Partisan Polarization in Congress
By Brother Rogers
The 114th Congress convenes this month. The Stennis Center brings together about 30 high-ranking congressional staff in each Congress for a leadership development program on Capitol Hill called Stennis Fellows. These men and women have spent decades working in Congress. They are divided almost equally between Democrats and Republicans and between House and Senate.
The Stennis Fellows of the 113th Congress were just as frustrated as you and me about partisanship and paralysis in government. Our inability to get things done prevents us from making progress on common goals: paying down the national debt, rebuilding our infrastructure, funding our obligations to the aged, and rebuilding the tax code to be simple, progressive and fair.
While Americans argue about the proper size of government, most agree they want an efficient, responsive, capable government. Political polarization appears to prevent us from having the properly functioning government that most Americans want.
We at the Stennis Center bring in experts on government – from academics to former Members of Congress – to meet with the Stennis Fellows in Washington, D.C. Through this column, I thought you might like to know some of the insights provided by congressional scholars.
First, partisan polarization is not new in American history. Our current political divide is more the norm, especially leading up to the Civil War and during Reconstruction. In fact, the 1790s, our country’s first decade of existence under the Constitution with arguably our greatest president, George Washington, was a time of great political turmoil.
In the 20th century, voting patterns began diverging in the 1970s as states became more polarized. In the 1976 presidential election, the voting results in many states were close, meaning the electoral vote might have gone either way. That year 20 states were decided by less than five percentage points.
Contrast that to 2012, when only four states were decided by less than five percentage points. Moreover, many more Members of Congress today represent districts voting by landslide margins for one party or the other. For example, in Mississippi it is hard to imagine a Republican being competitive in the Delta’s congressional district or a Democrat being competitive in any district outside the Delta.
The gap between Democratic and Republican voters is expanding. Over 90 percent of voters in 2012 voted straight-line for their own party’s candidates for President, House and Senate, representing the lowest rate of ticket-splitting since 1970. The result is a decline in the number of moderates in both parties and a shrinking number of competitive House districts. Today the average Republican is more conservative and the average Democrat is more liberal than their counterparts were 40 years ago.
Interestingly, political engagement increases polarization. The more politically active or involved Americans are, the more polarized they become.
Partisan polarization coupled with narrow majorities in Congress is the single most important factor behind today’s perceived dysfunction in Washington. With such narrow majorities, the minority party has little incentive to compromise with the majority, but has a great incentive to attack the majority in the hopes it will replace them in the next election.
These findings are just a slice of what the Stennis Fellows heard during their fellowship, and they are not encouraging. Therefore, we must remember what Winston Churchill once said. “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the rest.” I think we know just what he meant.
Brother Rogers works at the Stennis Center for Public Service and is a guest columnist for the Starkville Daily News.
The 114th Congress convenes this month. The Stennis Center brings together about 30 high-ranking congressional staff in each Congress for a leadership development program on Capitol Hill called Stennis Fellows. These men and women have spent decades working in Congress. They are divided almost equally between Democrats and Republicans and between House and Senate.
The Stennis Fellows of the 113th Congress were just as frustrated as you and me about partisanship and paralysis in government. Our inability to get things done prevents us from making progress on common goals: paying down the national debt, rebuilding our infrastructure, funding our obligations to the aged, and rebuilding the tax code to be simple, progressive and fair.
While Americans argue about the proper size of government, most agree they want an efficient, responsive, capable government. Political polarization appears to prevent us from having the properly functioning government that most Americans want.
We at the Stennis Center bring in experts on government – from academics to former Members of Congress – to meet with the Stennis Fellows in Washington, D.C. Through this column, I thought you might like to know some of the insights provided by congressional scholars.
First, partisan polarization is not new in American history. Our current political divide is more the norm, especially leading up to the Civil War and during Reconstruction. In fact, the 1790s, our country’s first decade of existence under the Constitution with arguably our greatest president, George Washington, was a time of great political turmoil.
In the 20th century, voting patterns began diverging in the 1970s as states became more polarized. In the 1976 presidential election, the voting results in many states were close, meaning the electoral vote might have gone either way. That year 20 states were decided by less than five percentage points.
Contrast that to 2012, when only four states were decided by less than five percentage points. Moreover, many more Members of Congress today represent districts voting by landslide margins for one party or the other. For example, in Mississippi it is hard to imagine a Republican being competitive in the Delta’s congressional district or a Democrat being competitive in any district outside the Delta.
The gap between Democratic and Republican voters is expanding. Over 90 percent of voters in 2012 voted straight-line for their own party’s candidates for President, House and Senate, representing the lowest rate of ticket-splitting since 1970. The result is a decline in the number of moderates in both parties and a shrinking number of competitive House districts. Today the average Republican is more conservative and the average Democrat is more liberal than their counterparts were 40 years ago.
Interestingly, political engagement increases polarization. The more politically active or involved Americans are, the more polarized they become.
Partisan polarization coupled with narrow majorities in Congress is the single most important factor behind today’s perceived dysfunction in Washington. With such narrow majorities, the minority party has little incentive to compromise with the majority, but has a great incentive to attack the majority in the hopes it will replace them in the next election.
These findings are just a slice of what the Stennis Fellows heard during their fellowship, and they are not encouraging. Therefore, we must remember what Winston Churchill once said. “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the rest.” I think we know just what he meant.
Brother Rogers works at the Stennis Center for Public Service and is a guest columnist for the Starkville Daily News.