Article link
After watching the Democrats flip 40 seats to take control of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Republicans gain two seats to widen a narrow margin in the Senate, Minnesota remains the only state that joins the national government with a split legislature. Among the other 49 states, Republicans control 31 legislatures and Democrats control 18 legislatures. A few liberal initiatives have emerged in states where Democrats gained full control of both legislative chambers such as a ban on firearms in the New Hampshire House, a bill to offer undocumented students financial aid in New York, and bills to expand affordable health care in Colorado. Meanwhile, conservative legislatures are moving to ban abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy in Ohio, new right-to-work laws in Missouri, and more prison construction in Alabama.
Discussion Questions
1. Is the polarization in state level politics the result of state legislators following the lead of national lawmakers or simply following the will of voters in the state?
2. How might Minnesota's divided legislature be similar to or different from the divided legislature at the national level?
3. With states taking clear liberal or conservative positions, how might this impact next year's presidential election?
I think that polarization exists as a result of both the national government and the voters. The blatant polarization in the national government has definitely been an influence on voters of lower governments as it appears that party loyalty is very prominent between Americans. Whether the national government influences the polarization of the voters or vice versa remains pretty unclear. However, voters most likely voted for more extremes of their parties because of the divide in the parties demonstrated in the national government. I think that these ideals will definitely transfer to next year's presidential election. Those who support Trump will either be strong supporters for his re-election or a different conservative candidate. On the other side, the Democratic candidate will most likely be more extreme to the liberal side. It seems that the middle line grows farther away and the candidates who will have a chance for ether party has to be more on the radical side.
ReplyDeletePolarization in state level politics is the result of the polarizing national situation. As the parties drift farther apart on the federal level, their state counterparts also become more radical, but as shown here, the majority of people in most states support a specific party, so the polarization is largely because of different party voting patterns in different states. Minnesota's divided legislature will probably be different from the national legislature because they are fighting for a more homogeneous group of constituents. Even Democrats in Minnesota are far less likely to be interested in some topics, like illegal immigration because they are far less applicable to their core supporters, and both parties have an interest in some Minnesota industries like manufacturing. Because they represent more similar constituents I believe it's likely that bipartisanship on this level will be more effective. Next year's political election might be significantly different, because a large reason for Trump's election came from narrow margins in states like Florida and Pennsylvania, and by having more concrete party lines drawn in states this year will shape the overall result of next election, especially if Trump participates.
ReplyDeleteI think Minnesota's state level polarization is very similar to that of the national level. As a nation, we remain split at the national level with a democratic majority in the House and a conservative majority in the Senate. At the state level, we remain split across the states with many states fully liberal or conservative- with the exception of a couple swing states. In terms Minnesota has been stated as a swing state before, therefore I believe the state fits right into the patterns of the national level.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is dangerous if state legislatures follow the pattern of United States politics in polarization. Since many Americans do not follow a specific political party the legislatures that are supposed to represent the people should share that. I think the political system in the United States is fundamentally flawed in the way that polarization has created a system where our elected officials no longer truly represent the desires of the people. This news is state legislatures is just a representation of the bigger problem of political polarization in the United States.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Stefan that our political system is flawed in that it does not accurately represent the beliefs of our people. We continuously move from the center in national politics, which is then affecting state politics as well. More radical politicians are coming into higher positions, even though the public is generally more towards the center. Both national and state politics affect each other and the mindsets of the politicians. Minnesota's situation is very representative of the national politics. In terms of the next election, I think the candidates will continue getting more and more radical to combat each other, which will just increase the awful polarization and ignore the middle. Polarization is become a bigger problem and we are not doing anything to combat it on both the national and state level. If we start on the state level, maybe that may reflect onto the national level, but it will take a long time to dig ourselves out of the hole that we dug ourselves into.
ReplyDelete