Bipartisanship: Overview.

Introduction

Bipartisanship occurs in government when two political parties compromise to develop public policy that is mutually agreeable. In this condition, the two parties work together on the language that will appear in such bills and in a combined effort as the legislation works through the legislative process. Bipartisan legislation or policies are typically moderate in nature or address critical issues using methods both parties find acceptable. Often, bipartisanship occurs during periods of crisis, such as during times of war or severe economic conditions.

In the two-party system that exists in the United States, bipartisanship is an unusual occurrence. The rarity with which it occurs is due to the fact that party leaders are loyal to their respective party bases, which are liberal or conservative in ideology. By virtue of this contrast, bipartisanship is usually achieved through the collaborative efforts of moderate, rank-and-file legislators.

Understanding the Discussion

Bipartisan: Condition in which policy is made with the cooperation of both parties in a two-party system.

Conservative: Political ideology characterized by an emphasis on free markets, minimal government intervention, and social order.

Liberal: Political ideology characterized by an emphasis on civil and political liberties, social openness, and government social programs and oversight of business.

Recession: Period of economic decline generally defined as lasting for two or more consecutive quarters.

History

The history of political parties spans back to the formation of democracy in ancient Greece. The city-state of Athens, developing in the fifth century BCE, began to show signs of evolving into a democracy. The Athenian government was, to be sure, considerably looser in organization than more modern governments—populations were much smaller, political infrastructures less formalized, and bureaucratic systems more flexible (deferring much to the input of the people rather than government officials). Political parties began to emerge during this period, but they too were not very formalized or organized. Rather, these parties were issue-based, coming and going as political issues became manifest. Among them were oligarchs, democrats, conservatives, radicals, supporters of war and supporters of peace. Because these parties were not organized, there was no party system within the government of which to speak.

The Roman Empire was by no means a typical democracy. A system that developed to strengthen Rome’s most influential families meant that citizens showed more loyalty to their individual “patrons” than to the issues of empire-wide importance. By the second century BCE, during the later stages of the Roman Republic, however, two major political parties did emerge within this patronage system. The first of these parties was the populares (the “people’s party”). The populares had a significant agenda, seeking Roman citizenship for citizens who lived outside of Rome, canceling debt, and distributing land. At the other end of the party spectrum were the optimates (the “senatorial” party). Optimates were conservative, opposed to any proposal that ran counter to the traditions of the empire and the order it had created. Although the patron-client system took shape to support the society’s most powerful families, people who were not among such families still voted for the parties who were loyal to those families.

When the United States first took shape, there were no political parties in the fledgling system—and in fact parties, or "factions," as they were first called, were considered harmful to the new republican system of government. In 1787, however, there were two prominent factions, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. However, like the parties of the early Athenian city-state, Federalists and Anti-Federalists were founded on issues, not political ideology. The issue at hand was ratification of the Constitution, with Anti-Federalists opposed to acceptance of the document. In 1789, when the Constitution was adopted, the platform of Anti-Federalists was rendered moot.

By 1792, the Federalists had organized into a formal Federalist Party, led by the first treasury secretary, Alexander Hamilton. They came to be opposed by the Democratic-Republican Party, led by Thomas Jefferson. After 1800, the Democratic-Republicans were the dominant party. Still, that party was not without its factions, and the differences among Democratic-Republicans came to a head in the early 1820s, when the party splintered into two distinct groups during the 1824 election—those in support of President John Quincy Adams and those in favor of candidate Andrew Jackson. The faction that supported Jackson, who became president in 1829, eventually became known as the Democratic Party, while the anti-Jacksonians evolved into the Whig Party, which existed until 1856.

The modern Republican Party was founded in 1854 to advocate for economic freedom and to oppose the spread of slavery. During the Civil War, the differences between Republicans and Democrats broadened. Republicans, whose support came exclusively from the North, vied for power with the Democrats, who were rooted in the South. Immediately following the Civil War, the two parties continued to push for followers, with the Republicans courting the Northern states, while Democrats held strong in the South. For several decades, the two main parties of the American political system remained at odds, with little desire to work together.

Bipartisanship during this period was seen largely in matters of foreign policy and national security. For example, during the Cuban rebellion against Spain in the late nineteenth century, both parties in Congress pushed ardently for the president to involve the United States in the war, particularly after the attack on the USS Maine, providing $50 million to support the effort. Congress showed similar resolve when the German submarine fleet began attacking US commercial ships at the onset of American involvement in World War I, pushing President Woodrow Wilson to reverse course on his 1914 declaration of neutrality and enter the war in 1917.

In 1929, the collapse of the US financial system and the onset of the Great Depression altered this trend. Congress showed signs of bipartisanship, unified in a desire to reverse the devastating conditions of that period. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt introduced a series of reforms known as the New Deal, Congress moved quickly to approve his ideas—sometimes without any debate. When it became clear to many in Congress that some of these reforms were showing signs of ineffectiveness, Congress again began to jell, although this time in opposition to Roosevelt’s proposals. This coalition of conservative Democrats and conservative Republicans exerted great control in Congress into the 1960s. Conservatives eventually came to dominate the Republican Party, while liberals became dominant among Democrats.

In the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, bipartisanship on domestic issues would prove to be a rare occurrence. Although the global recession that began in 2008 galvanized both parties in a desire to halt the crisis, for example, the parties could not agree on major reforms that would undo the recession. Bipartisanship among legislators was even more prevalent in foreign policy and national security areas than on domestic issues—such as following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

As its etymology suggests, bipartisanship is a condition rooted in a two-party system, wherein both parties create policy that is commonly agreeable. Bipartisanship is frequently the rhetorical goal of political candidates—President George W. Bush frequently called for it during his State of the Union addresses. His successor, Barack Obama, made similar statements throughout his time as president. However, in both administrations, bipartisanship mostly proved elusive. President Obama, for example, saw some success on his foreign policy agenda, most notably his efforts to foster nuclear reduction agreements with Russia and the effort to stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan, but met with resistance on many domestic issues. There were exceptions to this trend, such as Congress’s collective effort in early 2010 to reform and modernize the census. When congressional Democrats assumed majority control of the House and Senate in 2007, their leaders promised to include Republicans in their deliberations. However, their efforts shortly thereafter suggested that Republicans would only be welcome in the process if their input was in agreement with the Democratic majority.

Bipartisanship Today

In the 2010 midterm elections, Republicans were able to regain control of the House of Representatives, thereby entrenching Congress in even deeper partisan conflict. Between 2010 and 2012, ideological gridlock plagued legislative debate in both chambers. The 2012 election cycle saw unprecedented partisan mudslinging that culminated in the trouncing of Republican candidates in both the presidential and congressional races. In the 2014 midterm elections, Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress, unifying Congress under Republicans but pitting the legislative branch against the Democratic Obama administration. Emblematic of this period was the avowal of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell that the Republicans' main goal was to ensure Obama would be a "one-term president."

The controversial 2016 election of Donald Trump ensured that partisan rancor would persist in US government, with the added spectacle of intra-party conflict, as Trump's base of populist nationalists battled traditional conservatives in the Republican Party, and liberals bickered with progressives in the Democratic Party. Within two years, however, Trump had cemented control of the Republican Party, and Democrats regained control of the House in the 2018 midterms. Despite increasing partisan polarization, however, signs of bipartisanship remained in certain limited areas, with Congress pushing back against Trump, for example, on his support for Russia. Also, in 2017 a new house caucus was formed, the Problem Solvers Caucus, with forty-eight members equally divided between Democrats and Republicans, with the goal of reaching compromise in areas like health care, infrastructure, and immigration.

However, some argue that partisanship is actually good for the nation: after all, those who accept a party platform believe that the policies for which it advocates are the correct ones. It is further suggested that the issue is not necessarily partisanship, but rather on the lack of civility elected officials demonstrate toward one another based on differences in opinion. Part of the debate focuses on the parties themselves. In a two-party system, each party competes with the other, seeking to generate grassroots-level support from its base. Proponents of bipartisanship stress that parties must keep an open mind and show a willingness to compromise in order to move the country forward. On the other hand, partisanship advocates cite the fact that neither party wishes to see its candidates openly embrace the ideals of the competing party. If such candidates do endorse the policies of the competing party, they risk losing their election or reelection bids.

The issue of bipartisanship and its value (or lack thereof) remains an important one, particularly as the United States and other two-party systems seek to undo damages caused by the recessions of the early twenty-first century and prevent further crises from taking shape.

These essays and any opinions, information, or representations contained therein are the creation of the particular author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of EBSCO Information Services.

Bibliography

Baker, Ross K. Is Bipartisanship Dead? A Report from the Senate. Paradigm, 2015.

Durst, Will. The All-American Sport of Bipartisan Bashing: Common Sense Rantings from a Raging Moderate. Ulysses, 2008.

Flynn, Michael E. “The International and Domestic Sources of Bipartisanship in US Foreign Policy.” Political Research Quarterly, vol. 67, no. 2, 2014, pp. 398–412. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=96157268. Accessed 30 May 2024.

Gottheimer, Josh, and Tom Reed. "Reps: Bipartisanship in Washington Is Actually Happening." CNN, 27 Nov. 2017, www.cnn.com/2017/11/27/opinions/reps-bipartisanship-in-washington-is-happening-opinion-reed-gottheimer/index.html. Accessed 30 May 2024.

Gregg, Judd. "The Laws of Bipartisanship." The Hill, 8 Jan. 2018, thehill.com/opinion/white-house/367846-judd-gregg-the-laws-of-bipartisanship. Accessed 30 May 2024.

"History of Bipartisanship." Bipartisan Policy Center, bipartisanpolicy.org/history-of-bipartisanship/. Accessed 30 May 2024.

Han, Hahrie, and David Brady. “A Delayed Return to Historical Norms: Congressional Party Polarization after the Second World War”. British Journal of Political Science, vol. 37, no. 3, 2007, pp. 505–31. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=25724987&site=ehost-live. Accessed 14 May 2010.

Hilley, John L. The Challenge of Legislation: Bipartisanship in a Partisan World. Brookings, 2008.

Maxey, Chester C. Bipartisanship in the United States. Caxton, 1965.

Metzler, Rebekah. “Snowe Makes Pitch for Bipartisanship in Final Senate Speech.” US News & World Report, 14 Dec. 2012, www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/12/14/snowe-makes-pitch-for-bipartisanship-in-final-senate-speech. Accessed 30 May 2024.

Schmitt, Mark. “Divide and Concur.” Washington Monthly, Nov. 2007, washingtonmonthly.com/2007/11/01/divide-and-concur/. Accessed 30 May 2024.