing the image of a party may be expelled from parliament for a certain duration until a time when it is determined that the negative behavior inherent in the party member has been rectified.

In their study of the behaviors of members of the European Parliament (EP)-especially in the aspects of competition and contestation, Hix, Kreppel, and Noury (2003) found ‘cartelized’ party systems-political systems that are supranational in outlook. Some parties of the EP displayed a lack of common ideology in their initial establishments (Hix, Kreppel, & Noury, 2003). In the United States, there are wide disparities in the voting behaviors of the legislature and that little data is available to the scholar especially at the cross-national level. Indiscipline in a party could result in a party to lose its reputation and lower voter confidence. In most cases, legislatures try to fix their adverse differences when threatened by a rival party and when their own electoral seats are at stake.

Currently, looking at how events unfold in both houses of Congress, we can conclude that the American legislative system is far from being perfect. There is the need to have a major force that will look into the behaviors of the members of the legislature and enforce regulations so that law and order can be maintained. While political independence is good for democracy, it is irrational to leave both houses in their current states. Sieberer (2006) argues that research on the causes of disunity in parties, especially in parliamentary democracies, is under researched. McCarty, Pole, and Rosenthal (2000) argue in the absence of tough leadership, members may find themselves engaging in legislative activities that could include pork. Therefore, it is logical to have measures that will be used to contain behaviors of errant party members.

References

Hix, S., Kreppel, A. & Noury, A. (2003). The party system in the European Parliament: Collusive or competitive? Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 309-331.

Nolan, M, Poole, K. & Rosenthal, H. (2001). The hunt for party

           discipline in Congress. American Political Science Review 95(3):673-

           688.

McClosky, H. (1964). Consensus and ideology in American politics. The American Political Science Review, Volume 58, Issue 2, pp. 361-382

Sieberer, U. (2006). Party unity in parliamentary democracies: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Legislative Studies, Vol. 12, Issue 2, pp. 150-178

Third Political Party

The United States is a land of dual political party arrangement that leaves little room for a third force. For a long time, the Democratic and Republican parties have been the only two party juggernauts that held the political mantle in a land that has been described as a ‘melting pot’ and ‘land of opportunities’. It may seem strange how people hailing from all walks of life and living in such a diverse environment fail to cultivate political pluralism as is evident in many other democracies. According to Abramson, Aldrich, Paolino, and Rohde (1995), thirty-six presidential elections were held between the years 1852 and 1984 with the Republicans snatching twenty-one and the Democrats a mere nineteen. Since America’s formation, the political will of the nation was one built on electoral challenges and competition.

Perot, Anderson, and Wallace have in the past competed for leadership roles in the electoral processes as Independents. America has experienced a cornucopia of political parties that had little effect in the governing of the nation. These parties were engineered by people having personal, social, or economic agendas. Despite their struggles to bring their parties to the limelight, in the end they turned out to be ineffective in the nation’s public policy formulations and governance. Sundquist (1988) contends that the formulation of both houses and the presidency are accidental and not necessarily formed as a result of coalition between political parties.

Independent and third-party candidates incur tremendous political hardships because they are restrained by the plurality-vote system instituted by the states. Independent candidates bear the brunt when it comes to dispensation of electoral votes. It is a mechanical effect that leaves little room for independent candidates to emerge victorious and claim majority-vote as demonstrated by America’s electoral system. According to historical electoral records, candidates vying for presidential slots received a mere 5% of the popular votes and 5% of the electoral votes between the years 1832 and 1992. For example, Rose Perot gained 18.9% of the popular votes and absolutely no credible, worth mentioning electoral votes (Abramson, Aldrich, Paolino, & Rohde, 1995). While many would like a third force to counter the existing duopoly in the American political system, it is unlikely that a third major party will be born soon. For now and in the future, Americans will have to learn to become professionals in the art of partnerships and coalition governments.

References

Abramson, P.R., Aldrich, J.H., Paolino, P. & Rohde, D.W. (1995). Third-party and independent candidates in American politics: Wallace, Anderson, and Perot. Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 110, No. 3, pp. 349-367.

Sundquist, J.L. (1988). Needed: A political theory for the new era coalition government in the United States. Political Science Quarterly, Volume 103, No. 4.