Skip to main content

State and Local Party Structures: Strengthened and Still Relevant

  • Chapter
  • 50 Accesses

Abstract

Implicit in our discussion of the national party organizations was the significance of the state and local levels of the party. Since the activity and the powers of a party are only partially exercised at the national level, with heavy emphasis on local representation and support, it is necessary to study party organization below the national level to discover what an American party really is. Recent reforms, as we have shown, have made the national organizations much more effective. But it is clear they have to work with the state and local organizations and indeed are dependent on them. If one asks who has the power and who has the responsibility, in vote mobilization terms, the answer for the American system is that the state and local units of the parties share both power and responsibility with the national.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. David S. Broder, 1978, “The Case for Responsible Party Government,” in Jeff Fishel, ed., Parties and Elections in an Anti-Party Age (Bloomington: Indiana University Press), 26.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Edward C. Banneld, Political Influence (New York: Free Press, 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Malcolm E. Jewell and David M. Olson, American State Parties and Elections (Homewood, IL: Dorsey, 1978), 56.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Elmer E. Schattschneider, Party Government (New York: Rinehart, 1942), 147.

    Google Scholar 

  5. James L. Gibson, Cornelius Cotter, John Bibby, and Robert Huckshorn, “Assessing Party Organizational Strength,” American Journal of Political Science 27 (1983): 193–222; Malcolm E. Jewell and David Olson, American State Political Parties and Elections (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1982, 1988); John F. Bibby, “Party Organization at the State Level,” in S. L. Maisel, ed., The Parties Respond (Boulder: Westview Press, 1990), 21–40; Robert Biersach, “Hard Facts and Soft Money: State Party Finance in the 1992 Federal Elections,” in Daniel M. Shea and John C. Green, eds., The State of the Parties (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 1994), 107–32; Shea, ibid., 219–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Samuel J. Eldersveld, Political Parties: A Behavioral Analysis (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964), 74–75.

    Google Scholar 

  7. A 1964 study by the Center for Political Studies was done in 208 counties. See Paul Beck, “Environment and Party,” American Political Science Review 68 (1974): 1229–44; the 1979–80 study was done by a group of scholars who mailed surveys to over 7,300 county-level party leaders with a 52.7 percent response rate. See James L. Gibson et al., “Assessing Party Organizational Strength,” 139–60; two 1992 studies were done, one of 659 county leaders in eight states (John Frendreis, Daniel M. Shea, and John C. Green, 1994, 133–45) and the other by Paul Beck, et al., of 40 county chairs “Party Effort at the Grass Roots” (unpublished manuscript, 1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mike Royko, Boss: Richard J. Daley of Chicago (New York: New American Library, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  9. M. Margaret Conway and Frank B. Feigert, “Motivation, Incentive Systems, and the Political Party Organization,” American Political Science Review 62 (1968): 151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Paul A. Beck et al., “Party Effort at the Grass Roots: Local Presidential Campaigning in 1992,” paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 14–16, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  11. See, for example, William Crotty, ed., Political Parties in Local Areas (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  12. James Bryce, The American Commonwealth (New York: Macmillan, 1916), 118.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Royko, Boss, 60–61. Much of this summary is based on Royko’s accounts and that of Milton Rakove, Don’t Make No Waves, Don’t Back No Losers (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1975), chap. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Raymond Wolfinger, “Why Political Machines Have Not Withered Away,” Journal of Politics 34 (1972): 365–98. The dimensions and types of machines used here were stimulated by this article.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Adapted from William Wright, ed., A Comparative Study of Party Organization (Columbus, Ohio: Merrill, 1971), 53.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Leon D. Epstein, Political Parties in Western Democracies (New York: Praeger, 1967), 111–18.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 2000 Bedford/St. Martin’s

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Eldersveld, S.J., Walton, H. (2000). State and Local Party Structures: Strengthened and Still Relevant. In: Political Parties in American Society. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-11290-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-11290-3_7

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-349-62492-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-11290-3

  • eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics