India has seven primary political parties. Argentina has four, with many smaller branches within them. The United States has two, and is one of only five countries that has what is referred to as a two-party system. This two-party system rarely allows for any other kind of political voice to be heard beyond the right-leaning Republicans and left-leaning Democrats. To put it simply: The U.S. political system is heavily outdated.
Political structure was never a heavy concern for the founders of this country. The Constitution makes no mention of political parties. Many of the nation’s founders doubted and distrusted political groups, including Alexander Hamilton, who stated parties are “the most fatal disease.” Hamilton, ironically, ran what we consider the first political party today: the pro-big national government Federalists (with their opposition party being the pro-localized government Anti-Federalists). This was the first instance of political parties in the U.S. and formed the two-party system we still utilize today.
While some might argue the U.S. two-party system can allow for a breakthrough from a third-party candidate (such as the Green Party or an independent candidate), there is no foundation to do so. Not only do third parties and independent candidates need to request to make it onto ballots to receive votes, they can even be denied.
Additionally, the Electoral College vote does not aid in breakthroughs from these candidates. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority, 270 electoral votes, is required to elect the president. Each state has the same number of electors as it does members in Congress. For example, New Mexico has five electors because it has two senators and three representatives. In contrast, California has two senators and 52 representatives for a total of 54 votes. This signifies that some states have more weight than others. This is a massive challenge for the people trying to overcome the two-party system.
According to Politico, none of the top 20 states for third-party voting in the past two presidential elections is broadly considered a swing state, and only three of the top 20 were states where the winning candidate’s margin in 2020 was within single digits. Swing states are difficult for Republicans and Democrats to receive a significant amount of votes from, let alone independent and third-party candidates who structurally will have a harder time.
This makes the two-party system not only a challenge for candidates outside the box of the two-party system, but also makes it feel outdated. How has our political structure not been updated since the 1700s? More important, what will push lawmakers to consider straying from the Electoral College to allow for more opportunities?
More than half of Americans — 62% according to The Pew Research Center in 2023 — are in favor of moving away from the Electoral College and instead using the popular vote (a system in which the candidate who receives the most votes is the winner, no matter the number of electors). The pushback was specifically noticed in 2016 when Hilary Clinton, who finished second in the election, received 2.9 million more votes than former President Donald Trump but still came up short due to the Electoral College.
Additionally, many believe it is unfair to “discount” some votes just because they belong to voters living in states with fewer representatives.
The implications of the two-party system are grave, both for major-party and third-party candidates. It is time to update a system that dates to the 1700s.
Emily J. Aguirre is a sophomore at Santa Fe Prep. Contact her at emjazz19@gmail.com.
The Santa Fe New Mexican observes its 175th anniversary with a series highlighting some of the major stories and figures that have appeared in the paper's pages through its history. The collection also includes archival photo galleries.
