{"id":314,"date":"2016-10-17T16:01:36","date_gmt":"2016-10-17T21:01:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/?p=314"},"modified":"2021-03-10T18:52:09","modified_gmt":"2021-03-11T00:52:09","slug":"evolution-of-the-two-party-system","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/?p=314","title":{"rendered":"Evolution of the Two-Party System"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The chart below shows the history of American political parties in&nbsp;Congress, from the 1st&nbsp;(1789-91) through&nbsp;the&nbsp;114th (2015-17).&nbsp;It is&nbsp;only&nbsp;part of the&nbsp;story of parties in the United States, as many have&nbsp;never won any seats at the federal level. These include the modern Libertarian and Green parties as well as the early abolitionist&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Liberty_Party_(United_States,_1840)\">Liberty Party<\/a>, to name just a few. Nevertheless, I think it&#8217;s illuminating to see the number that were represented in&nbsp;certain Congresses of&nbsp;the past, especially from the 1840s until about 1900, seemingly a &#8220;golden age&#8221; for minor parties in this country.<\/p>\n<p>Each row corresponds to a two-year Congress, showing the percentage of seats occupied by each party (or faction). Vacant seats are not shown.&nbsp;Position your mouse over the data&nbsp;for more information. To get a closer look at the rightmost 20%, click the &#8220;magnify&#8221; button on the right.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p><a href=\"#popmake-579\"><img src=\"\/parties\/us-congress\/us-parties.png\"><\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#popmake-579\">View chart<\/a><\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>Some further notes about the data:<\/p>\n<p>1. I did not try to position each party on a&nbsp;left-right ideological axis, which is a very simplified spatial model of ideology. It seemed to me it would be both anachronistic to apply such a model, and endlessly debatable which party should go where. It would also require a lot of work just to come up with reasonable guesses for some of the parties.&nbsp;I did nod to convention in putting the Democratic Party and its predecessors (loosely speaking) on the left side. Mostly, I&nbsp;arranged the parties for visual&nbsp;coherency, with smaller parties to the right to facilitate zooming in on them together.<\/p>\n<p>2. The source for the 1st through 100th Congresses is Kenneth C. Martis&#8217;s book <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Historical-Political-Parties-Congress-1789-1989\/dp\/0029201705\/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1474497387&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=kenneth+martis+parties\"><em>The Historical Atlas of Political Parties in the United States Congress, 1789-1989<\/em><\/a>&nbsp;(1989). For the 101st Congresses and later, the data is based on Wikipedia. For each chamber, I use the party breakdown at the earliest point at which all seats were filled (or as close to&nbsp;it as was reached during that Congress). For example, in the <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/107th_United_States_Congress\">107th Congress<\/a>, the House had vacant seats until December 2001, so I use the party breakdown at that point (211 Democrats, 222 Republicans, and 2 independents) instead of at the beginning, when there were only 221 Republicans seated.<\/p>\n<p>3. For the most part, I follow Martis in choosing which party labels to show. Here are the exceptions:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Many politicians have been elected under labels like &#8220;Independent Democrat&#8221;, &#8220;Independent Republican&#8221;, &#8220;Independent Whig&#8221;, and so on. Rather than group these with the party named, or dedicate new colors to them, I put them under the &#8220;independent\/other&#8221; category.<\/li>\n<li>I don&#8217;t show&nbsp;the &#8220;Union&#8221; ticket which elected two Representatives from Rhode Island to the 37th Congress (1861-63). These two are categorized&nbsp;&#8220;independent\/other&#8221;. As Martis indicates on pages 403-405 of his book, this party label was basically a fusion of the Constitutional Union and Democratic parties.<\/li>\n<li>I use &#8220;Democratic-Republican&#8221; for clarity, whereas Martis uses &#8220;Republican&#8221; for the&nbsp;second-earliest American&nbsp;party. (&#8220;Pro-Administration&#8221; and &#8220;Anti-Administration&#8221; were just factions, not real parties.)<\/li>\n<li>The 18th Congress (1823-25) was a transitional one. Party identifiers had receded and the primary factions were organized around four&nbsp;political leaders: John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, William H. Crawford, and Henry Clay (who was allied with Adams). Martis presents a &#8220;matrixed&#8221; labeling system in which there were Adams-Clay Republicans and Adams-Clay Federalists, and likewise for Jackson and Crawford supporters. I ignore the Federalist vs. (Democratic-)Republican distinction,&nbsp;which was in its last throes, and combine Adams-Clay with Adams to show&nbsp;continuity with the subsequent two Congresses. Although &#8220;Crawford Men&#8221; is not a well-accepted label, it seems to me stylistically preferable to&nbsp;&#8220;Crawfordians&#8221; or&nbsp;simply&nbsp;&#8220;Crawford&#8221;. (As&nbsp;I believe to be true of&nbsp;&#8220;Adams Men&#8221;, it&#8217;s less&nbsp;an&nbsp;official name&nbsp;than it is&nbsp;a&nbsp;descriptor.)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>4. The periodization scheme on the left side of the chart derives from work by Walter Dean Burnham and others. For a summary of the scheme see Wikipedia on the <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Political_parties_in_the_United_States#History_and_early_political_parties\">history of political parties in the US<\/a>. It is debatable how closely this model fits the history of American parties, and if so, whether we are in a sixth party system or still in the fifth.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The chart below shows the history of American political parties in&nbsp;Congress, from the 1st&nbsp;(1789-91) through&nbsp;the&nbsp;114th (2015-17).&nbsp;It is&nbsp;only&nbsp;part of the&nbsp;story of parties in the United States, as many have&nbsp;never won any seats at the federal level. These include the modern Libertarian&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":330,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"spay_email":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[49,48,33],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/featured-img01-1.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p7wJJ7-54","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/314"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=314"}],"version-history":[{"count":40,"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/314\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":711,"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/314\/revisions\/711"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/330"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=314"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=314"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.daneckam.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=314"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}