Involvement of huge money in election campaigns and gerrymandering by political parties have emerged as a matter of concern for a number of US citizens. The debate intensifies at the time of elections in the United States. People also express their opinion on two party system in the United States. Some argue in favour of the two party system while others consider it against democratic setup of the country. This paper proposes a discussion on use of money in election campaigns, gerrymandering and two party system in the united states.
United States’ election 2012 cost huge money. Both presidential candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney spend significant amount during election campaign. Both candidates spend around USD 1.12 billion, which does not include hidden expenses incurred by the parties and their outside groups. In general, U.S. election 2012 cost around USD 2.6 billion(2012 Presidential Race). Supreme Court of United States in year 2010 allowed unlimited funding in election campaigns by companies and unions, however, the funders can remain silent or unnamed. This ruling encouraged corporate houses to fund in election campaign. The law may not allow parties to directly co-ordinate with Super Pac but in reality Super Pac communicate with the parties, taking advantage of loopholes present in the system (Younge).
Gerrymandering also plays a major role in the election on United States. Candidates at district level and at large level manipulate things in a manner to give advantage to one party. In 2012, election money facilitated gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is used in order to garner votes by political parties. Gerrymandering is a planned strategy for manipulating votes and winning seats. (Fang).
United States has a two party system and currently there are two parties that play the decisive role in the politics of United States. This system has a number of strengths, as well as, weaknesses, associated with it. Due to the two party system, American voters get the opportunity to elect people from their familiar candidates. Due to lack of a large number of candidates, leaders spend more time among voters and also explain their agendas in a better manner. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney represented their views in a detailed way in 2012 election campaigns.
Two party system ensures stability and delivery. There is no pressure or fear among elected representatives to act against the interests of voters. They take decision on the basis of their understanding and in the national interests. Parties are always concerned about their performance and they try to deliver what they promised to voters. There is always an anxiety among politicians that if they do not deliver their promises, people will vote them out in next elections (Bibby and Maisel 9)
Voters have limited options. They do not get any option to choose people apart from two parties. Such a forced choice is not healthy for the democracy. In a two party system, voters are also taken for granted by politicians. Sometimes, politicians ignore voters because they understand their limitations. In multiparty system, voters, as well as, the nation get diversified and rich perspectives that benefit the nation.
Works Cited
"2012 Presidential Race." 2013. opensecrets. Electronic. 22 June 2015.
Bibby, John F. and Maisel, Louis S. Two Parties-or More?: The American Party System. USA: Westview Press, 2003. Print.
Fang, Lee. "Gerrymandering Rigged the 2014 Elections for Republican Advantage." 05 November 2014. republicreport. Electronics. 22 June 2015.
Younge, Gary. "US elections: no matter who you vote for, money always wins ." 29 January 2012. The Guardian. Electronic. 22 June 2015.
