What is the place for third parties in American politics?

Third, or minor parties have historically held a small percentage of the vote, and according to the major polls, this election will be no different.

Despite their overall ineffectiveness in the national election, third parties can play a significant role in the politics of the United States.

Votes for third-party candidates have been understood as an expression of dissatisfaction with the major parties or their candidates.

Also, third parties have historically brought different issues to national attention, and many times the major parties embrace these concerns due to the size of the public’s response.

Ralph Nader of the Green Party has brought the issue of globalization and its impact on American society to national attention, according to Dr. Steven Puro, professor of Saint Louis University’s political science department.

The established two-party system in the United States creates barriers that make it nearly impossible for third parties to gain much influence in the political realm.

“The strength of the two-party system is in its stability, though it’s not very democratic,” said Dr. Kenneth Warren, professor of SLU’s political science department.

An issue that has been debated during the recent election is the control of the debates by the two major parties.

Participants in the debates are selected by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which requires candidates to poll almost 15 percent of the vote in nationwide polls.

“The commission is composed of representatives from the Democratic and Republican parties. The set up virtually bars third-party candidates from the debates,” Puro said.

To get federal election matching funds, a candidate must obtain at least five percent of the public vote of the election.

For third-party candidates, this percentage is a high, but attainable goal.

Green party candidate Ralph Nader has become the influential third-party candidate of this election, holding the highest polled percentage of all third parties.

“His votes are making the difference,” said Puro.

The Gore presidential campaign has focused on obtaining Green party votes. Gore’s campaign has initiated a program called “Greens for Gore” for this purpose.

Nader’s campaign has countered with the “Nader Trader” program. In this program, Nader supporters would “trade” their votes with Gore supporters in states firmly secured by Republican George W. Bush. The Gore supporter would vote for Nader, and the Nader supporter would vote for Gore.

The program is intended to keep Bush from winning, while still contributing toward the five percent vote that Nader would need for federal matching funds.

“[The Greens] are going to be the beneficiary of those votes, if people look at their votes strategically, not just voting their conscience instead of their fears, but voting for a significant Green party after the election to be the watchdog and to hold the two parties’ feet to the fire,” said Nader.

Warren said the Nader Trader program is “foolish.”

“He’s not going to get five percent. He’s at about four percent now, and one percent is a lot for a third-party candidate,” Warren said.

Neither the two-party system, nor the national debates are outlined in the Constitution of the United States. Both exist independently of the U. S. government.