Party influence in Congress Essay

The decline of political political troupe strong point and make up ones mind began in the 19th century, partly due to the growth of the federal government under FDR whose New Deal psychiatric hospital served to undermine traditional social functions once carried out by party machines, thereof weakening party loyalty. In the 1960s and 1970s new issues such as civil rights, feminism, environmentalism and consumer rights arose to gain take traditional vote habits. These issues did not divide neatly along party lines and more voters indulged in ticket-splitting (voting for opposite parties in different alternatives). Partly in response to these trends, the parties themselves began to question their own policies and challenge their leaders.In Congress, reforms democratized or opened up selection procedures to broader participation. Senior members found themselves surrendering delegation chairmanships to unknown newcomers. Whips found it harder to enforce party discipline and junior members increasingly engage their own personal projects to gain media aid and impress their constituency voters. Congress members have often to gain, in publicity and in touchable rewards (grants for their constituencies) from unpredictable behavior.The effect upon presidential influence in Congress has been destructive. chairwoman Carter struggled to hark back bills through a House and Senate controlled by his own party. President Reagans earlier successes were largely due to Democrat Boll Weevil defections. President Clinton has likewise been unable to rely upon satisfying party support, particularly for his anti-crime legislation and health care Reform bill. Congress has been split by the new individualism of its members.The rise of the primary feather in presidential selection was other method used to open up the political system and weaken party influence. Primaries allow voters a direct say in the choice of the partys standard bearer in the presidential electio n. However, they enable candidates to hijack the party nominating address for president by assembling teams of consultants, lawyers, financiers and media advisers, some of whom have no party crosstie and no loyalty or intention beyond the victory of their chosen leader.The triumphal candidates sometimes lack any control of government at the nationallevel. modernistic presidents, facing a fragmented Congress, raptorial pressure groups and a skeptical media, cannot have the luxury of limited experience. Unfortunately, the modern election system tends to favor those candidates who are good campaigners rather than those who may be legal administrators. Given these difficulties, it is not surprising that new-fashioned Presidents have appeared to struggle. The cement of practical experience, party loyalty and common cause is overly often thin or vanished at both ends.