Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Partisan polarization and US foreign policy: Is the centre dead or holding?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Politics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Scholars generally agree that most congressional decision-making behaviour has become characterized by partisan polarization. One area to which this consensus does not extend, however, is decision-making on foreign and national security issues. While a majority of scholars believe congressional foreign policy voting is now polarized, others insist that bipartisanship remains the norm. Examining roll-call votes in the House of Representatives from 1970 to 2012, this paper brings three new elements to bear on the dispute. Using a more comprehensive range of indicators, we re-examine the longitudinal data previously presented by scholars; we add an analysis of the roll-call data for the 2004–2013 period, and we utilize a static measure of polarization. Our analysis of the data reveals a cyclical trend of increasing and decreasing polarization and we conclude that it is too simplistic to characterize congressional voting on foreign and national security issues since 1970 as either partisan or bipartisan.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramowitz, A.I. and Saunders, K.L. (2008) Is polarization a myth? The Journal of Politics 70(2): 542–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, M.N. and Kumar, V. (2011) Opportunism in polarization: Presidential success in key Senate votes, 1953–2008. Presidential Studies Quarterly 41(3): 488–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busby, J.W. and Monten, J. (2008) Without heirs? Assessing the decline of establishment internationalism in U.S. foreign policy. Perspectives on Politics 6(3): 451–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busby, J.W. and Monten, J. (2012) Republican elites and foreign policy attitudes. Political Science Quarterly 127(1): 105–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busby, J.W., Monten, J., Tama, J. and Imboden, W. (2013) Congress is already post-partisan: Agreement across the aisle on U.S. foreign policy. Foreign Affairs 28 January, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138791/joshua-w-busby-jonathan-monten-jordan-tama-and-william-inboden/congress-is-already-post-partisan, accessed 19 June 2014.

  • Busby, J.W., Monten J., Tama, J. and Imboden, W. (2012) American foreign policy is already post-partisan: Why politics does stop at the water’s edge. Foreign Affairs 30 May 2012, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137669/joshua-w-busby-jonathan-monten-and-william-inboden/american-foreign-policy-is-already-post-partisan, accessed 19 June 2014.

  • Carmines, E.G. and Stimson, J.A. (1989) Issue evolution: Race and the transformation of American politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaudoin, S., Milner, H.V. and Tingley, D.H. (2010) The center still holds: Liberal internationalism survives. International Security 35(1): 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P., Evans, J. and Bryson, B. (1996) Have Americans’ social attitudes become more polarized? American Journal of Sociology, 102(3): 690–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiorina, M.P., Abrams, S.A. and Pope, J.C. (2006) Culture war? The myth of a polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleisher, R. and Bond, J.R. (2000) Partisanship and the President’s quest for votes on the floor of Congress. In R. Fleisher and J.R. Bond (Eds.), Polarized politics: Congress and the president in a partisan era (pp. 154–185). Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleisher, R. and Bond, J.R. (2004) The shrinking middle in the US Congress. British Journal of Political Science 34(3): 429–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleisher, R., Bond, J.R., Krutz, G.S. and Hanna, S. (2000) The demise of the two presidencies. American Politics Quarterly 28(1): 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup. (2012) Obama ratings historically polarized. 27 January, http://www.gallup.com/poll/152222/obama-ratings-historically-polarized.aspx, accessed 14 December 2012.

  • Hetherington, M.J. (2001) Resurgent mass partisanship: The role of elite polarization. American Political Science Review 95(3): 619–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hetherington, M.J. (2009) Putting polarization in perspective. British Journal of Political Science 39(2): 413–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, G.C. (2000) Party polarization in national politics: The electoral connection. In J.R. Bond and R. Fleisher (Eds.), President in a Partisan Era (pp. 9–30). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, G.C. (2010) A divider, not a uniter: George W. Bush and the American people. New York: Pearson Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, G. and Ragsdale, L. (1988) The elusive executive: Discovering statistical patterns in the presidency. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kupchan, C.A. and Trubowitz, P.L. (2007) Dead center: The demise of liberal internationalism. International Security 32(2): 7–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kupchan, C.A. and Trubowitz, P.L. (2010) The illusion of liberal internationalism’s revival. International Security 35(1): 95–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layman, G.C., Carsy, T.M. and Horowitz, J.M. (2006) Party polarization in American politics: Characteristics, causes and consequences. Annual Review of Political Science 9(1): 83–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levendusky, M. (2009) The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, B.W. and Prins, B.C. (2002) The pendulum of congressional power: Agenda change, partisanship and the demise of the post-World War Two foreign policy consensus. Congress and the Presidency 29(2): 195–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarty, N., Poole, K.T. and Rosenthal, H. (2006). Polarized America: The dance of ideology and unequal riches. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClosky, H., Hoffman, P.J. and O’Hara, R. (1960) Issue conflict and consensus among party leaders and followers. American Political Science Review 54(2): 406–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, J.M. (2010) American Foreign Policy and Process. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, J.M. and Wittkopf, E.R. (1990) Bipartisanship, partisanship, and ideology in congressional-executive foreign policy relations, 1947–1988. Journal of Politics 52(4): 1077–1100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, J.M. and Wittkopf, E.R. (1992) At the water’s edge: The effects of party, ideology and issues on congressional foreign policy voting, 1947-1988. American Politics Quarterly 20(1): 26–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, J.M., Wittkopf, E.R. and Danna, D.M. (1997) Politics and bipartisanship at the water’s edge: A note on Bush and Clinton. Polity 30(1): 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meernik, J. (1993) Presidential support in Congress: Conflict and consensus on foreign and defense policy. Journal of Politics 55(3): 569–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, B. and Siegle, E. (2010) The polarized presidency: Depth and breadth of public partisanship. Presidential Studies Quarterly 40(2): 342–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nincic, M. (2008) External affairs and the electoral connection. In E.R. Wittkopf and J.M. McCormick (Eds.), The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy (5th ed., pp. 125–140). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nincic, M. and Datta, M.N. (2007) Of paradise, power and pachyderms. Political Science Quarterly 122(2): 239–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, K.T. and Rosenthal, H. (1984) The polarization of American politics. Journal of Politics 46: 1061–1079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prins, B.C. and Marshall, B.W. (2001) Congressional support of the president: A comparison of foreign, defense and domestic policy decision making during and after the Cold War. Presidential Studies Quarterly 31(4): 660–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohde, D.W. (1991) Parties and Leaders in the Post-Reform House. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Schraufnagel, S. and Shellman, S.M. (2001) The two presidencies, 1994–1998: A replication and extension. Presidential Studies Quarterly 31(4): 699–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, R. and Bloch-Elkon, Y. (2005) Partisan conflict, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. Paper presented at the Inequality & Social Policy Seminar, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 12 December http://www.hks.harvard.edu/inequality/Seminar/Papers/Shapiro05.pdf, accessed 25 October 2012.

  • Sinclair, B. (2006) Party wars: Polarization and the politics of national policy-making. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stonecash, J.M., Brewer, D. and Mariani, M.D. (2002) Diverging Parties: Social Change, Realignment and Party Polarization. Boulder: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theriault, S.M. (2008) Party Polarization in Congress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Trubowitz, P. and Mellow, N. (2011) Foreign policy, bipartisanship and the paradox of post-September 11 America. International Politics 48(2/3): 164–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voteview.com (2012) An update on political polarization (through 2011). 30 January, http://voteview.com/blog/?p=284, accessed 12 December 2012.

  • Voteview.com (2014) The polarization of the congressional parties. 19 January, http://voteview.com/political_polarization.asp, accessed 17 February 2014.

  • Wildavsky, A. (1966) The two presidencies. Trans-Action 4: 7–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wroe, A., Ashbee, E. andd Gosling, A. (2014) The culture war and issue salience: An analysis of American sentiment on traditional moral issues. Journal of American Studies 48(2): 595–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of History, Politics and Philosophy, Manchester Metropolitan University, Geoffrey Manton Building, Rosamond Street West, Manchester, M15 6LL, UK

    Steven Hurst

  2. School of Politics and IR, Rutherford College, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, CT5 1PE, UK

    Andrew Wroe

Authors
  1. Steven Hurst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew Wroe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven Hurst.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hurst, S., Wroe, A. Partisan polarization and US foreign policy: Is the centre dead or holding?. Int Polit 53, 666–682 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-016-0002-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-016-0002-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation