Multiple Choice Identify the
choice that best completes the statement or answers the question.
|
|
|
Section 1 The Nominating Process
· The nominating process is critically important to democratic
government. · Five major nominating methods are used in American politics.
· The most widely used nominating method today is the direct
primary
Objectives
1. Explain why the nominating process is a critical first step in the election process.
2. Describe self-announcement, the caucus, and the convention as nominating methods.
3. Discuss the direct primary as the principal nominating method used in the United
States today. 4. Understand why some candidates use the petition as a nominating
device.
Why It Matters The nominating process, however it is conducted, is a critically important
step in electoral politics for a number of reasons. Not the least of these: It is from among those
who are nominated that the voters pick the men and women who will serve in public office in this
country. Political Dictionary
nomination The process of candidate
selection in an electoral system
general election The regularly scheduled election
at which voters make a final selection of officeholders.
caucus As a nominating
device, a group of like-minded people who meet to select the candidates they will support in an
upcoming election.
direct primary An election held within a party to pick that
party's candidates for the general election.
closed primary A party nominating
election in which only declared party members can vote.
open primary A
party-nominating election in which any qualified voter can take part.
blanket primary
A voting process in which voters receive a long ballot containing the names of all
contenders, regardless of party, and can vote however they choose.
runoff primary A
primary in which the top two vote-getters in the first direct primary face one
another.
nonpartisan election Elections in which candidates are not identified by
party labels.
|
|
1.
|
Why is the nominating process
important?
a. | It guarantees that smart people will
always be elected | c. | It does a job that
the people are too lazy to do | b. | It is good for business | d. | It is important to the democratic
process |
|
|
|
A
Critical First Step The nominating process is the process of candidate selection. Nomination—the naming of
those who will seek office—is a critically important step in the election process. The
nominating process also has a very real impact on the right to vote. In most elections in this
country, voters can choose between only two candidates for each office on the ballot. They can vote
for the Republican or they can vote for the Democratic candidate.1 This is another way of
saying that we have a two-party system in the United States. It is also another way to say that the
nominating stage is a critically important part of the electoral process. Those who win nominations
place real, very practical limits on the choices that voters can make in an election. In some
constituencies one party is so strong they are the only party that has a chance of winning.. Once the
dominant party has made its nomination, the general election is little more than a formality. Dictatorial regimes point
up the importance of the nominating process. Many of them hold general
elections—regularly scheduled elections at which voters make the final selection of
officeholders—much as democracies do. But typically, the ballots used in those elections list
only one candidate for each office—the candidate of the ruling clique; and those candidates
regularly win with majorities approaching 100 percent. There are five ways in which
nominations are made in the United States. They include (1) self-announcement, (2) caucus, (3)
convention, (4) direct primary, and (5) petition.
|
|
2.
|
How does the nomination process
impact the right to vote?
a. | By nominating only two candidates
the choice of candidates is limited | c. | Union workers are not allowed to vote for
Republicans | b. | Only Republicans and Democrats can vote | d. | Only one candidate can be
elected |
|
|
3.
|
When is the general election
only a formality?
a. | when no party strongly
dominates | c. | when candidates do
not belong to any party | b. | when candidates are weak | d. | when one party strongly dominates
|
|
|
4.
|
If an election has only one
candidate who receives nearly 100% of the vote we call the country a
a. | democracy | c. | dictatorship | b. | republic | d. | direct democracy |
|
|
|
Self-Announcement Self-announcement is the oldest form of the nominating process in American
politics. First used in colonial times, it is still often found at the small-town and rural levels in
many parts of the country The method is quite simple. A person who
wants to run for office simply announces that fact. Modesty or local custom may dictate that someone
else make the candidate’s announcement, but, still, the process amounts to the same thing.
Self-announcement is sometimes
used by someone who failed to win a regular party nomination or by someone unhappy with the
party’s choice. Note that whenever a write-in candidate appears in an election, the
self-announcement process has been used. In recent history, four prominent presidential contenders
have made use of the process: George Wallace, who declared himself to be the American Independent
Party’s nominee in 1968; and independent candidates Eugene McCarthy in 1976; John Anderson in
1980; and Ross Perot in 1992. And all of the 135 candidates who sought to replace Governor Gray
Davis of California in that State’s recall election in 2003—including the winner, Arnold
Schwarzenegger—were self-starters.
|
|
5.
|
Why do some people nominate
themselves for office?
a. | They do not have enough money to run
as part of a party | c. | they want to help
the regular party candidate | b. | Their religion keeps them from joining a
party | d. | they don’t like the regular party
candidates |
|
|
|
The
Caucus As a nominating device, a caucus is a group of like-minded people
who meet to select the candidates they will support in an upcoming election. The first caucus
nominations were made during the later colonial period, probably in Boston in the 1720s.2 John Adams described the
caucus this way in 1763 Originally
the caucus was a private meeting consisting of a few influential figures in the community. As
political parties appeared in the late 1700s, they soon took over the device and began to broaden the
membership of the caucus
The
coming of independence brought the need to nominate candidates for State offices: governor,
lieutenant governor, and others above the local level. The legislative caucus—a meeting of a
party’s members in the State legislature—took on the job. At the national level, both the
Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans in Congress were, by 1800, choosing their presidential and
vice-presidential candidates through the congressional caucus. The legislative and congressional caucuses were quite
practical in their day. Transportation and communication were difficult at best. Since legislators
already gathered regularly in a central place, it made sense for them to take on the nominating
responsibility. The spread of democracy, especially in the newer States on the frontier, spurred
opposition to caucuses, however. More and more, people condemned them for their closed,
unrepresentative character. Criticism of the caucus reached its peak in the early 1820s. The
supporters of three of the leading contenders for the presidency in 1824—Andrew Jackson, Henry
Clay, and John Quincy Adams—boycotted the Democratic-Republicans’ congressional caucus
that year. In fact, Jackson and his supporters made “King Caucus” a leading campaign
issue. The other major aspirant, William H. Crawford of Georgia, became the caucus nominee at a
meeting attended by fewer than one third of the Democratic-Republican Party’s members in
Congress. Crawford ran a poor third in the electoral college balloting in 1824, and the reign of
King Caucus at the national level was ended. With its death in presidential politics, the caucus
system soon withered at the State and local levels, as well. The caucus is still used to make
local nominations in some places, especially in New England. There, a caucus is open to all members
of a party, and it only faintly resembles the original closed and private
process.
|
|
6.
|
What is a
caucus?
a. | A group of people with similar ideas
get together to make decisions or choose candidates | c. | The presidents family | b. | An agency hired by a campaign to win an
election | d. | A way to raise money for
candidates |
|
|
|
The
Convention As the caucus method collapsed, the convention system took its place. The
first national convention to nominate a presidential candidate was held by a minor party, the
Anti-Masons, in Baltimore in 1831. The newly formed National Republican (soon to become Whig) Party
also held a convention later that same year. The Democrats picked up the practice in 1832. All
major-party presidential nominees have been chosen by conventions ever since. By the 1840s,
conventions had become the principal means for making nominations at every level in American
politics. On paper, the convention process seems perfectly suited to representative government. A
party’s members meet in a local caucus to pick candidates for local offices and, at the same
time, to select delegates to represent them at a county convention.3 At the county
convention, the delegates nominate candidates for county offices and select delegates to the next
rung on the convention ladder, usually the State convention. There, the delegates from the county
conventions pick the party’s nominees for governor and other State-wide offices. State
conventions also send delegates to the party’s national convention, where the party selects its
presidential and vice-presidential candidates. In theory, the will of the party’s rank and
file membership is passed up through each of its representative levels. Practice soon pointed up the
weaknesses of the theory, however, as party bosses found ways to manipulate the process. By playing
with the selection of delegates, usually at the local levels, they soon dominated the entire system.
As a result, the caliber of most conventions declined at all levels, especially during the late
1800s. How low some of them fell can be seen in this description of a Cook County, Illinois,
convention in 1896: Many people
had hailed the change from caucus to convention as a major change for the better in American
politics. The abuses of the new device soon dashed their hopes. By the 1870s, the convention system
was itself under attack as a major source of evil in American politics. By the 1910s, the direct
primary had replaced the convention in most States as the principal nominating method in American
politics. Conventions still play a
major role in the nominating process in some States—notably, Connecticut, Michigan, South
Dakota, Utah, and Virginia. And, as you will see, no adequate substitute for the device has yet been
found at the presidential level.
|
|
7.
|
What is one way that groups try
to control conventions?
a. | by opening it up to everyone who
wants to attend | c. | by keeping the
convention secret | b. | by imposing a dress code | d. | by controlling who is selected as delegates to the
convention |
|
|
8.
|
What process has replaced the
convention as the main nominating process in America?
a. | the indirect
primary | c. | the direct
primary | b. | the general election | d. | the town hall meeting |
|
|
|
The
Direct Primary A direct
primary is an intra-party election. It is held within a party to pick that party’s
candidates for the general election. Wisconsin adopted the first State-wide direct primary law in
1903; several other States soon followed its lead. Every State now makes at least some provision for
its use. In most States, State law requires that the major parties use the primary to choose their
candidates for the United States Senate and House of Representatives, for the governorship and all
other State offices, and for most local offices as well. In a few States, however, different
combinations of convention and primary are used to pick candidates for the top offices. In
Michigan, for example, the major parties choose their candidates for the U.S. Senate and House, the
governorship, and the State legislature in primaries. Nominees for lieutenant governor, secretary of
state, and attorney general are picked by conventions.4 Although the primaries
are party-nominating elections, they are closely regulated by law in most States. The State usually
sets the dates on which primaries are held, and it regularly conducts them, too. The State, not the
parties, provides polling places and election officials, registration lists and ballots, and
otherwise polices the process. Two basic forms of the direct primary are in use today: (1) the
closed primary and (2) the open primary. The major difference between the two lies in the answer to
this question: Who can vote in a party’s primary—only qualified voters who are party
members, or any qualified
voter?
|
|
9.
|
What is a direct
primary?
a. | a general
election | c. | an intra-party
election | b. | an independent party election | d. | an inter-party election |
|
|
|
The Closed Primary Today, 27 States provide for the closed primary—a
party’s nominating election in which only declared party members can vote. The party’s
primary is closed to all but those party members.5 In most of the closed
primary States, party membership is established by registration; see page 154. When voters
appear at their polling places on primary election day, their names are checked against the poll
books and each voter is handed the primary ballot of the party in which he or she is registered. The
voter can mark only that
party’s ballot; he or she can vote only in that party’s primary. In come of the
closed primary States, however, a voter can change his or her party registration on election day. in
those States, then, the primary is noan as completely “closed” as it is
elsewhere.
|
|
10.
|
What is a closed
primary?
a. | only voters who belong to the party
may vote | c. | anyone can
vote | b. | a primary open for a specific period of
time. | d. | only voters who belong to the opposite party may
vote |
|
|
|
The Open Primary The open
primary is a party’s nominating election in which any qualified voter can cast a ballot. Although it
is the form in which the direct primary first appeared, it is now found in only 26 States.
When voters go to the polls in some open primary States, they are handed a ballot of each party
holding a primary. Usually, they receive two ballots, those of the Republican and the Democratic
parties. Then, in the privacy of the voting booth, each voter marks the ballot of the party in whose
primary he or she chooses to vote. In other open primary States, a voter must ask for the ballot of
the party in whose primary he or she wants to vote. That is, each voter must make a public
choice of party in order to vote in the primary. Through 2000, three States used a different
version of the open primary—the blanket primary, sometimes
called the “wide-open primary.” Washington adopted the first blanket primary law in 1935.
Alaska followed suit in 1970, and California did so in 1996. In a blanket primary, every voter
received the same ballot—a long one that listed every candidate, regardless of party,
for every nomination to be made at the primary. Voters could participate however they chose. They
could confine themselves to one party’s primary; or they could switch back and forth between
the parties primaries, voting to nominate a Democrat for one office, a Republican for another, and so
on down the ballot. The Supreme Court found California’s version of the blanket primary
unconstitutional in 2000, however. In California Democratic Party v. Jones, the High
Court held that process violated the 1st and 14th amendments’ guarantees of the right of
association. It ruled that a State cannot force a political party to associate with
outsiders—that is, with members of other parties or with independents—when it picks its
candidates for public office. For 2002, California responded to the Court’s decision by
returning to the closed primary; and Alaska held a typical open primary. Washington did hold a
blanket primary in 2002, but it finally bowed to the High Court’s decision and, like Alaska, it
held an open primary in 2004. Louisiana has yet another form of the open primary, which was not
affected by the Court’s decision in Jones. Its unique “open-election law”
provides for what amounts to a combination primary and election. The names of all the people who seek
nominations are listed by office on a single primary ballot, regardless of party. A contender who
wins more than 50 percent of the primary votes wins the office. In these cases, the primary
becomes the election. In contests where there is no majority winner, the two top vote-getters, again
regardless of party, face off in the general election.
|
|
11.
|
What is an open
primary?
a. | a primary open for a specific period
of time | c. | a primary in which
voters from any party may vote | b. | a primary in which only party members can
vote | d. | a primary in which only independent voters may
vote |
|
|
12.
|
What is a blanket
primary?
a. | a voter gets a ballot with the names
of candidates from one party and votes for any that he chooses | c. | a primary that is secret
(covered). | b. | a primary that covers the general and primary
elections | d. | a voter gets a ballot with the names
of candidates from all parties and votes for any that he
chooses |
|
|
|
The Runoff Primary In most States, candidates need to win only a plurality of the votes cast in
the primary to win their party’s nomination.7 (Remember, a
plurality is the greatest
number of votes won by any candidate, whether a majority or not.) In 11 States,8 however, an absolute
majority is needed to carry a primary. If no one wins a majority in a race, a runoff primary is held a few
weeks later. In that runoff, the two top vote-getters in the first party primary face one another for
the party’s nomination, and the winner of that vote becomes the nominee.
|
|
13.
|
If no candidate receives a
majority of votes, what kind of election do they have to decide who wins?
a. | open primary
election | c. | runoff
election | b. | non partisan primary | d. | closed primary election |
|
|
|
The Nonpartisan Primary In most States all or nearly all of the elected school and municipal offices
are filled in nonpartisan
elections. These are elections in which candidates are not identified by party labels. About half
of all State judges are chosen on nonpartisan ballots, as well. The nomination of candidates for
these offices takes place on a nonpartisan basis, too, often in nonpartisan primaries. Typically,
a contender who wins a clear majority in a nonpartisan primary then runs unopposed in the general
election, subject only to write-in opposition. In many States, however, a candidate who wins a
majority in the primary is declared elected at that point. If there is no majority winner, the names
of the two top contenders are placed on the general election ballot. The primary first appeared
as a partisan nominating device. Many have long argued that it is not well suited for use in
nonpartisan elections. Instead, they favor the petition method, which you will consider later in this
section.
|
|
14.
|
In Nonpartisan
elections
a. | there are no election
rules | c. | candidates are not allowed to run as
party members | b. | candidates must declare their party
affiliation | d. | there are too many election
rules |
|
|
|
Evaluation of the Primary The direct primary, whether open or closed, is an intraparty nominating election. It came to American
politics as a reform of the boss-dominated convention system. It was intended to take the nominating
function away from the party organization and put it in the hands of the party’s membership.
The basic facts about the primary have never been very well understood by most voters, however.
So, in closed primary States, many voters resent having to declare their party preference. And, in
both open and closed primary States, many are upset because they cannot express their support for
candidates in more than one party. Many are also annoyed by the “bed-sheet ballots” they
regularly see in primary elections—not realizing that the use of the direct primary almost
automatically means a long ballot. And some are concerned because the primary (and, in particular,
its closed form) tends to exclude independents from the nominating process. These factors,
combined with a lack of appreciation of the importance of primaries, result in this unfortunate fact:
Nearly everywhere, voter turnout in primary elections is usually less than half what it is in general
elections. Primary campaigns can be quite costly. The fact that the successful contenders must
then wage—and finance—a general election campaign adds to the money problems that bedevil
American politics. Unfortunately, the financial facts of political life in the United States mean
that some well-qualified people do not seek public office simply because they cannot muster the
necessary funds. The nominating process, whatever its form, can also have a very divisive effect
on a party. Remember, the process takes place within the party—so, when there is a
contest for a nomination, that is where the contest occurs. A bitter fight in the primaries can so
wound and divide a party that it cannot recover in time to present a united front for the general
election. Many a primary fight has cost a party an election. Finally, because many voters are not
very well informed, the primary places a premium on name familiarity. That is, it often gives an edge
to a contender who has a well-known name or a name that sounds like that of some well-known person.
But, notice, name familiarity in and of itself has little or nothing to do with a candidate’s
qualifications for office. Obviously, the primary is not without its problems, nor is any other
nominating device. Still, the primary does give a party’s members the opportunity to
participate at the very core of the political process.
|
|
15.
|
Why did people feel it was
necessary to have primary elections to choose candidates?
a. | to make the candidate selection
process more democratic | c. | to elect more
intelligent people to offices | b. | to allow party bosses to have more control over the candidate selection
process | d. | to speed up the candidate selection
process |
|
|
|
The Presidential Primary The presidential primary developed as an offshoot of the direct primary. It is
not a nominating device, however. Rather, the presidential primary is an election that is held as one
part of the process by which presidential candidates are chosen. The presidential primary is a
very complex process. It is one or both of two things, depending on the State involved. It is a
process in which a party’s voters elect some or all of a State party organization’s
delegates to that party’s national convention; and/or it is a preference election in which
voters can choose (vote their preference) among various contenders for a party’s presidential
nomination. Much of what happens in presidential politics in the early months of every fourth year
centers on this very complicated process. (See Chapter 13 for an extended discussion of the
presidential primary.)
|
|
16.
|
What is the purpose of the
Presidential Primary?
a. | elect candidate supporters to go to
the party conventions | c. | to go around
(circumvent) the Electoral College | b. | help the president to pick a vice president | d. | help the president to pick his
cabinet |
|
|
|
Petition One other nominating method is used fairly widely at the local level in
American politics today—nomination by petition. Where this process is used, candidates for
public office are nominated by means of petitions signed by a certain required number of qualified
voters in the election district Nomination by petition is found most widely at the local level,
chiefly for nonpartisan school posts and municipal offices in medium-sized and smaller communities.
It is also the process usually required by State law for nominating minor party and independent
candidates. (Remember, the States often purposely make the process of getting on the ballot difficult
for those candidates.) The details of the petition process vary widely from State to State, and
even from one city to the next. Usually, however, the higher the office and/or the larger the
constituency represented by the office, the greater the number of signatures needed for
nomination.
|
|
17.
|
In some local elections it is
possible to get the nomination by getting signatures on a petition
|
Multiple Response Identify one
or more choices that best complete the statement or answer the question.
|
|
|
The
Caucus As a nominating device, a caucus is a group of like-minded people
who meet to select the candidates they will support in an upcoming election. The first caucus
nominations were made during the later colonial period, probably in Boston in the 1720s.2 John Adams described the
caucus this way in 1763 Originally
the caucus was a private meeting consisting of a few influential figures in the community. As
political parties appeared in the late 1700s, they soon took over the device and began to broaden the
membership of the caucus
The
coming of independence brought the need to nominate candidates for State offices: governor,
lieutenant governor, and others above the local level. The legislative caucus—a meeting of a
party’s members in the State legislature—took on the job. At the national level, both the
Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans in Congress were, by 1800, choosing their presidential and
vice-presidential candidates through the congressional caucus. The legislative and congressional caucuses were quite
practical in their day. Transportation and communication were difficult at best. Since legislators
already gathered regularly in a central place, it made sense for them to take on the nominating
responsibility. The spread of democracy, especially in the newer States on the frontier, spurred
opposition to caucuses, however. More and more, people condemned them for their closed,
unrepresentative character. Criticism of the caucus reached its peak in the early 1820s. The
supporters of three of the leading contenders for the presidency in 1824—Andrew Jackson, Henry
Clay, and John Quincy Adams—boycotted the Democratic-Republicans’ congressional caucus
that year. In fact, Jackson and his supporters made “King Caucus” a leading campaign
issue. The other major aspirant, William H. Crawford of Georgia, became the caucus nominee at a
meeting attended by fewer than one third of the Democratic-Republican Party’s members in
Congress. Crawford ran a poor third in the electoral college balloting in 1824, and the reign of
King Caucus at the national level was ended. With its death in presidential politics, the caucus
system soon withered at the State and local levels, as well. The caucus is still used to make
local nominations in some places, especially in New England. There, a caucus is open to all members
of a party, and it only faintly resembles the original closed and private
process.
|
|
18.
|
What are some of the problems
with caucuses? (pick 2)
|
|
|
The
Direct Primary A direct
primary is an intra-party election. It is held within a party to pick that party’s
candidates for the general election. Wisconsin adopted the first State-wide direct primary law in
1903; several other States soon followed its lead. Every State now makes at least some provision for
its use. In most States, State law requires that the major parties use the primary to choose their
candidates for the United States Senate and House of Representatives, for the governorship and all
other State offices, and for most local offices as well. In a few States, however, different
combinations of convention and primary are used to pick candidates for the top offices. In
Michigan, for example, the major parties choose their candidates for the U.S. Senate and House, the
governorship, and the State legislature in primaries. Nominees for lieutenant governor, secretary of
state, and attorney general are picked by conventions.4 Although the primaries
are party-nominating elections, they are closely regulated by law in most States. The State usually
sets the dates on which primaries are held, and it regularly conducts them, too. The State, not the
parties, provides polling places and election officials, registration lists and ballots, and
otherwise polices the process. Two basic forms of the direct primary are in use today: (1) the
closed primary and (2) the open primary. The major difference between the two lies in the answer to
this question: Who can vote in a party’s primary—only qualified voters who are party
members, or any qualified
voter?
|
|
19.
|
What are two types of direct
primaries? (pick 2)
|
|
|
Closed vs. Open Primary The two basic forms of the primary have caused arguments for decades. Those
who favor the closed primary regularly make three arguments in support of it: 1. It prevents one
party from “raiding” the other’s primary in the hope of nominating weaker
candidates in the other party. 2. It helps make candidates more responsive to the party, its
platform, and its members. 3. It helps make voters more thoughtful, because they must choose
between the parties in order to vote in the primaries. The critics of the closed primary contend
that: 1. It compromises the secrecy of the ballot, because it forces voters to make their party
preferences known in public, and 2. It tends to exclude independent voters from the nomination
process.6 Advocates of
the open primary believe that their system of nominating addresses both of these criticisms. In many
open primaries, (1) voters are not forced to make their party preferences known in public, and (2)
the tendency to exclude independent voters is eliminated. The opponents of the open primary insist
that it (1) permits primary “raiding” and (2) undercuts the concepts of party loyalty and
party responsibility.
|
|
20.
|
What are three arguments in
favor of closed primaries? (pick 3)
|
|
21.
|
What are two arguments against
closed primaries? (pick 2)
|
Matching
|
|
|
a. | nomination | f. | open primary | b. | general election | g. | blanket primary | c. | caucus | h. | runoff
primary | d. | direct primary | i. | nonpartisan election | e. | closed
primary |
|
|
22.
|
An intra-party election to
choose candidates to run for offices
|
|
23.
|
An election to pick candidates
to run that any voter can vote in
|
|
24.
|
An election where the
candidates do not run as members of a political party
|
|
25.
|
Picking a
candidate
|
|
26.
|
An election in which voters
have to pick between the top two candidates who got the most votes
|
|
27.
|
An election to pick candidates
to run that only party members can vote in
|
|
28.
|
The election that places a
candidate in the office he is running for
|
|
29.
|
An election in which voters
can see all candidates and vote for any of them
|
|
30.
|
People who come together in
person to choose a candidate
|