No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Theme of Equality in Campaigns and Elections
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 April 2005
Extract
Elections are the chief mechanisms of popular consent and political accountability in democracy. As recent history attests: “elections in the democratic context can have significant implications for the makeup of a nation's ruling circle and the character of its policies” (Ginsberg 1982, viii). While American elections are undeniably consequential, they fail on the democratic standard of equality. The American electorate is class biased—and more so than in other advanced democracies. Research for more than 50 years has shown that large numbers of Americans don't vote and that voters and nonvoters are drawn from different income and educational strata (Leighley and Nagler 1992). The burning issue of American elections is how to make the electorate more representative of the population as a whole. Courses on American elections, however, devote little time to turn-out and still less on how to mobilize non-voters. Instead, the lion's share of the typical syllabus is devoted to the presidential campaign process. The emphasis on “hoopla” (Patterson 1980) cannot help but feed student conceptualization of politics as a game, rather than an essential social enterprise. If our goal as teachers of political science is to bring students into the world of constructive democratic citizenship, then we must discuss with our students what is at stake in American elections.
- Type
- The Teacher
- Information
- Copyright
- © 2005 by the American Political Science Association
References
Abramson Paul R., John
H. Aldrich, and David W. Rohde.
1999. Change and Continuity in the 1996 and 1998
Elections. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Braumoeller Bear F.
2003. “Perspectives on Pluralism.”
PS: Political Science and Politics
36
(July): 387– 389.Google Scholar
Blumler Jay,
Elihu Katz, and
Michael Gurevitch. 1973–1974.
“Uses and Gratifications Research.” In “Directions in
Mass Communications Research: A Symposium,”
Public Opinion Quarterly
37
(winter): 509– 523.Google Scholar
Dalton Russell J.
2001. Citizen Politics in Western Democracies: Public
Opinion and Political Parties in the United States, Great Britain, West Germany, and
France, 3rd ed. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Google Scholar
Gerber Alan S., and Donald
P. Green. 2000. “The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field
Experiment.” American Political Science Review
94
(September): 653– 663.Google Scholar
Halbfinger David M.
2003. “Alabama Voters Crush Tax Plan Sought by
Governor.” New York Times, September 10,
A14.Google Scholar
Hart Roderick, and
Sharon Jarvis. 2003.
“Research Findings from the Campaign for Young Voters.” Presented at the
National Campaign for Political and Civic Engagement Researchers' Meeting,
Institute of Politics, Harvard University, October 24.Google Scholar
Leighley Jan E., and
Jonathan Nagler. 1992. “Socioeconomic Class Bias in Turnout, 1964–1988: The Voters Remain the
Same.” American Political Science Review
86
(September): 725– 736.Google Scholar
Levy Shlomit, and
Louis Guttman. 1975. “Structure and Dynamics of Worries.” Sociometry
38
(December): 445– 473.Google Scholar
Mansbridge Jane. 2003. “Rethinking Representation.” American Political Science
Review
97
(November): 515– 528.Google Scholar
Morrow James D.
2003. “Diversity through
Specialization.” PS: Political Science and Politics
36
(July): 391– 393.Google Scholar
Neuman W. Russell. 1986.
The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American
Electorate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Norris Pippa. 2000. A
Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in the Postindustrial Societies. New
York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris Pippa. 2003.
Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior. New
York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris Pippa. 2003. “Do
Institutions Matter? The Consequences of Electoral Reform for Political
Participation.” In Rethinking the Vote: The Politics and Prospects of American
Election Reform, eds. Ann Crigler, Marion
R. Just, and Edward J. McCaffery.
New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Patterson Thomas. 1980.
The Mass Media Election: How Americans Choose Their President. New
York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Piven Francis Fox, and Richard
A. Cloward. 2000. Why Americans
Still Don't Vote: And Why Politicians Want It That Way. Boston:
Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Schattschneider E. E.
[1960] 1975. The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of
Democracy in America. Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz-Shea Peregrine, and
Andrew Bennett. 2003. “Introduction—Methodological Pluralism in Journals and Graduate Education?
Commentaries on New Evidence.” PS: Political Science and Politics.
36
(July): 371– 372.Google Scholar
Traugott Michael. 2003.
“Why Electoral Reform Has Failed: If You Build It Will They Come?” In
Rethinking the Vote: The Politics and Prospects of American Election Reform, eds.
Ann N. Crigler, Marion
R. Just, and Edward J. McCaffery.
New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vanishing Voter Project. 2004. Study by
the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard
University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. November 11.
http://www.vanishingvoter.org/Releases/release111104.shtmlGoogle Scholar
Verba Sidney, Kay
Lehman Schlozman, and Henry
E. Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality:
Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.Google Scholar