According to a new Gallup poll released on Oct. 11, 60 percent of Americans believe that “the Democratic and Republican parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed.” Fifty-two percent of those in support of a third major party identified as Republicans and 49 percent identified as Democrats.

In our current electoral system, the emergence of a third major party is highly unlikely. However, the influence of a third party would help end the partisan gridlock in Washington and provide voters with better Congressional representation.

The Founding Fathers were keenly aware of the perils of two dominant parties.

George Washington, the only Independent to be elected president, called a two-party system “frightful despotism.”

John Adams said, “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties.”

Ironically, partisanship was at a high point during the election of 1800 between Thomas Jefferson and incumbent John Adams. Jefferson’s supporters portrayed Adams as a monarchist and Adams’ supporters portrayed Jefferson as an anarchist — an eerie foreshadowing of the current debate between tea party libertarians and “big-government” liberals.

The recent government shutdown and the irresolution about the debt ceiling based on Republican hatred for Obamacare can be directly linked to such a disagreement.

The debate about the role and size of the federal government has been at the core of most arguments between political factions throughout the country’s history. Our plurality voting system, in which the winner takes all, is to blame for the current two-party rule.

In the current system, where the candidate with the most votes in an election wins outright, voters are sometimes forced to choose between the lesser of two evils.

For example, suppose a registered Republican voted for Rick Perry in the 2012 Republican primary election. But because Mitt Romney won the majority of the Republican primary votes and became the party’s nominee, the voter was left to choose between two candidates, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.

However, the voter did not support either of these candidates. He or she could still have voted for Rick Perry, but without the monetary backing and support of the Republican Party, Perry’s chances were slim to none.

If a third major party existed, the voter would have had another option. But in order for a third major party to emerge, the United States would almost certainly have to adopt a new electoral format such as a multiple-winner system.

Multiple-winner systems are used in most western-style democracies, but the United States and United Kingdom are the notable exceptions.

If the United States adopted a voting system of multiple winners for Congressional elections, where the proportion of representation is based on the proportion of votes received, a third major party — and other parties — could emerge.

The influence of other parties would translate to presidential elections, providing voters with more options. Candidates would also be less restricted by conformity to their party’s platform.

Despite the positives a third major party would bring, it is unlikely we will see the emergence of any other major political parties without a reformation of our electoral system. This is certainly not something we should expect to see anytime soon.

It is interesting to note though, that a good majority of Americans are so fed up with the current system that they would support a major change in government.

Michael Hacker is a senior political science major. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at mahacker@syr.edu and followed on Twitter at @mikeincuse.

Published on October 17, 2013 at 2:10 am