The American Two-party System

     

      No one now living in the United States can remember when the contest began between the Democratic and the Republican parties. It has been going on for more than a century, making it one of the oldest political rivalries in the world.

      The American political system is a classical example of the two-party system. When we say that we have a two-party system in the United States we do not mean that we have only two parties. Usually about;i dozen parties nominate presidential candidates. We call it a two-party system because we have two large parties and a number of small parties, and the large parties are so large that we often forget about the rest. Usually the small parties collectively poll less than 5 per cent of the vote cast in national elections.

      The Democratic and Republican parties are the largest and most competitive organizations in the American community. They organize the electorate very simply by maintaining the two-party system. Americans almost inevitably become Democrats or Republicans because there is usually no other place for them to go. Moreover, because the rivalry of these parties is very old, most Americans know where they belong in the system. As a consequence of the dominance of the major parties, most elected officials are either Republicans or Democrats. Attempts to break up this old system have been made in every presidential election in the past one hundred years, but thesystem has survived all assaults.

      How does it happen that the two-party system is so strongly rooted in American politics? The explanation is probably to be found in the way elections are conducted. In the United States, unlike countries with a parliamentary system of government, we elect not only the President, but a large number of other officials, about 800,000 of them. We also elect congressmen from single-member districts. For example, we elect 435 members of the House of Representatives from 435 districts (there are a few exceptions), one member for each district. Statistically, this kind of election favors the major parties. The system of elections makes it easy for the major parties to maintain their dominant position, because they are likely to win more than their share of the offices.

      One of the great consequences of the system is that it produces majorities automatically. Because there are only two competitors in the running, it is almost inevitable that one will receive a majority. Moreover, the system tends slightly to exaggerate the victory of the winning party. This is not always true, but the strong tendency to produce majorities is built into the system.

      In over 200 years of constitutional history, Americans have learned much about the way in which the system can be managed so as to make possible the peaceful transfer of power from one party to the other. At the level of presidential elections, the party in power has been overturned by the party out of power nineteen times, almost once a decade. In the election of 1860, the political system broke down, and the Civil War, the worst disaster in American history, resulted. Our history justifies our confidence in the system hut also shows that it is not foolproof.

      The second major party is able to survive a defeat because the statistical tendency that exaggerates the victory of the winning party operates even more strongly in favor of the second party against the third, fourth, and fifth parties. As a result, the defeated major party is able to maintain a monopoly of the opposition. The advantage of the second party over the third is so great that it is the only party that is likely to he able to overturn the party in power. It is able, therefore, to attract the support of everyone seriously opposed to the party in power. The second party is important as long as it can monopolize the movement to overthrow the party in power, because it is certain to come into power sooner or later.

      Another consequence of the two-party system is that whereas minor parties are likely to identify themselves with special interests or special programs and thus take extreme positions, the major parties are so large that they tend to be moderate. Evidence of the moderation of the major parties is that much business is conducted across party lines. What happens when the Democrats control one house of Congress and the Republicans control the other? About the same volume of legislation is passed as when one party controls both houses, although some important legislation is likely to be blocked temporarily. It is possible to carry on the work of the government even when party control is divided because party differences are not fundamental.

     

      现在生活在美国的人中没有一个人能够记起民主党和共和党是何时开始进行竞争的。这种竞争历经了100多年，成为世界上最古老的政治竞争之一。

      美国的政治制度是两党制度的一个典范，我们说在美国实行两党制度，并非说只有两个政党。通常大约有十几个政党提出他们的总统侯选人。我们之所以称之为两党制，是因为我们有两个大党和许多小党。大党太大，所以我们常常忽视了那些小党。通常小党派合在一起在全国选举中得票低于全国所投票数的5%。

      民主党和共和党是美国社会中最大和最具有竞争力的组织，通过维持两党制他们很容易组织起自己的选民。美国人几乎不是民主党就是共和党，因为通常情况下他们别无选择。而且因为这两个政党竞争由来已久，大多数美国人对自己在这个两党体制中的立场十分清楚。两个大党占主导地位的结果是多数当选者要么是共和党人，要么是民主党人。在过去100年的历届总统竞选中，人们都试图打破这一旧的制度，但这一体制还是在种种非难中幸存了下来。

      两党制如此稳固地植根于美国政治之中，那么它是如何形成的呢?我们可能会从选举进行的方式中找到解释。不同于其他拥有议会制政府的国家，在美国我们不仅选举总统，而且选举多达800000名其他政府官员。国会议员也是从每票区中选出来的。例如，我们从435个选区中(有个别例外)选举435位国会议员，每个选区一位。从统计学上来看，这种选举大党占便宜。这种选举制度使大党能较轻松地维持其主导地位，因为他们赢得的席位可能比他们应得的份额多。

      这一制度造成的一个重要结果是它自动地产生了多数。因为只有两个竞争者参加竞选，几乎必然会有一个政党获得多数票。而且这种制度稍稍有些夸大获胜党派的成功的倾向。虽然并非总是如此，但是产生多数的强烈倾向已经形成这一制度的特征。

      在200多年的宪政历史中，美国人已经学会了很多关于这种制度运作的方式，这种运作方式可以使政权和平地从一个政党手中转移到另一个政党手中。在总统选举中，执政党被在野党推`翻过19次，几乎每十年一次。在1860年的选举中，这一政治体制瓦解，结果爆发了美国历史上最大灾难——美国内战。我们的历史证明我们有理由对这一制度保持信心，但历史也表明了这一制度不是万无一失的。

      第二大党能够在失败中生存下来，因为统计学上夸大获胜党成功的倾向有利于第二大党对抗第三、第四、第五大党。因此败北的大党能够在反对派中享有垄断地位。第二大党对第三大党的优势是非常大的，所以它是惟一有可能推`翻执政党的政党。因此它能吸引每一个强烈反对执政党的人的支持。只要第二大党能够主导推`翻执政党的运动，它的地位就是举足轻重的，因为它迟早将重新执政。

      两党制的另一结果是，小党因为很可能要支持特殊利益或特殊计划，因而采取一些极端立场，而大党因规模庞大而倾向于采取温和立场。大党的温和倾向的证据是，很多事情都是超越了党派界限进行的。当民主党控制了参众两院的一个而共和党控制了另一个时，情况会怎么样呢?如同一政党控制着参众两院时的情形一样，尽管某些重要的法案有可能暂时搁置，而大约有同样多的法案会获得通过。对政府部门的控制权即使分属于不同的党派，政府的工作仍然有可能进行下去，因为党派分歧并不是根本性的。 

     

分享到：