Question on parties (the boring kind)

[Liar]

I'm doing a school thing on political systems, organization democracy, and whatnot, and I'm trying to figure a little something out.

How does political parties in the United States work? I've tried to find a comprehensive description of how they are organized but I keep ending up with contradictory info.

Here in many Eurpoean countries, a political party is a voluntary non-corporate association ruled by a congress of all registered members (or representatives) dictating the policies and lead by a board, executing the policies. The party is lead by the board's chairman. he or she is also the main spokesperson, and the natural prime minister candidate should the party win an election. The leader's voice carries a whole lot of weight in the party, and although the congress does the voting, (s)he has a lot of the de facto power. point in case, Tony Blair, who pretty much redefined the Labour to "New Labour" with centrist politics and a whole new rhethorics bag.

On a whim, I looked up the Republican Party, and Wikipedia mentions a Mel Martinez as the chairman. (And apparently, Howard Dean for the Democrats. Mkay?) In my mind, that title belongs to the person steering the ship, so to speak, leading the debate and taking responsibility for it's doings.

But who the heck is Mel Martinez? Does the dude have any power, or is that just a clerk position? An internal fixer-upper? From the GOP figures present in the media (even before the primaries race got going), I'd have to say the latter.

Does anybody actually lead an American political party?

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I don't know if it helps, but I can tell you that in Portugal it depends on each individual party.

The President of the Socialist Party, for example, is merely the speaker at several levels of "board" meetings, the person who presides to the meetings; a sort of glorified secretary, really. The Secretary-General is the one who really leads the party, although his general political strategy needs to be approved by the "boards".

Maybe the contradictory info you're finding is just a result of job-titles that don't really fit the job.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

I'm doing a school thing on political systems, organization democracy, and whatnot, and I'm trying to figure a little something out.

How does political parties in the United States work? I've tried to find a comprehensive description of how they are organized but I keep ending up with contradictory info.

The political parties in the US are quite contradictory, so I'm not very surprised.

 

[Liar]

Maybe the contradictory info you're finding is just a result of job-titles that don't really fit the job.

Of the associations I have with the job titles are not actually befitting the job.

"Chairman" can be like chairman Mao, god-like leader of every aspect of it. Which is a bit like how I envision the chairman of a political party, minus the whole dictator thing. Or he can be a man on a chair, the guy moderating the board meetings.

So how are the inner circles of the two basts called Reps and Dems organized?

That's one part of what I'm asking. The other is, what are the outer limits of the party? What qualifications do I have to meet to candidate as a Dem or Rep to a local or national office?

Something Ron Paul said on his Daily Show appearance, regarrding having been a Libertarian before, but a Republican now. (paraphrased) "You don't get on a ballot, and you don't get on TV, if you're not part of the Big Two." As his message seems to differ greatly on many issues from the rest of the GOP candidates, I wonder: Is party affiliation more of a chosen tag than an actual set of politic positions to represent?

 

[rgraham666]

Actually Liar, Gore Vidal had it right. There's really only one party in the States. He calls it 'The Property Party'.

They disagree only on what should be property. They do agree that their first goal is to protect property.

That may be why you're having so much trouble nailing the organization down. The organization is peripheral to the reality.

Also, American political parties are much similar to America itself. They're individuals that band together in order to increase their power. The individuals have their own agenda though. And often, once that agenda conflicts with the party, the party gets tossed over the side in pursuit of the personal agenda.

Parties in the European sense, that is people banding together to pursue a common political philosophy, doesn't really exist in America.

From what I've seen.

 

[3113]

I'm doing a school thing on political systems, organization democracy, and whatnot, and I'm trying to figure a little something out.

How does political parties in the United States work?

Work? Work? [Hysterical laughter] A political party that works....what an idea

Okay, seriously:

Does anybody actually lead an American political party?

From what little I know, Political parties are like tupperware parties...there's a hostess who "directs" things, and that's about it.

 

[Liar]

K seriously, nobody knows?

 

[rgraham666]

Apparently not. Sorry.

 

[Liar]

Apparently not. Sorry.

Well hey, it's not your country.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I have a vague idea, and meant to answer, but got busy. I think it's a pyramidical structure that starts with local organizations and committees who elect people for various functions at the next level, and so on. There are "national committeemen/women" who are selected in this way from each state, and I think they choose the national party - board? Not sure. There are parallel entities - county party org, congressional district org, etc., which I think lets lots more people participate, get to be officers, etc. There are state party conventions in which the official stuff is stuff - selecting national committee people, state party officers, etc. It probably varies by state. It's not supposed to be elegant and neat, but pluralistic and "associational." It's often quite "clubby" at the local level - some individuals get into the local party politics and rivalries, etc. As in most things, the world is run by those who show up. Anyone can participate.

 

[cantdog]

A lot of politicians are never seen by the public, particularly, liar. Martinez rose to where he is within a hierarchy of caucuses and boards and committees. But he is unlikely to run for things, particularly by virtue merely of his chairmanship.

We do have parties in the European sense, with philosophical bases. There were some eighteen of them making the rounds in the last election. Paul was running Libertarian, for instance. There were greens and socialists and so forth, too. But they are organized in a very different way, more like the Big Two, with local caucuses, many times a local office, an actual building with secretarial spaces and meeting rooms. You have to get out the flyers and newsletters somewhere, and store the copier machines, and sit down with others to meet. Regional and state and national entities multiply from there.

But who gets thrown up to run, out of that organization, is just one of the things it decides. Elected officials do possess clout and they also have big staffs who can meet with people, address meetings, and generally spread their ideas about what's next. But many very influential people never run for any office.

The on-paper organization charts of any party can be obtained from the party itself, but they are not going to be reflective of the current faction disputes amongst 'wings' of the parties. Those 'wings' are going to meet and talk outside of the actual hierarchical structure. Wings and factions are rife here because of the two-party thing, which is irrational in a way, but practical in another.

For your school thing, though, you will want real titles of real caucuses and boards, and for that, applying to the parties themselves is a good idea.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

An informal summary, because it seems the desire to be cynical and demeaning to the US political system trumps answering the damn question:

Two major parties in the US--Republicans and Democrats. There are a smattering of other parties, the largest of which are still so small as to escape notice throughout the year with brief outcroppings during election times (and usually only for major offices).

Republicans were modernists in the mid-1800's, what we would think of as people driving the US toward a vision of "free society" in tune with Jeffersonian democracy (with the exception of the reward-system). They opposed the expansion of slavery, for instance, and a lot of works they saw as reinstituting a very European design of aristocracy and privilege. The Republican Party and the Republican National Committee are basically different functionaries of the same party. Where the RNC is responsible for most of the organization during election times (fundraising, events hosting, the bringing together of the members of the party for the purposes of nominations, etc.), the Party itself is the body of politicians and registered members. The power structure of the party is very corporate, there being an executive board of sorts and a chairman who oversee the operational duties of the Party. There are official representatives of the party to both houses of Congress, to most major political organizations, etc. Most strictly operational decisions for the party are made by the executive board and Chairperson, while essential decisions (nominations for certain positions, internal structural choices) are done with collected opinion of the party as a whole (a lot like stock holders having a "say" in major internal decisions of any large company). It should be noted that frequently (though not in all cases), state Republican organizations are considered the units of the party as a whole... effectively empowering a Republican Party of a given state to represent that "stock holder"--in tune with our representative government as a whole.

The Democratic party came in in the late 1800's under the auspice of focusing on lower political matters of the time. Where Republican concerns took a priority on the momentum of the country or states in a broader and ideological way, the Democratic party chimed in on issues effecting the laborers, the minorities, and the poor. Of course, they stood on the side of Slavery, but more as a cultural practice than a political one--again, because of their concern for things like the localized economies and agriculture and the like. Regardless, the Democratic Party evolved towards more of a socially-concious party (as contrasted with the Republicans later on who traditionally remained ideologically interested until the last fifteen years or so, when they've addressed more social change issues). The Democratic party is structure very similarly to the Republican Party internally, the only glaring exception being that there are more officials and positions formed to interface with organizations other than the Party (for a long time there was an official Democratic Party liason to the Green Party, for example).

That's about all I know, but it should help a bit. It's not particularly confusing... the rules for both the Republicans and Democrats are publicly available. When you read through their rules, and get past some of the routine stuff, their internal structure is pretty fluid.

And I disagree with RG... our political parties are highly philosophical entities, cohesive (and evolutionary), and possessed of a rich and deep history of consistent ideological concern /over/ individual opinion.

 

[cantdog]

Actually, Joe, you answered the wrong damn question. He wanted to understand the formal structure of the parties, which is a bit different from those in places with a parliamentary system.

Abroad, generally, parties, not individuals, are voted for, and the result determines the government indirectly. Many times, the parties have to form coalitions to amass a majority. Our system is considerably different, and the organization of the parties reflects it.

Read the question he asks a little closer.

 

[cantdog]

Because we elect individuals, having two parties means one needn't often have a runoff election. But it means that the two parties are artificial. Philosophically, there are of course considerably more than two viewpoints. Thus the philosophical blocs exist within the two parties, rather than forming parties of their own. That was what I was referring to with 'wings' of the major parties.

 

[cantdog]

An individual running as a republican, here, would not represent all republicans. Pat Robertson and Paul are two very different philosophical cats. The coalition action happens in caucus and in meeting, as pledges are made by the party's candidate and his 'wing' to push for certain portions of the agenda of another 'wing' in order to receive that wing's support. The public sees little of this.

 

[Liar]

Joe, cant, rox.

Thanks for all the input. I think I'm beginning to get the hang of what i was after now. I did try to read up on the material I could find from the two parties and kind of got lost.

I must admit that my view on this is a bit, if not a lot, etnocentric. I understand what I've got here, and anything else seems either inefficient or undemocratic at first glance. I expect the strongman leader, and I expect the most politically prominent representative (for instance, GWB for the Reps) to be that person.

 

[cantdog]

Another weird feature here, liar, is the multiple levels of government. Towns and cities may pass laws. States may pass laws. The country as a whole as well. A streetful of people will be in a voting district for a member of the lower house of state government (a couple thousand people0, for the upper house of state government (perhaps ten thousand, and it'll encompass the districts of several state legislators), and also the voting districts of the congressmen (lower house of federal government). There are also county officials. So county-level districts exist as well.

The sheriff is a county law enforcement official, and his deputies run the county jail and staff the county courts. County officials typically include registers of deeds, county assessors, and so forth, and some of them will be elective. Towns and cities elect school boards, some places, as well as town officials like councilmen or selectmen. A political party will be concerned with all levels.

Parties send out people to canvass for various purposes, organize to get out the vote by giving shut in people rides to the polling places, and whatnot. They send observers to each polling place, and observe all vote tabulations. They nominate members to run for offices at all levels. They also do such mundane tasks as man phones, write op ed pieces, stuff envelopes, put up and take down posters for elections. They also meet in simple rooms and decide the fate of whole populations, at the other end of the pyramid.