This study traces the history of the national committee chairmanships of the two major political parties in the United States, emphasizing the national conventions and presidential campaigns - where national factions often reveal themselves. Candidate and ideolological factionalism, as the evidence of this volume demonstrates, has been the principal engine of convention action. Factional conflicts have had consequences not just for the political parties but for the party system itself. The institutional history of the two national committees and their chairmanships reveals a previously unrecorded aspect of United States national party development.
The national committees of the major political parties in the United States are symbols of party government. They carry forward a national heritage of peaceful change in national politics and administration. National committees are substitutes for party ideologies, yet they are pretty much headless, drifting organizations. Cotter and Hennessy explain why this is the case, arguing that the vagueness of the committees' responsibilities between presidential elections is one of the main sources of their limitations. Politics without Power explains what the national committees are, who belongs to them, where they are located in relation to other politically oriented organizations, what they do, and what steps might be taken to make better use of them. Although the authors' descriptions in this classic volume are straightforward, their recommendations are sweepingly bold. A few have been instituted in part, but most have yet to be adopted. If they were, it would completely change the makeup of the two committees and the political processes. Among their proposals are that the offi ces of national committeeman and committeewoman should be abolished, that the national chairman of the in-party continue to be chosen by the president or candidate, and the national chairman of the out-party be the titular head of that committee. The out-party should have a party council to interpret the platform and to recommend a platform to the national convention. There should be a tax credit for small contributions to the national committee or state committees, and each national committee would have its own building shared with the Congressional Campaign Committees. This book will interest political scientists, politicians, and other students of American politics and elections.
This study traces the history of the national committee chairmenships of the two major political parties in America. It emphasizes the national conventions and presidential campaigns, examining candidate and ideological factionalism.
The passage of Citizens United by the Supreme Court in 2010 sparked a renewed debate about campaign spending by large political action committees, or Super PACs. Its ruling said that it is okay for corporations and labor unions to spend as much as they want in advertising and other methods to convince people to vote for or against a candidate. This book provides a wide range of opinions on the issue. Includes primary and secondary sources from a variety of perspectives; eyewitnesses, scientific journals, government officials, and many others.
The systematic examination of state party leadership and organization based on interviews with party chairmen reviews the legal powers, roles, and career patterns of state party officials.
Professor Goldman has contributed articles and books in divers fields of political science. This is a partial collection of his principal published and unpublished journal articles as well as bried references to his principal books. This volume reports Professor Goldman’s research on United States political parties and elections. His National Party Chairmen and Committees and his studies, with Paul T. David, of the party presidential nominating conventions continue to be classics on this subject. Three books are devoted to the development of the Democratic Party. Among the reforms he has proposed is electronic voting.
How do Democratic and Republican party leaders react after their party has lost a presidential election? Is there a pattern of response to defeat that reflects the distinctive cultures of the two parties? This book answers these questions by examining how the two national party organizations have responded to presidential election defeats between 1956 and 1993. Drawing on party documents, interviews with party officials, and contemporary accounts, Philip Klinkner provides detailed case studies of opposition party politics. He shows that Republican national committees have reacted to losses by making organizational changes to improve campaign technology and fundraising and that losing Democrats have sought to refine or make more democratic their internal procedures for selecting delegates to the national convention or for choosing presidential candidates. Klinkner suggests that the reasons for these reactions stem from the historical development of the parties. The organizational response of the Republican party is the result of its long-term relationship with business, its homogeneity and hierarchical structure, and its minority party experience. The Democrats' emphasis on participation and representation for its constituent elements is based on its characteristic composition of social and economic out-groups, its heterogeneity and decentralization, and its tradition as the majority party.
