As you know, there are two major political parties in the United States, the Republican and the Democratic, between which the main political battles are played out. Representatives of these parties occupy seats in the Senate and Congress of the country. They also nominate candidates for president. Accordingly, after the election, the head of state belongs to one of these parties and forms his cabinet along party lines-all officials in key government positions have the same party affiliation. To maintain formal political diversity, one or two minor agencies are headed by representatives of the opposing party.
On many issues of state development the official positions of the parties are close. All advocate for strong, financially stable state, for improvement of citizens’ well-being and strengthening of business. The differences appear in methods and some approaches. And, as usual, the most heated disputes often arise over very close positions that differ only in nuances.
The basic policy of the Republican Party is to shrink the government, reduce the cost of maintaining the state apparatus, increase the personal responsibility of all officials. The party is focused on big business, believing that with more and more wealthy businesses in the country, it increases its wealth, creates more jobs, and makes life better for everyone. In the financial sphere, the party advocates lower taxes on businesses and individuals, which should increase their collectability and, consequently, the state treasury.
The Democrats, on the other hand, say that lower taxes would reduce government programs to support the poor, rapidly reduce the share of small businesses in the country, and increase the share of large corporations, which would impoverish the middle class – the largest segment of the population. And this process is actually already underway. The Democrats’ goal is to rely on regular working people and small businesses to pursue a policy that would reduce the percentage of poor people in the country, and to carry out various social programs (public health insurance, support for low-income families, free schooling, etc.).
A great many U.S. citizens believe that they owe it to their country to serve it voluntarily. This service takes the form of picking up litter, helping the poor and the sick, participating in social projects, and supporting a favorite political party or candidate without pay.
Volunteers are most often called upon in election campaigns for two things: door-to-door canvassing and fundraising. I don’t know about big cities, but in Vermont, which is all about the image of one-story America, voters won’t vote for a candidate they know only from newspaper articles or news videos. What counts here is a personal touch, a face-to-face interaction. All candidates strive to meet with as many voters as possible during the campaign, to shake hands with them, and to convey their views to them. Undoubtedly, it is impossible for a candidate to reach hundreds of thousands of homes. This is where volunteers come in, not only distributing printed materials (leaflets, flyers, invitations, letters), but also talking about their candidate’s political platform. Moreover, since all this is done not for money, but for ideological reasons, such campaigning is extremely effective. Volunteers have a heart for their cause, and it pays off.
Despite the importance of party institutions in the United States, attitudes vary from state to state. There are states that, for the most part, are loyal to one particular position. For example, Texas is considered a Republican state, while New York is considered a Democratic state. Vermont, as already mentioned, is a special state. What matters here is not the party affiliation, but the personality of the candidate, his political views, and his electoral promises. For example, despite the general Democratic orientation of the population (the majority of members of the State Senate and the State Congress are Democrats), the governor of Vermont is a Republican. People are close to his ideas of governing.