The Gallup Poll recently reported
that the percentage of independents—people who don’t identify with a political
party—reached an all-time high of 42 percent, eclipsing the percent of people
who identify as Democrats (31 percent) or Republicans (25 percent) and the
highest percent since 1988. During the final quarter of 2013, 46 percent of
Americans identified as independents. Gallup’s Jeffrey Jones notes that:
Americans are increasingly
declaring independence from the political parties. It is not uncommon for the
percentage of independents to rise in a non-election year, as 2013 was. Still,
the general trend in recent years, including the 2012 election year, has been
toward greater percentages of Americans identifying with neither the Republican
Party nor the Democratic Party, although most still admit to leaning toward one
of the parties.
Are Americans really abandoning an affiliation with
political parties? Is that what’s happening?
At Monkey Cage, John Sides
doesn’t think so:
That last
statement is important. Most self-described “independents” do lean toward a
party. This other graph by Gallup is really the more important one:
Why is it
more important? Because independents who lean toward a party — or “independent
leaners”—behave like partisans, on average. They tend to be loyal to their
party’s candidate in elections. They tend to have favorable views of many
political figures in their party. They are not much more likely to identify as
ideologically moderate. To be sure, independent leaners are not as partisan as
the strongest partisans. But they resemble weaker partisans much more than they
do real independents. In actuality, real independents make up just over 10
percent of Americans, and a small fraction of Americans who actually vote.
So, does that mean that parties are
alive and well, and Gallup’s concern about the rise in independents is
hyperbole? But, on the other hand, Gallup attributes the rise of independents
to “. . . Americans' record or near-record negative views of the two
major U.S. parties, of Congress, and their low level of trust in government
generally.” The attribution comes from Gallup polls on these topics. Surely this
can’t be good, can it?
So, according to Sides, Americans may be saying that they’re
independents, but behaviorally, most independents—that is, the partisan leaning
independents—act like partisans; so that’s not really a problem. But I
disagree, it is a problem in that it denotes a negative attitude towards
political parties, members of Congress collectively as well as the institution,
and the government more generally. Furthermore, independents—primarily “partisan
leaners”—only act like partisans in terms of voting for one of the major
parties most of the time. To which I would respond: “what other choice is there unless your vote
is purely symbolic.” So given the choices and a desire to participate in the
election, which candidate or party is the lesser of two evils? That’s the choice
with which the independent voter is faced.
To help understand why more people are choosing to be
independents, Hawkins and Nosek, in a recent article,
provide reasons that people select for choosing to be an independent:
Most of the high percentage choices involve being free from
affiliation or attachment to a political party. These people, whether partisan
leaners or pure independents, don’t want to be attached to a political party.
Just because they vote for one of the major parties most of the time, is it
really appropriate to label them as partisan, or even to attribute partisan
characteristics to them? There is also the question of how consistently
partisan leaners are in supporting a party’s candidates. Hajnal and Lee provide
the following critique of previous studies of independents:
Third, these
findings tend to ignore the possibility that the reason Independent leaners
appear to vote consistently as partisans is that they lean toward the party
that they just voted for in the current election. Keith and his colleagues own
data show that from just one presidential contest to the next, a
surprisingly large percentage of leaners—30 percent—switched their votes and
vote for the other party. Moreover, of these vote switchers a third altered
their partisan leanings to match their vote change. Using a range of panel
data, our analysis will show that much of the perceived loyalty of leaners to
one party is illusory. . . None of these criticisms refutes the fact that most
Independent leaners in most elections will probably vote for the party they
lean toward, but they do raise important questions about just what Independence
means across different groups and different contexts. They also suggest that it may be too early to categorize all
Independent leaners as partisans and thus too problematic to simply lump
leaners with other partisans when analyzing party identification. (emphasis
added)
To me, there is no doubt that people who answer the first
question about partisanship by declaring themselves independents are, in fact,
independents. Just because they are prodded with a follow-up question about
leaning toward one party of the other, and with that prodding probably recall the
party of their last vote choice, does not make that person a partisan. There is
no doubt in my mind that these leaners differ from pure independents in
important ways—more involved in politics, better informed, and more active
politically—but it doesn’t change the fact that they lack a party
identification and that strongly influences how they engage the political
system.
So, what to make of the rise of independents? Political
scientists need to pay more attention to independents—especially the so-called
partisan leaners—and how they engage in politics and approach the political
system. They are, no doubt, a heterogeneous group, but they can, by the issues which
mobilize them and by the candidates to whom they are attracted, have an
enormous effect of American and Texas politics and government and the
institutional arrangements that exist. Let’s study them more rather than simply
lumping them in with partisans. Hajnal and Lee’s book—Why Americans Don’t Join the Party: Race, Immigration, and the Failure
(of Political Parties) to Engage the Electorate—provides an excellent
start.
No comments:
Post a Comment