Staying in Bounds

The Obama administration was remarkably successful in mitigating intraparty conflict while moving forward with major rulemakings. When challenged in court, many of these rules were upheld, and have proven difficult to reverse, because they were supported by rigorous analysis. Over the course of its eight years, the administration pursued rulemakings on a large number of subjects. Political considerations and the demands of party constituencies no doubt influenced the direction of policy, but so too did evidence, analysis, and expertise, in keeping with the practices of prior administrations. President Obama and senior officials showed considerable respect for the system of governance that they inherited, with its established methods for incorporating analysis and evidence into regulatory decision making. Their personal policy preferences and perspectives were tempered by these long-standing practices, which ultimately led to better decision making.

A Threatening Synthesis

Despite objections from certain constituencies, President Obama placed cost-benefit analysis at the very center of his administration’s governing philosophy. He also pursued an aggressive agenda of new regulatory protections for public health, consumers, and the environment. His time in office demonstrated in powerful terms that cost-benefit analysis need not be associated with an anti-regulatory agenda. The synthesis of cost-benefit analysis and a progressive regulatory agenda helped mitigate intraparty conflict among Democrats but also opened up fissures among prior supporters of cost-benefit analysis, who assumed that its use would generally lead to less regulation.

When do party supporters abandon the party leader? The intraparty conflict of the Alternative for Germany

Drawing on a unique panel data set of supporters of the Alternative for Germany (AfD), the study shows that programmatic differences between supporters of Frauke Petry and Bernd Lucke cannot sufficiently explain the crucial intraparty leadership contest of July 2015. Programmatic differences were minor in 2013 but became pronounced over time. Politically active supporters were disaffected with the old moderate leadership of Bernd Lucke, who pursued an organizational reform to reduce the influence of the rank-and-file. Social media also played a key role for the leadership turnover, as alternative news sources on social media were only politicized by the intraparty opposition. It is conceivable that the structure of social media networks influences opinion formation processes and internal affairs of right-wing populist parties in general, as their supporters tend to have low trust in mainstream news.

Driven from the House of Their Fathers

This chapter examines President Harry S. Truman's commitment of the National Democratic Party to the cause of racial equality and the responses to them by Deep South authoritarian enclaves. It first provides an overview of the central state, national party, and southern enclaves during the period 1932–1946 before discussing the causes and consequences of the revolt by the States' Rights Party (SRP), also known as the Dixiecrats. It then considers southern enclaves' growing unease with the national party through the 1930s and 1940s, along with the experiences of South Carolina, Mississippi, and Georgia. It shows that the Truman shock and responses to it varied within the Deep South depending on different configurations of intraparty conflict and party–state institutions.

Suffrage Restriction under Attack, 1944–47

This chapter examines the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Smith v. Allwright that challenged the restriction on suffrage: it invalidated the all-white Democratic primary and struck at the heart of southern politics—one-party rule based on white supremacy. It first considers the Supreme Court's challenge to the white primary in relation to rulers' dilemmas, opportunities, and options before discussing narratives of enclave experiences with the white primary challenge in South Carolina, Mississippi, and Georgia. It then compares outer South and Deep South responses to Smith, showing that Georgia and South Carolina featured more impressive black mobilizations than Mississippi. However, the consequences of these episodes were not driven solely by such forces as economic development or black protest infrastructure. Rather, given different configurations of intraparty conflict, party–state institutions, and levels of black insurgency, Smith and the responses it invoked had different consequences for each enclave.

The Emergence of Parties in the Canadian House of Commons (1867–1908)

This study analyses legislative voting in the first ten Canadian Parliaments (1867–1908). The results demonstrate that party unity in the House of Commons dramatically increased over time. From the comparative literature on legislative organization, we identify three factors to explain this trend: partisan sorting, electoral incentives and negative agenda control. Our empirical analysis shows that intraparty conflict is primarily explained by the opposition between Anglo-Celtic/Protestants and French/Catholic members of Parliament. Once lawmakers sort into parties according to their religious affiliations, we observe a sharp increase in voting unity within the Liberal and Conservative caucuses. Ultimately, our results highlight the importance of territorial and socio-cultural conflicts, as well as agenda control, in explaining the emergence of parties as cohesive voting groups in the House of Commons.Résumé. Cette étude analyse le vote législatif dans les dix premiers parlements canadiens (1867–1908). Les résultats démontrent que l'unité partisane à la Chambre des communes a augmenté dramatiquement durant cette période. En nous basant sur les principales théories liées à l'organisation des législatures, nous identifions trois facteurs pour expliquer cette tendance : la classification partisane; les pressions électorales; et le contrôle de l'agenda législatif. Nos analyses empiriques confirment que les conflits intra-partisans au Parlement s'expliquent principalement par l'opposition entre les députés Anglos-Celtiques/Protestants et Francos/Catholiques. À partir du moment où les députés commencent à rejoindre les principaux partis selon leur groupe religieux, nous observons un accroissement important de l'unité législative au sein des caucus libéral et conservateur. Les résultats de cette recherche soulignent l'importance des conflits territoriaux et socioculturels, mais aussi de l'agenda législatif, pour expliquer l'émergence des partis politiques comme groupes cohésifs à la Chambre des communes.

Delinking National and Local Party Systems: New Parties in Japanese Local Elections

Broader structural developments in Japan in the past two decades—decline of clientelist practices, partisan de-alignment, and decentralization—have dissolved traditionally close ties between national and local party systems, creating an environment conducive to the emergence of local parties. In this context, popular chief executives in four regions launched new parties. I trace how these parties emerged and how national parties reacted to them, from the appearance of the new-party leaders to the 2011 local elections. In comparing the four cases, two factors appear to shape their trajectories: the urbanness of their electoral environments and the responses of the two national parties at the local and the national level. In dealing with the new challengers, both the Liberal Democratic Party and Democratic Party of Japan experienced considerable intraparty conflict and defections, indicating a process of delinking between national and local party systems.

The Beginning of the End for Authoritarian Rule in America:Smith v. Allwrightand the Abolition of the White Primary in the Deep South, 1944–1948

In 1944, the U.S. Supreme Court inSmith v. Allwrightshocked the southern body politic by invalidating the white-only Democratic primary. Interpreting the eleven states of the old Confederacy as enclaves of authoritarian rule, this article views Smith as beginning a long process that culminated in the early 1970s with the consolidation of democratic rule in America. Smith v. Allwright transformed the politics of all eleven enclaves, challenging rulers in their roles both as party officials and as lawmakers. Filtered through various configurations of intraparty conflict, political institutions, and black insurgency, however, the ruling shaped the politics of each enclave differently. This article compares the ruling's effects on three similarly-situated enclaves—Georgia, Mississippi, and South Carolina. It suggests how Smith v. Allwright positioned these enclaves differently as they faced several other democratization challenges over the next three decades. The article closes with a discussion of how southern enclaves ultimately took divergent paths out of Dixie, why these different modes of democratization matter today, and how the reframing of southern political history developed here engages with recent research on America's distinctive democratic development.

The Attrition Game: Initial Resources, Initial Contests and the Exit of Candidates During the US Presidential Primary Season

In contests for the presidential nominations from the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States, the duration of candidacies determines both the winning candidate (i.e., the one who outlasts his or her opponents) and the amount of intraparty conflict before the nomination is bestowed. This article analyses how strategic considerations lead some candidates to exit the race more quickly than others. Factors which could shape such strategic considerations include initial candidate assets and characteristics (national poll standings, fund-raising totals and occupational background), initial contest outcomes (Iowa and New Hampshire) and structural variables (proportional representation delegate distribution rules, party, front-loaded calendar). Results from a duration model indicate that poll standings, money (in a curvilinear pattern), New Hampshire and Iowa results, occupational backgrounds and the front-loading of the primary calendar shaped the length of candidacies for presidential contestants from 1980 to 2004. Candidates lacking in initial assets or early victories leave the nomination race in a process most resembling a game of attrition.