May 08, 2022 | Written by Ella Witalec '24
When asked to rate on a scale of 1-100 how “favorable and warm” their views of their own political party are, Americans’ responses have stayed fairly constant over the last 50 years or so. However, when asked to do the same for the opposing party, ratings have steadily declined from just under 50 in the mid-1970s to around 20 in 2016. This is negative partisanship: a trend of increased political vitriol that is harming our society.
As negative partisanship has increased, compromise has become even more difficult. In November, the passage of President Biden’s $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill was hailed as an outstanding bipartisan victory. While the passage of the bill is certainly a monumental achievement, calling it “bipartisan” is a bit of a stretch. It was supported by only 13 out of 209 Republican Representatives and 19 out of 50 Republican Senators. Infrastructure has historically been a less politically charged topic than issues such as those addressed in President Biden’s social spending bill, the Build Back Better Act. In today’s political climate, however, even infrastructure has become controversial as Republicans have continued the strategy first used under Obama of stonewalling essentially all legislation proposed by Democrats. As the trend of polarization continues, we will continue to see extremist uprisings such as the events of January 6, 2021, when supporters of Donald Trump refused to accept the results of a free and fair election. The Pew Research Center reported that 90% of Biden supporters and 89% of Trump supporters believed that a victory in the 2020 election by the opposing candidate would cause “lasting harm” to our country. This feeling, which is inextricably linked to growing political animosity, was a driving force behind the January 6th riot.
One important trend contributing to negative partisanship is the nationalization of political parties. National political parties used to be little more than a collection of distinct local and state parties that each focused on separate issues important to local communities. However, as local media, and consequently the attention placed on local-level issues, has declined, and the operations of national political parties have ramped up, political parties have gained an increasingly homogeneous national image. This trend has forced candidates for office and voters alike to change their views to fit the dominant mold of their party, creating two conflicting sets of opinions between the two main political parties, and consequently increasing partisanship.
Another important contributing trend is the rise of gerrymandering. Gerrymandering, when one political party draws district maps in ways that give it an inherent advantage, leads to less competitive elections. In fact, if Texas’s current map survives litigation, only 1 out of its 38 districts will be considered highly competitive, according to FiveThirtyEight. The problem with the decline in competitiveness is that it means that candidates do not have to appeal to a wide range of voters in order to get elected. When the large majority of voters in a district are either Democrats or Republicans, candidates in the district are incentivized to fit the mold of that party, and, once elected, are likely to continue to reject the views of the opposing party, limiting legislative compromise.
Lastly, the “echo chamber” phenomenon has decreased Americans’ exposure to differing viewpoints, making them less open to such ideas. We are far past the time when everyone watched the same evening news show. Nowadays, every news program, whether it's Fox News or CNN, seems to have a partisan lean, and Americans are more likely to watch shows that match their political affiliation. In fact, a study from the Pew Research Center found that 93% of those who name Fox News as their main source of political and election news are Republicans, and 79% of those who name CNN as their main source of political and election news are Democrats. Furthermore, social media algorithms are designed to show us content that we agree with, thereby continuing the cycle. This constant exposure to only ideas we agree with robs us of the opportunity to hear opposing viewpoints and inform ourselves about all sides of an issue, contributing to the problem of negative partisanship by ensconcing us in our beliefs and robbing us of chances for civil discourse, a necessary predecessor of compromise.
Negative partisanship, driven by the nationalization of American politics, the rise of gerrymandering, and the increased presence of echo chambers, is a troubling trend that is contributing to extremist events and the decline in legislative compromise. However, we can all learn to work together and move away from political animosity. Bipartisanship begins when we break out of the traps of confirmation bias and expose ourselves to opposing viewpoints. Bipartisanship begins with us.
Comentarios