The Founding Fathers who drafted the U.S. Constitution in 1787 feared political parties, popular democracy, and centralized government. Contrary to these sentiments, the national politics that emerged has been that of intense partisan conflict, the continual expansion of suffrage, and the expansion of federal power. Early on, American politics became a blood sport with political candidates and officeholders assailing opponents in negative, and often, vicious ways, to win votes within an electorate that had increased in size and expressed a multitude of interests. By the 1830s all politicians, whatever their party affiliation, proclaimed themselves democrats and “men of the people.” The only consistency between the Founders’ dream for the new republic and what emerged was a profound faith in constitutional government.
This very short introduction explores how national politics changed from what was conceived in 1787 and what followed. Four major themes emerge in this brief study of American political history: the intensity and continuity of partisanship and polarization; the steady expansion of the electorate to be more inclusive; the continuation of debates over the role and power of the federal government; and the importance of the Constitution in framing political debate.
Political parties emerged early in George Washington’s first administration, much to his disgust and despair. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison organized the first political party, the Democratic-Republican Party. In response, Alexander Hamilton and John Adams orchestrated the formation of the Federalist Party. These were not well organized on the national level at first, but operated through state and local leaders. Parties appealed to voters—white males—through reason and passion. They purchased newspapers to carry their partisan message to voters.
With the collapse of New England’s sectionally based Federalist Party following the War of 1812, American politics experienced a brief calm, the “Era of Good Feelings.” The emergence of Jacksonian Democracy in the late 1820s led to the creation of the Whig Party, and with its collapse in the 1850s, the Republican Party formed. Only in the late nineteenth century was a two-party system composed of the Democratic and Republican parties well developed. Even as the two-party system was being established, a dizzying array of other parties formed—the Know-Nothing Party, the Greenback Party, and People’s Party, among others. Third-party movements continued into the twentieth century with the Progressive Party, the Socialist Party, the Reform Party, and the Libertarian Party. Nonetheless, antiparty sentiment remained a powerful expression in American politics. The general American public was wary of partisanship, remaining both disgusted and fascinated by politics as a blood sport.
The development of political parties coincided with the expansion of the electorate. Restrictions on voting rights based on property qualifications for white males were eliminated by the 1830s in most states. Black males were granted voting rights following the Civil War, although measures were instituted in Southern states to prevent full black participation. In the early twentieth century women were granted the right to vote, and in the mid-twentieth century, legislation was passed to ensure voting rights to blacks. The expansion of suffrage came through social movements and political struggle.
The expansion of the electorate changed the tone of American politics. Candidates running for office proclaimed themselves as representing the average American, rallying against elites and elitism. Campaigns against “politics as usual,” bossism, backroom politics, and Washington, D.C., became common themes.
The expansion of the electorate also meant that political parties had to put together uneasy coalitions of constituent interests. Regional, economic, racial, ethnic, and gender groups had to be calibrated carefully by parties and candidates. Shifting alliances meant candidates needed to remain flexible if they were to win office. Challengers tapped into new constituencies to defeat incumbents and overturn party leaders.
In the course of these developments, political campaigns became increasingly expensive. The development of television following the Second World War made running presidential campaigns (as well as congressional campaigns) highly expensive. For political candidates it meant a greater reliance on organized special interests and wealthy donors. It also meant that candidates needed to sell themselves to the public through well-conceived, well-orchestrated, and expensive media campaigns. Image became nearly as important as substance in this new media age.
Above all, the Founders feared power, the domination of some men over others. Power in itself was a natural aspect of government and could only be made legitimate through a compact of mutual consent. If left unconstrained, governmental power, they believed, degenerated into tyranny, oligarchy, or mob rule. Power needed to be distributed among the components of society so that no one group could dominate the others and strip others of their rights. Therefore the Founders sought to create balance through the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of a national government operating in a federal system. States were to function, in effect, as laboratories in democracy.
They envisioned the new federal government as serving as a referee in adjudicating the various sectional, economic, and social interests of the nation. The coercive powers of government were to remain relatively weak, although necessary to national trade, territorial expansion, immigration, relations with Indians, and diplomatic relations with other countries. Government on the federal, state, and local levels was to foster economic development through the chartering and subsidizing of private companies, while ensuring that the rule of law was maintained.
This tension between the adjudicatory and coercive powers of government appeared early in the nation’s history when Alexander Hamilton proposed the creation of a centralized bank, high tariffs, and internal taxes. His opponents, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, viewed Hamilton’s plan as a threat to liberty by expanding the coercive powers of government. Debates over the proper role of the federal government intensified in antebellum America over the removal of Indians west of the Mississippi, banking, tariffs, states’ rights, and most importantly, slavery. Often the lines of argument became blurred. For example, southern slaveholders argued for states’ rights, while insisting that the federal government return escaped slaves in northern states to their owners in the South.
Industrialization, the emergence of national and transnational corporations, a national market, conservation of natural resources, labor conflict, urbanization, and other social problems led reformers and much of the general public to demand the expansion of federal powers. This entailed extending the powers of government to regulate corporations, protect consumers, conserve natural resources, and protect labor rights. Further expansion of federal power came during the 1930s with the creation of the modern welfare state through the establishment of Social Security, unemployment insurance, and workmen’s compensation insurance. The Second World War and the Cold War subsequently imparted an even greater role to the federal government. Civil rights activists called for federal involvement in state affairs to end racial segregation and protect the civil rights of blacks. The result was the growth of the size of government and its role in the economy. Those who supported the expansion of the federal government and the extension of the coercive powers of the state, considered them proper and necessary to maintain freedom and ensure the equal rights of all citizens.
The growth of the federal government in the twentieth century became a central topic in modern American politics. Partisan debate over the proper role, size, and nature of government as well as federal waste, budget deficits, and the national debt divided political parties and the general electorate. Special interests that benefited from government regulations, welfare expenditures, government contracts, and consumer and environmental protection came under political attack.
While the specifics of policy debates in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries changed, partisan division was by no means new to American political history. Political polarization framed early debates over the national bank, territorial expansion, slavery, federal regulation, military intervention, voting rights, and executive power. What remained consistent throughout, however, was a belief in the constitutional order that was embodied in the Founders’ vision.
Here proved to be the most enduring legacy and the greatest achievement of the Founders of the new American nation. The agreement that constitutional principles must be upheld, even though these principles might be interpreted differently, characterized a unique experiment in republican government that has survived for the last two hundred-plus years. Partisan conflict, slavery, a civil war, and two world wars presented many challenges to this constitutional order. Yet throughout this turmoil, regular elections continued to be held, representatives were elected to office, and the government continued to operate.
The Founders understood that constitutional republics were fragile by their very nature. Few had survived. Corruption, demagoguery, war, and economic turmoil led to the subversion of liberty and to tyranny. History was replete with the failure of republics. The Founders, well aware of these failures, held an abiding faith that a constitutional republic remained the best, albeit not perfect, form of government. Americans have shared this vision, a faith that has been contested by others. American democracy faces new challenges in the twenty-first century. An understanding of where we have come from and an understanding of our political history will help us meet these new challenges.