Why The Collapse Of Patron And Broker

Throughout the rigmarole of political history of the United States of America, the growth of the “fourth branch of government”, the Bureaucracy, has been a prominent, controversial topic. Peter Woll, in his article “Constitutional Democracy and Bureaucratic Power”, and James Q. Wilson, in his article “The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, discuss this developing administrative branch. The Constitution has no written mention of an “administrative branch”, and today’s Bureaucracy is often tedious, corrupt, and even undemocratic. But such a branch’s development and expansion is necessary in order to keep par with an evolving and changing society.

George Washington himself wanted to avoid a party system in America. Unfortunately, even when saying this he was part of the beginning of one of the first parties in United States politics. There have been many different parties surface since the beginning of the American political system. They all have different thoughts, policies, and motivations. Each party has come and gone, some have made significant contributions and others have not. The first split, and beginning of the party system, came with the differentiation between the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. These two parties were extremely different in thought, design, and status of people involved. This paper, will deal with

The First Party System refers to a period between 1792 and the 1820’s when the American political system was divided into two parties. Both parties, the Federalist Party, and the Democratic-Republican Party, wanted control of the Congress, the presidency, and the states. The parties were the result of the differences between Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson on how to solve various national problems such as the economic crisis that was threatening the nation at the time (Dickerson, 2004). However, the roots of these political parties and concerns emerged during the constitution ratification process. On one hand, the Federalists supported the constitution while, on the other hand, the Antifederalists (Democratic-Republican) did not support it due to key issues that had not been considered in the new constitution (rAndon HersHey & Beck, 2015).

At the end of the 19th century the United States were in a time called “The Gilded Age”, coined by Mark Twain; a time of mass immigration, Western settlement, and industrialization. Out of these times emerged a political party named the Populist party, later changed to the People’s party. This party stood for the working man, like farmers and factory laborers. Though this party meant well, it did not last long. Surviving until 1896, the Populist party eventually merged with the Democratic party. With this being said, the Populist party was a short lived dream and failure.

Despite the fact the founding fathers advised contrary to the establishment of political factions as the Constitution withstood the ratification process, a rift amongst men in President George Washington’s cabinet instituted the move toward the conception of political party. During the time period between 1791 and 1833, a two-party system had begun that demonstrated the philosophy of the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans. Although these two political groups were unyielding in their original ideas and beliefs, both had to change a few of their initial standpoints on numerous topics as they dealt with the truth of the government.

The political system of America is very different from other developed and developing democracies. Most notable is the increased power bestowed on the upper house of the parliament, the extensive power held by the Supreme Court and the dominance demonstrated by only two major parties. In the United States, third parties have the least influence on the world’s most developed democracy’s political structure. In this democracy, people are under the US Constitution of the governmental system as well as state government and other units of local government. Local government entails counties, districts and municipalities. The evolution of the American political party system has come a long way; with Hamilton and Jefferson being regarded as the founder fathers of the modern party system. These were heads of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist groups in the 18th century of American politics. Ever since, the country has maintained a party system that has two main parties that are relatively stable. These are Democrats and Republicans and have remained in contest for election every time since the 1860 presidential elections. Initially, the Republican Party was the dominant party but the Democrats later gained dominance. However, the two parties became closely competitive and neither of them has been notably dominant since the 1970s (O'Connor & Sabato, n.d).

Political bosses, heads of the political machine, focused on the vast influx of immigrants coming to the United States in the 19th century and targeted not only them but also poor, working-class citizens. Political bosses ensured support was by offering goods and services, including business contracts and licences within the city’s growing areas, otherwise known as bribery. Because the growing areas of cities mostly consisted of immigrants and the poor, the trade of a vote in exchange to a good or a service was appealing to constituents and even more so to political bosses. Machines offered jobs for immigrants, generating the possibility of a citizen’s personal upward mobility. However, these services were not always equal, and machines were willing to act with hostility when their wishes were not met. While machines aided in the assimilation of immigrants into the

These documents both stated the need for political reform with the progressive ideals of Roosevelt and the lowering percentages in each election. However, the progressives failed to unite the party’s ideas for reform in the politics of the early 20th century.

As the political parties became increasingly polarized, the country became more fractionalized. A few of the main factors that caused conflict between the two parties before the election of 1800 were state’s rights

The dichotomy of major political parties in the United States initially developed from the division of Federalists and Democratic-Republicans during the Federalist Era. These alignments were distinguishable almost immediately after and even during the drafting of the Constitution. Though the names and stances of the two parties varied over time, they both rested on their foundations of their ideas of a government’s role and where power belonged. The most defining trait of each party was their support—or lack thereof—of a strong central government. Federalists, as the name implies, advocated for power to be firmly rooted in the federal government, whereas Democratic-Republicans urgently recommended the autonomy of each state.

The United States began as a weak, newborn nation that grew into a large, self-supporting country with a governing body unique to this time period. As the government grew and the nation prospered, the rise of leaders and political figures came about and with this, conflicting principles and ideology spawned, thus creating the first of the political parties; the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. Although the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans ideology and stances on the power of the federal government, domestic economic policies and the group of constituents they represented differed vastly, members of both parties often compromised their own beliefs for the nation’s best interest as a whole.

FDR’s desire to “purge” and reform the party system was based on a belief that intra-party battles where the cause for the dysfunctionality in American politics and its inefficiency of mobilization to needed change.

Today, political parties are an authoritative and essential component of the United States political system. However, it is important to examine how the political parties began and evolved over hundreds of years, since they were first established. In 1794, the major political parties were the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. The major difference between these two was that the Federalists favored a strong central government, while the Democratic-Republicans preferred a central government with limited power and more state control. At the time of the election, it seemed that the prominent, distinguished Federalist Party clearly had the upper hand, but in the end the

Wood and Waterman’s 1991 article on the Bureaucracy attempted to change the view on Congressional and Executive control over the many different bureaucratic agencies. There have been many different views on who controls who and to what degree that control reaches, as well as different reasoning’s for the same view. Their question was what were the “causal mechanisms” that determined to what extent congress and the presidency controlled bureaucracies, and how effective were these mechanisms? After looking at years of data and research on the subject and seeing the differing opinions on both congressional control and presidential control they began to see that first and foremost, most studies were on one or the other. Very few looked at both Congress and the Executive and how they influenced the bureaucratic agencies. Another thing that they noticed was that there are a lot of limitations when it comes to analyzing the President, because by 1991, there had only been 41 Presidents. This makes finding data on the influence of the Presidency as a whole difficult, especially when all you have is data that could have more to do with individual Presidents than it does the influence of the position in general. It also, especially when you are looking for quantitative data, is restrictive to whatever time frame you want to look at for the data. Wood and Waterman noticed that almost all of the studies that were performed, the data they used was based on terms, which could be 2-4 years

The Civil Service Act of 1883 created the merit system by requiring that appointees to public office be qualified for the job, thereby ending the spoils system.