Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper begins with the premise that political party organizations should be treated as open, fluid networks of actors who compete with each other for control over their collective agenda. It then examines nomination contests for evidence of factional conflict among interest groups in the Democratic party. The paper defines factions to be durable coalitions of different actors that try to influence the party's internal organization, and have some rational basis for doing so. Examining the 2002 congressional primary candidates that were supported by Democratic party-oriented Political Action Committees, it finds that there is a consensus on one primary candidate in about 70% of open primary races. This finding undermines the conventional wisdom that Democrats are frequently deeply divided, especially in primaries. In the races where these PACs do not support the same primary candidate, exploratory analysis hints at some discernible groupings, though not necessarily factions per se. The paper concludes that more work needs to be done defining the boundaries of the Expanded Party, and defining and measuring faction.