An increase in partisanship leads to negative consequences: a sharp divergence of opinions, fragmentation of parties, and the likelihood of weak party leadership. Partisanship arises from an ideological division between parties characterized by a high level of party discipline. Although there is an opinion about the usefulness of two polar views on public life, most researchers agree on the negative side of partisanship. In the United States, partisan animosity has increased markedly, leading to significant disagreements between Republicans and Democrats, both in society and in government, on several political issues (Mayer, 2019). The current partisanship goes beyond political differences, negatively affecting the ability of legislatures to make quick decisions. Zmigrod et al. suggest that rising inter-party hostility, ideological polarization, and political dogmatism have raised questions about the relationship between psychological rigidity and political commitment (2020). Thus, mental rigidity may be associated with a conservative political orientation or reflect party extremes across the entire political spectrum.
The last example of the negative consequences of increasing party membership is the authorities’ actions during the pandemic. Representatives of the Democratic Party were much stronger in favor of mandatory vaccination (Weisel, 2021). For every 10% increase in Republicans in the state, mobility restrictions are reduced by 8% (Hsiehchen et al., 2020). Contradictions on this issue have caused a decrease in the authorities’ ability to respond to a dynamic situation quickly.
One of the ways to reduce contradictions to ensure the competent functioning of the legislative apparatus can be Christian statesmanship. Christian statesmanship calls for moral action, requiring prudent judgment to be taken into account when acting within constitutional frameworks, even in the face of opposition, persecution, and personal risk, to achieve what is good for society in the long run (Overeem & Bakker, 2019). However, high morality may not always be the key to resolving contradictions.
Party membership directly affects the legislative work of Congress. The constitutional separation of powers in the modern era has faded into the background due to party conflict (Marshall & Haney, 2021). The erosion of regular order legislative processes exacerbates partisan conflict in Congress (Curry & Lee, 2020). However, politicians with polar views are sometimes ready to unite to make unambiguous decisions. Regardless of a political party, general messages focus on the enduring legacy of the LWCF, its economic impact, and its symbolic weight (Dunning, 2022). However, joint interaction on an important public issue is seen as something surprising in the context of polar opinions.
The main sources for this work are the Research Handbook of Political Parties and Dynamic Partisanship, which present opposing points of view – one insists on a decrease in partisanship, the other on growth. Based on cutting-edge global data, the Research Handbook of Political Parties argues that party membership is declining but not disappearing in modern societies (Holmberg & Oscarsson, 2020). The authors focus on the role and importance of partisanship for democratic governance, how to measure and protect addiction data, explanation of the emergence and development of partisanship. In Dynamic Partisanship, the authors examine the change in party patterns in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia over the past fifty years to identify possible causes of party switching and party identification (Kollman & Jackson, 2021). Both books are the most relevant sources, as they represent opposing views and a wide range of research issues.
Thus, there are two opposing points of view on the question of partisanship: some researchers argue that the contradictions between parties are growing, and others are seeing a decrease. However, researchers insist on the negative consequences of the political break in the adoption of important social movements. As time goes on, research on this issue becomes more specific; as the world faces difficulties such as the pandemic, the partisan divide becomes more pronounced. An issue that researchers do not focus on is how to reduce partisanship. Therefore, two questions can be presented for future research: how to reduce partisanship and its negative effects and how to unite parties’ polar opinions to adopt progressive laws.
References
Curry, J. M., & Lee, F. E. (2020). What is regular order worth? Partisan lawmaking and congressional processes.The Journal of Politics, 82(2), 627-641. Web.
Dunning, K. H. (2022). Unlikely conservation policy making in a polarized Congress: A multiple streams analysis of “America’s most successful conservation program”. Politics & Policy, 50(1), 93-118.
Holmberg, S.,& Oscarsson, H. (Eds.). (2020). Research Handbook on Political Partisanship. (2020). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hsiehchen, D., Espinoza, M., & Slovic, P. (2020). Political partisanship and mobility restriction during the COVID-19 pandemic.Public Health, 187(1), 111-114. Web.
Kollman, K., & Jackson, J. E. (2021). Dynamic Partisanship: How and Why Voter Loyalties Change. University of Chicago Press.
Marshall, B. W., & Haney, P. J. (2021). The impact of party conflict on executive ascendancy and congressional abdication in US foreign policy. International Politics, 58(4), 1-26.
Mayer, A. (2019). Partisanship, politics, and the energy transition in the United States: A critical review and conceptual framework.Energy Research & Social Science, 53(1), 85-88. Web.
Overeem, P., & Bakker, F. E. (2019). Statesmanship beyond the modern state. Perspectives on Political Science, 48(1), 46-55.
Weisel, O. (2021). Vaccination as a social contract: The case of COVID-19 and US political partisanship. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(13), 1-2.
Zmigrod, L., Rentfrow, P. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2020). The partisan mind: Is extreme political partisanship related to cognitive inflexibility? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(3), 407–418.