Choosing the Candidates

The process of choosing each major-party candidate assumes a special importance, particularly in places where one party is so dominant that its candidate is almost sure to win. When the Democratic and Republican parties were fully established in the latter part of the nineteenth century, each party chose its candidates at assemblies of party activists. In some cities and some states individuals succeeded, through skilful manipulation, in obtaining impregnable positions of power in their parties, and through their party-power, effective control over the whole political apparatus. Some such 'bosses' relied on corrupt methods.

Reformers could see that if party candidates were chosen in public elections, it would be less easy for bosses to exercise power. The specially American device of the primary election was an attempt to solve this problem; it spread gradually at first. The first local 'direct' primary was held (probably) in 1868. In 1903 a law of the State of Wisconsin required the parties to choose their candidates by public vote. Other states soon followed, and the practice is now universal for elective positions except the Presidency (for which, as will be seen, most states now hold non-direct primaries of various types).

Although in theory the choice of a party's candidate might be regarded as a private matter for the party, primary elections are recognized as part of the formal voting process, and organized by the public authorities. The Supreme Court (against earlier decisions) has accepted jurisdiction over the conduct of primaries as part of its duty to see that citizens' constitutional rights are respected. But the system of primaries is not uniform. Each state has its own rules and there are many differences of detail.

In most states, primaries are 'closed'. If a citizen wishes to take part in the primary at which the Democratic party candidates are chosen, he or she must register as a Democrat. The Republican primaries are held at the same time and place. Voters may vote only in the primary of the party for which they have registered.

Once the party candidates have been chosen by this means, the campaign between the parties begins, in preparation for the election proper. But then the voter can vote for either party. In a state where the Democrats are dominant, a voter who hopes they will lose may well register as a Democrat so as to vote in the Democratic primary, but then vote for Republican candidates at the general election. Because it is impossible to prevent such practices, some states have 'open' primaries, allowing any person to vote in either party's primary - and there are other variants as well.

The system of primaries is a highly democratic device. In practice it has one serious weakness. An effective primary campaign needs money. No one can become the Democratic candidate for governor or senator in a big state without spending huge amounts which have to be provided by supporters. Partly because of this, the primary system has not been altogether successful in putting an end to 'boss rule'. Someone who gains an ascendancy in a state party may be able to ensure that the candidates he prefers have the money they need for their primary campaigns - and thus to ensure that if they are elected they behave according to his wishes.

Another disadvantage of the primary system is the time that it takes. Candidates must begin preparations for their primary campaigns as much as a year before the general election. As members of the United States House of Representatives are elected for only two years, and have to expect to be opposed by rivals for their party's nomination, a newly-elected Representative may need to begin the next primary campaign within a year of being elected.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-14