Trends in voting- Party Coalitions

Trends in voting- Party Coalitions

The primary trend in USA voting pattern is unpredictable if not chaotic. The four basic demographic considerations are:

Race and Ethnicity:

Democrats had a clear edge in the Black population as per study in 2015 – a whopping 90%- whereas Republicans were lagging. Chances of potential complexity increase when there is togetherness of multiple strands of identity when it comes to Racial identity being far from a straightforward concept. Family ties, physical are among a range of factors beyond genealogy taken into account in seeking. Hispanic (62%) Asians (56%) and whites (42%) were the share vote Democrats got.

Age: Whereas 56% in the age bracket of18~29 years preferred Democrats, the age brackets in 30~59 and the last bracket of senior citizen scored almost same
Religion: Religion too played a revised trend. Protestants could muster 34% while 36% Catholics preferred Democrats. Prediction of Jewish votes went haywire – an astonishing 76%.
Income: The shift in revenue and preference too changed dramatically. The upper bracket (40%), middle income (47%) and lowest (63%) was the distribution.

It is clear that demographic demarcation plays an important decisive force in vote sharing between both the major political parties. Those constituencies which brought Obama to the White House will continue to dominate in the coming elections too.

Other demographic trends accentuate Democrats’ advantage. Those bones between 1978 and 2000 (The Millennial generation) is adding 4 million eligible voters to

The new voter group comprising of 4 million voted for Obama by a stunning 66-32 the basic trend in USA voting pattern is unpredictable if not chaotic. The four basic demographic considerations are:

The margin in 2008; by 2020this group will be 103 million strong, and an estimate of 68 percent of professionals vote in 2008 was handed to Obama.

Around one in five American workers professionals will account by the middle of this decade. This trend in combination with growth among race-ethnic trends and non-Christian faiths —will ensure United States ceases to be a white Christian nation by 2016 election (or 2020 at the outside). White Christians will be only around 35 percent of the population in the road. It’s hectic to look past these many demographic changes and not believe that the Republican Party as currently constituted is in need of changes in approach.

Whichever Party shift their priority on social issues are bound to have a winning edge. They should realize that culture war is one aspect of change voters expect

Equal if not a sizeable distribution of national resources to rural areas would pave the way for better results in elections. Taxing more and more is not the viable solution either. Inconsistency in distribution would create a sense of restlessness which would ultimately reflect in voting pattern. Environmental issues to fighting terror would are the barometer to assess the performance.

Carrying forward is easy for Democrats whereas for Republicans it is also a rebuilding after a gap of 8 years in 20156 elections. .

A new approach to governance with an emphasis on education, financial reform, health care, global relations and energy that they are having some success in pursuing is the need for not only for the present but also the future government. The global financial meltdown is yet to recede entirely and as such excellent effort at least in keeping the status quo would be decisive.

References

Alan Berube and others, “State of metropolitan America” (Washington: Brookings Institution, 2010), p. 50

Centre for American Progress Action Fund Report 2010 Demographic Change and the Future of the Parties. Ruy Teixeira June 2010

Parties and Party Leadership

The blunders the US committed over the years were far too many to wipe put ant good they tried to implement in the so-called developing as well as developed countries. It can be Vietnam, Afghanistan or global policing using spy satellites. The climate control policies including Carbon emissions were tailor made to suit the top polluter. Fighting terror from Al-Qaida or IS are not effective. Even NATO in which the US are an influential member failed in many missions. This game Republicans or Democrats play irrespective of their majority in the House or Senate, never change.

According to US Foreign Affairs: “export controls, including non-proliferation of nuclear technology and nuclear hardware” Many clauses of the constitution including non-intervention policy remained only in the paper for e.g.) cultivating harmony and peace for all nations and observing justice and good faith with all, etc. The congressional –executive agreement made by the president or the sole executive agreement by the President alone turns to be autocratic.

Since World War 11, US diplomacy is without punch. The supremacy they want in UN Security Council, World Bank, IMF or WTO is deplorable. America got an edge over the world with the collapse of USSR.

The endeavour to have better ties with China, ASEAN, Japan and Britain, etc. are appreciable, though. With over 100 miles porous boundary line with Mexico, the relationship is complicated. Recent normalization of ties with Cuba is a definite trend. And controlling North Korea failed. The nuclear weapon scenario is also not giving the US a clear advantage.

Even when the US continues to explore the shale gas technology to control dominance of Gulf countries’ oil money, a feasible alternative is yet to emerge. Recent trends show a more cordial relation to India. Their supremacy in weapon sales has shown a slow growth.Wealth and democracy are interlinked. But military intervention and freedom never go hand in hand. During the formulation of the foreign policy, the legislative and the executive branches became a battleground for human rights.

Bill Clinton in his speech said that “Ultimately, the best strategy to ensure our security and to build a durable peace is to support the advance of democracy elsewhere. Democracies don’t attack each other.”

References

James M. McCormick, American Foreign Policy and Process (2009) ch 7-8

George C. Herring, From Colony to Superpower: U.S. Foreign Relations Since 1776 (2008) Richard Russell, “American Diplomatic Realism: A Tradition Practised and Preached by

Judicial Vs Executive and vice versa

The constitution of America, having a bearing on British Constitution but is unique.

The functions and three arms of the constitution – Judiciary, President, and Congress intermingled but also distinct.

Supreme Court can control President and even can declare President’s action unlawful.

President can pardon those convicted by Supreme Court and responsible for the appointment of Judiciary.

Supreme Court has the power to question Congress.

Congress can impeach the president.

Congress can dictate the number of Judges

President can veto Congress.

Even though these three agencies should work harmoniously like well-oiled machinery, conflicts are inevitable. In April 2013, about 10 percent of federal seats were vacant, with 85 of 856 positions unfilled and four vacancies on the prestigious high vacancy rate has been attributed to politics debating potential appointment.

Acts of Congress defines the powers and duties of these branches. Principle federalism is a basis for The United States government in which the federal government and state governments share power. It also creates a conflict of interest as state Governments sandwiched between President and Supreme Court.

The executive (President) has the power to can veto any legislation an act overrode by Congress. While the legislative (Congress) has the power to create law. Congress must approve nominee judges by the President of the nation’s highest judiciary authority (Supreme Court). The power to invalidate as “unconstitutional” any law passed by the Congress is by the Supreme Court.

The legislative branch of the federal government is the United States Congress. It is, comprising the House of Representatives and the Senate. And Constitution grants various powers to Congress. The executive authority of the federal government is by the President of the United States Congress has the power to remove the President. Impeachment by the Representatives House (Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton), saw none of them removed following the trial in the Senate.

, although power passes through the Cabinet members and other official; Unless two-thirds of both houses of Congress vote to override the veto, the President may sign legislation passed by Congress into law to prevent it from becoming law during recent moratorium move by the president to safeguard the declining economy met with severe criticism.

Relationships between state and federal courts also face conflicts of interest. The ability to all the three authorities suggested changes but unanimously agreed on. Same is the age limit for use of tobacco consumption.

A typical case of conflict is reflected in Supreme Court case Worcester v. Georgia, American Indian tribes considered as “domestic dependent nations” that created a flutter between executive and judiciary. A federal taxing system that is not uniform has also emerged a conflict. Similar issues cropped up on environmental concerns, Medicaid, etc

There is no right of appeal to the Supreme Court. That too is a field for conflicts.

References

Article II, Constitution of the United States of America

Goldstein, Joel K. (1995). “The New Constitutional Vice Presidency“. Wake Forest Law Review (Winston Salem, NC: Wake Forest Law Review Association, Inc.) 30 (505).