Political Parties in American Politics
PS 506
Instructor: Troy Gibson
Contact Information:
- Email:
- Office Phone: 228-867-2607
- Office Location: Lloyd Hall 304
- Office Hours:TT 9-11am
Course website: ocean.otr.usm.edu/~w487033
Course Description
Political Parties play a central role in American Politics. The dynamics of political parties as organizations, parties in government, and parties in the electorate have been the subject of much debate and research in political science over the last several decades. However, in each of these areas, much of the research indicates that we still imprecisely understand the reasons for the existence of political parties, the impact of political parties in government, the role of political parties in electoral behavior, the identity of political parties as political organizations, and areas where political parties have become stronger and weaker. This course will inspect the scholarly literature in this regard with an emphasis on contemporary party politics.
Course Requirements
- Final exam: 35%
- Research Paper: 45%
- Executive Summaries: 20%
- The final exam is cumulative and covers the reading assignments over the course of the semester. The format for the exam is essay with some choice over the questions. Five questions will be given a week in advance, three of which will appear on the exam. Two of these must be answered.
- The research paper must be a research design which covers some topic in the political parties literature. The paper should present an original research question and design and should state precisely what is to be tested (hypothesis), how it is to be tested (variables, data, and methods), and how the results would contribute to the literature. In short, the paper will be complete in every way except the analysis will not have been conducted. More later. DUE DATE: MAY 4, 2006
- Students are expected to have examined the readings before each class meeting and to have prepared for a thorough discussion of the readings with their classmates. While all students are required to analyze each week’s readings, each student will be assigned responsibility for presenting one particular reading. The student will prepare an executive summary* for their assigned piece of literature to be turned in to the instructor and handed out to classmates for discussion. Student presentations of these may be included in the undergraduate lecture.
*Executive Summary
1. What is the research question?
2. What is the hypothesis? What is the expected relationship?
3. What previous research is the study based on?
4. What methods are used?
5. What are the findings and conclusions?
6. Are the conclusions justified? What limitations to the work are there?
Academic Dishonesty
Your work in this course should be your own. Plagiarism (i.e., using someone else’s words or ideas without appropriately referencing them) will not be tolerated. Indiscretions will be handled according to the University’s guidelines (consult your student handbook).
Required Texts
Gary Cox and Mathew McCubbins. 1993. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press:
Marjorie Hershey and Paul Beck. 2003. Party Politics in America (10th edition). New York: Longman Press.
Course Outline and Readings
All readings may be found and printed from JSTOR unless otherwise indicated.
Week of
Jan 12 – Introduction to the course
Political Parties: Basics and Origins
Marjorie Hershey and Paul Beck. 2003. Party Politics in America (10th edition). New York: Longman Press.
John H. Aldrich and Ruth W. Grant. 1993. “The Antifederalists, the First Congress, and the First Parties.” The Journal of Politics 55: 295-326.
Electoral Laws and Patterns of Party Competition
Anthony Downs. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row, Chapter 8 (“The Statics and Dynamics of Party Ideologies”), pp. 114-41. (ON E-RESERVE)
Duverger. Maurice. 1963. Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the ModernState. Selected Chapters. (ON RESERVE)
Parties as Organizations
Party Organizations in the Election Campaign
James L. Gibson, Cornelius P. Cotter, John F. Bibby, and Robert J. Huckshorn. 1985. “Whither the Local Parties?” American Journal of Political Science 29:139-60.
“Do Parties Make a Difference? The Role of Party Organizations in Congressional Elections.” Paul S. HerrnsonThe Journal of Politics, Vol. 48, No. 3. (Aug., 1986), pp. 589-615.
Political Parties and Electoral Mobilization: Political Structure, Social Structure, and the Party Canvass. Robert Huckfeldt; John Sprague. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 86, No. 1. (Mar., 1992), pp. 70-86.
Party Contacting and Political Participation, 1952-90. Peter W. Wielhouwer; Brad Lockerbie
American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 38, No. 1. (Feb., 1994), pp. 211-229.
Parties in the Electorate
Partisanship: Decline?
Martin P. Wattenberg. 1981. “The Decline of Political Partisanship in the United States: Negativity or Neutrality?” The American Political Science Review 75: 941-950.
The Decline of Partisanship in the United States: A Reexamination of the Neutrality Hypothesis. Stephen C. Craig. Political Behavior, Vol. 7, No. 1. (1985), pp. 57-78.
Information Processing and Partisan Neutrality: A Reexamination of the Party Decline Thesis
Jay A. DeSart. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 57, No. 3. (Aug., 1995), pp. 776-795.
Partisanship and Voting Behavior, 1952-1996
Larry M. Bartels. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 44, No. 1. (Jan., 2000), pp. 35-50.
Partisan Identification; The unmoved mover?
Peasants or Bankers? The American Electorate and the U.S. Economy
Michael B. MacKuen; Robert S. Erikson; James A. Stimson
The American Political Science Review, Vol. 86, No. 3. (Sep., 1992), pp. 597-611.
Macropartisanship: A Replication and Critique
Donald Green; Bradley Palmquist; Eric Schickler
The American Political Science Review, Vol. 92, No. 4. (Dec., 1998), pp. 883-899.
What Moves Macropartisanship? A Response to Green, Palmquist, and Schickler
Robert S. Erikson; Michael B. Mackuen; James A. Stimson
The American Political Science Review, Vol. 92, No. 4. (Dec., 1998), pp. 901-912.
Measuring Party Identification and Intransitivity
The Partisan Affinities of Independent 'Leaners'
Bruce E. Keith; David B. Magleby; Candice J. Nelson; Elizabeth Orr; Mark C. Westlye; Raymond E. Wolfinger
British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 16, No. 2. (Apr., 1986), pp. 155-185.
Multiple Party Identifiers and the Measurement of Party Identification
Richard G. Niemi; Stephen Wright; Lynda W. Powell
The Journal of Politics, Vol. 49, No. 4. (Nov., 1987), pp. 1093-1103.
Realignment and Partisan Identification (South; Religion)
Party Identification, Realignment, and Party Voting: Back to the Basics
Warren E. Miller
The American Political Science Review, Vol. 85, No. 2. (Jun., 1991), pp. 557-568.
Realignment: New Party Coalitions and the Nationalization of the South
John R. Petrocik
The Journal of Politics, Vol. 49, No. 2. (May, 1987), pp. 347-375.
Religion and Political Behavior in the United States: The Impact of Beliefs,Affiliations, and Commitment From 1980 to 1994
Geoffrey C. Layman
Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 61, No. 2. (Summer, 1997), pp. 288-316.
Ticket Splitting: Intentional or Circumstantial?
An Era of Divided Government
Morris P. Fiorina
Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 107, No. 3. (Autumn, 1992), pp. 387-410.
A New Approach to the Study of Ticket Splitting
Barry C. Burden; David C. Kimball
The American Political Science Review, Vol. 92, No. 3. (Sep., 1998), pp. 533-544.
Split-Ticket Voters, Divided Government, and Fiorina's Policy-Balancing Model
Richard Born
Legislative Studies Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 1. (Feb., 1994), pp. 95-115.
Response to Born
Morris P. Fiorina
Legislative Studies Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 1. (Feb., 1994), pp. 117-125.
Split-Ticket Voters, Divided Government, and Fiorina's Policy-Balancing Model]: Rejoinder
Richard Born
Legislative Studies Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 1. (Feb., 1994), pp. 126-129.
Political Parties in Government
Parties in the Legislative Process
Lecture on Distributional and Informational Theories of Legislative Organization (Shepsle verses Krehbiel)
Cox and McCubbins. 1993. Legislative Leviathan. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (SELECTIONS TBA).
Divided Government: Consequences
Unified Government, Divided Government, and Party Responsiveness
John J. Coleman. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 93, No. 4. (Dec., 1999), pp. 821-835.
Binder, Sarah. 1999. “The Dynamics of Legislative Gridlock.” American Political Science Review 93: 519-534.
Final Exam – It will be take home. You will have 5 days to complete it.