Democratic And Republican Parties Are Now Ideologically Distinct And Internally United

Political scientists have made it clear that the Republican and Democrat parties are ideologically distinct and polarised, however the notion of the parties being internally united is up for question. This is because of factions within parties such as the Tea Party and Blue dogs have recently risen to precedent; demonstrating the deep rooted divisions within the parties.

Many political scientists have concluded that, since the civil rights movement, which resulted in the break-up of the solid south for the Democrats; and realignment of the two major parties, they have become ever more polarised. During this time both politicians and voters realigned themselves to new parties. This led to the Republicans becoming more conservative and the Democrats becoming more homogenous and liberal. This as a result led to both parties becoming more and more distinct. This has become ever more evident as with President Barack Obama's attempt to bring in background checks; in response to the Newtown school massacre in December. However, despite all his efforts he faced fierce opposition by the powerful National Rifle Association which as a result led to a backlash by conservative Republicans from pro-gun states that doomed key proposals in the gun package, even after they had been watered down to try to satisfy opponents.

This therefore clearly shows that both parties have become ideological distinct and polarised. Another explicit example which demonstrates the extent to which the parties have become polarised is that of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, this law entailed that is any physician who, knowingly performed a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years. In the house of representative, 218 Republicans supported the bill whereas 137 democrats opposed the bill. This therefore shows that the Democrats hold more liberal views and the Republicans more conservative ones, therefore supporting argument that the parties have become polarised. Another example, showing the extent to which the parties have become polarised is that of the US gridlock over President Obama's health care reform bill. The Republicans chose to close the US government in order to dilute or even to completely veto the medical reform legislation. This is because the bill would have involved large government intervention, and would have meant more taxation as well as more public spending. These are all features that Republicans oppose whereas the Democrats support these policies. This shows that clearly both parties are ideologically polarised and are further willing to do anything it takes to stop legislation which they disagree with from being implemented. This leaves no room for speculation; as it clearly shows that US parties have become extremely polarised.

It has become the signifying identity of both parties two oppose one another on every issue other than America being a super power, belief in democracy and their hatred towards communism and dictatorships. The Republican Party holds conservative beliefs such as having a free market economy, as free as possible from government intervention and regulation; it supports a less active and more of a limited role of the government. This is evident with the Republicans fiscal policies through out presidential elections. For example the Newt Grinch contract promised no more new taxes to be implemented on the electorate. This shows that clearly the Republicans hold a conservative view. The Republican Party is fiscal; it promotes and propagates the need of having low taxation, as well as lower public spending and to also have a balanced budget. Whereas, the Democrats believe the total opposite; advocating an interventionist government which regulates and manages the economy in the interest of the people. Therefore, more intervention from the government into peoples lives as well as more public spending. This therefore clearly shows, both parties have become ideologically distinct and polarised. An example of this is of the 6 in 06 pact where the Democrats promised to legislate for better wages and medical support. Another example of this is of the findings political scientists Nolan McCarty, Keith Poole and Howard Rosenthal have found that the parties have become ideologically homogeneous and separated from each other along a single left-right dimension. There research was based on party polarization since 1879 to 2010 using voting records.. There findings show that House and Senate votes are very predictable, even on issues that have little to do with traditional dividing points like the size and scope of government.This shows explicitly their ideologies are completely different.

Furthermore, the Democrats also believe in a more diplomatic approach to foreign policy, to such an extent the political analyst have dubbed the Democrats of having a "dovish policy" on intervention in foreign countries. Whereas the Republican party promotes more of a "hawkish" stance of foreign issues, by spending large amounts of money on defence and choosing to take and interventionist approach on foreign policy matters. This is quite evident with the recent congress vote on intervention in Syria to stop President Assad from using chemical weapons on his own citizens. The vote in the House of Representatives shows clearly that the Democrats unlike the Republican's voted to not intervene into Syria militarily but rather to use diplomacy. .Another example of this would be of the Iraq War vote in 2003, the overwhelming majority of those who voted to not intervene, were Democrats from the House of Representative; and similarly in the senate all of the nay votes came from the Democrats. This leaves no room for doubt that clearly both parties have become ideologically distinct and polarised.

Some political analysts have argued that, both parties have not become polarised but rather are homogenous. This is evident in, with the Iraq war, where both parties voted in

favour of going to war with Iraq. The majority of the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted for the war with only 3% voting nay. Similarly, 40% of the Democrats supported the Republicans. Also within the senate a majority from both parties voted in favour of the war. This shows that clearly, both parties aren't ideologically distinct but rather are very homogenous. Another example of this would be of the Patriot Act where George Bush a Republican president legislated to allow NSA to spy on American citizens. Despite the fact this legislation would contravene the fourth amendment, both parties Republican and Democrats passed the bill. The patriot act saw 145 Democrats supporting the bill and 211 Republicans. This therefore clearly shows that both parties are not polarised but rather have common grounds, where they have believed in taking similar action. The point of both parties being homogenous is evident with the blue state of California, whom in the years 2003 to 2011 elected Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. This shows that clearly both parties are similar and not distinct as the electorate chose to elect a republican in safe democrat state. This therefore leaves little room for speculation; it has explicitly displayed that the electorate do not see the parties as being two completely different ideologies but rather as similar ones.

Furthermore, political scientists have also concluded that, the political parties are no longer united and have become divided over several issues. A prominent faction within the Democrats was that of, Blue Dog's. These are representatives elected in southern states who are fiscally and socially conservative. Therefore commentators have dubbed the as being "Democrats in name only" The Blue Dog's formation alone shows that clearly the parties are not united. The need to have a faction shows that clearly the party is not united and homogonous. The Blue Dog's came to new heights in the previous two elections where there were 19 Blue dogs elected from southern states. This as a result made them more significant, as they were now was able to defect from the Democrat's party line. By 2009 to 2011 the Blue Dogs numbered 54, therefore becoming a rising and powerful faction from within the party. The divided opinion from the Democrats is evident with; the majority of the Blue Dogs voting against Democrat President Barrack Obama's health care reform bills. The lack of support from within his own party led to him abandoning his reforms. As well as that another example of the Blue Dog's becoming influential and displaying the spilt within the Democrat party is that of, them being able to force the president to institute a pay as you go budget plan for his $787 billion stimulus bill. As well as that they were also able to delay, Waxman Markey climate change energy bill and blocked legislation that would have benefited unions. A further example that explicitly shows the division within the Democrat party is that of, the threat posed by the Blue Dogs on house energy and commerce committee whom threatened to veto Obama's health care legislation. This Cleary shows that the parties are divided to a great extent and are far from being internally united.

This is also evident within the Republican Party with the Tea Party factions who stand for fiscal beliefs and advocate for low taxation, low public spending and balanced budgets. The tea party has become evermore significant in displaying the divisions within the Republican Party. A clear example of this is of protest in over 40 cities in America organised by the tea party in retaliation of the republican president George senior's, announcement to raise taxes this as result contravened not only the Tea Parties beliefs but also the newt Grinch contract. The 40 public protests clearly demonstrated that there were deep rooted divisions in the Republican Party.

However, commentators have said that this factions do not show that the Democrat party is divided, as the number of blue dogs has since dramatically decreased to only a mere 23 blue dogs; therefore showing that clearly the Democrat party is not divided but rather it is on the whole united on the issue. This is evident in the American recovery, and reinvestment act 2009, all but 11 Democrats voted in favour of the bill and in the senate all of the Democrat's senators voted unanimously in favour of the bill. This clearly shows the Democrat party is united and homogenous. Similarly another example which clearly advocates that the parties are internally united is that of "Don't ask and don't tell repeal act of 2010" this bill was to allow homosexual people to be able to work for the armed forces. The voting record shows that the majority of the Democrats acted as a united party and voted in favour of the bill. Another example of this is that of Barack Obama's health care reform bill, where an overwhelming majority of 178 republicans voted against the legislation and a majority of the Democratic representatives and all of the Democrat senators voted in favour. This shows clearly that both parties Republican and democrats are internally united. Furthermore, within the Republican Party political analysts have raised the point that in the 2010 election the Tea party challenged mostly non republican seats. This means that, the party is united as the tea party faction has no intention of dividing the party or causing it any harm for not legislating its fiscal policies. This leaves no room for speculation; it provides a clear definition of the party being internally united.

In conclusion, it is clear that due to the decentralised nature of the American political system, differences within parties will always occur. This is due to the fact that the United States is incredibly vast; its electorate thus hold differing beliefs. This is evident with Susan Collins a moderate Republican representing the blue state Maine; this is due to the sheer size of America. As a result some states elect extreme conservatives, some elect moderates and some liberals. Because of this reason internal unity may be an impossible factor to achieve in American politics. However it has become evidently clear that the parties have become ideologically distinct, this has been put down to region, as political scientists believe, where there are large urban populations such as California, New York and Ohio; the electorate forms liberal and moderate views; whereas where there is little urban population the electorate have formed conservative views. Therefore to conclude its clear that, both parties have become ideologically distinct and polarised. However the internal unity of the parties remains open to interpretation.