GOVT 312: Lecture 15

1. GOVT 312: Lecture 15 (Minor) Party Campaigns

2. Minor Parties • Libertarians: A national party interested in limited government. In 2000, contested a majority of House and Senate races. • Greens: New “post-materialist” party modeled on European Green parties. Have had limited success in electing candidates in local elections in liberal areas. • Reform: Built on the popularity of Perot, yet to see if it can survive as a party. • Natural Law: Believes in “rational thought.” Fielded many candidates in 1996, less in 1998, tried to merge with the Reform party in 2000.

3. Digression on the Reform Party • Reform Party is a personality party: • Perot: 1992 (18.9%), 1996 (8.4%) • Buchanan: 2000 (0.5%) • Viable minor parties are those that are organized around an issues that are not addressed by the major parties, not an individual • Issue parties • Protest parties • Minor parties are effective in New York, because the ballot allows “fusion parties,” candidates running under more than one party label

4. Viable minor parties (Lowi) • Must be built from bottom up • Must be aimed at influencing, not governing (since governing is not a realistic possibility) • Must have dedicated party activists

5. Building a third party • In 1996, Perot embarked on a strategy to make the reform party into something bigger than himself. • Organized state level parties in 50 states • Created a national convention (delegates selected by mail-in voting) • Had a real opponent for the nomination (though is alleged to have rigged the mail-in voting) • Accepted public financing • In 2000, bowed out. • Power vacuum created a bitter nomination battle between Hagelin and Buchanan • Perot did create a party, that was developing from the bottom up, but it was destroyed by the 2000 convention

6. Minor Party Supporters (similar to amateur activists) • Are more ideological than pragmatic major party supporters • Focused on particular issues • Particularly differ with major party candidates on reform of government

7. Candidates • Profile of Candidates (H&G p. 84) • Major party candidates more likely to have worked a campaign, held an appointed government position, or worked on government staff. • Democrats more likely than Republicans to have worked as staff • State legislative candidates more likely to have held an appointed government position

8. Campaign Finance • Candidate Financing (H&G p. 86) • Minor Party candidates more likely to self-finance their campaigns • Minor party candidates get no support from their party organization • Minor party candidates get little support from PACs (public, unions, or business). • Moral: money follows winners

9. Campaign Expenditures • Campaign Expenditures (H&G p.88-89) • Minor party and state legislative candidates spend more money on campaign literature and yard signs. All campaigns spend a sizable amount. • Minor party and state legislative candidates spend less money on TV, radio, and newspapers • State legislative candidates spend more money on direct mailing • Republican congressional and minor party candidates spend more on travel • Congressional campaigns spend more on staff

10. Campaign Organization • Minor party campaigns are almost entirely run by volunteers • Congressional Democrats tend to use more of all types of campaign professionals • Congressional campaigns use more professional services

11. Campaign Strategy • Major party candidates stress image over policy • Minor party candidates stress policy over image • Minor party candidates reach out to the youth and the disaffected • Minor party candidates tend to stress their own stands, rather than compare to other candidates • Minor party campaigns are not as negative

12. Do minor party candidates steal votes from major party candidates? • Yes: Supporters of minor parties repeatedly discuss the relevance of minor party candidates in terms of their presence affecting electoral outcomes. • No: Voters who vote for minor party candidates would otherwise abstain if no minor party candidate ran.