The two party systems have run its course and therefore it should not be abolished. This is because, over the time the two party systems has been expressive of the sectional, regional characteristics of the American polity to a very high degree. The system reflects class and pluralistic interests because of the way in which the electoral system enables strongly marked regional groupings to gain representation (Vile, 2007). The two party systems allow the individualistic elements in American politics to have full expression, particularly through the system of primary elections. According to Vile (2007), the two party systems “allow the interest groups to have structures which act as the vehicle par excellence for the articulation of group demands including those with a marked sectional or class bias”.
The two party systems have been fundamental in organizing the electoral process and simplifying the choices presented to a busy citizenry in America (Lowi & Romance, 1998). With the two party systems it is much easier for a voter to choose a Republican or a Democrat than to seek information about candidates with unknown characteristics (Lowi & Romance, 1998). Scholars indicate that the two party systems have been inscribed into the America’s electoral system at its origin by the mandate for single member district, plurality rule voting. Disch (2002) says that competition between the two parties is both inevitable and beneficial to United States democracy.
Moreover, the two party systems have run its course because the range of ideological choice usually offered by the American two party systems is wider than has generally been recognized. Reichley (2000) says that the two great ideological traditions represented by our major parties while sharing many fundamental values. They are also significant because they support national unity during the times of crisis hence the absence of monarchists and Marxists are real choices in most elections and seems acceptable price for the advantages of the two party systems (Reichley, 2000).
In addition, Magstadt (2010) indicated that where the two parties are system is entrenched, elections typically produce a clear majority in both state and national legislatures. The two party systems also produce the appearance of a clear majority in most presidential elections. Lowi & Romance (1998) says that the two party systems have over the time promoted popular participation because they seek those voters who are supportive or may be persuaded. Lowi & Romance (1998) continues to say that the two party systems bring new voters and immigrants to the polls, socializing them to the electoral process. In the contest for power they draw attention to the elections and work to get out the vote on Election Day.
The two party system competitions produce major parties that are grand coalitions. As a result, Disch (2002) says that the two party systems conciliate conflict and temper ideological extremes. They are trusted to speak for the nation as a whole or to represent the substantial majority. The two party system makes it easier for the president to govern and easier for the voter to choose and therefore they not be abolished. In this context the two party systems brings moderation, simplicity and stability to the governance of the country as a whole (Disch, 2002). The importance of the two party systems is that unlike a trade embargo, which is explicitly stated and thus can be realized as an act of power, the two party systems gives no edicts and imposes no injunctions (Disch, 2002). In addition, the two party systems are very important to democratic accountability, consensus building and political stability in the country.
In conclusion, it is important to note that the two party systems act as vehicles for changes in policy originating in other places, but they are not often incubators of policy alternatives. Lowi & Romance (1998) noted that “the key feature in the functioning of the two party systems has been the existence of competition and not so much what the competition is about” (p. 8). Through the two party systems political leaders have developed a fundamental stake in the integrity of the state boundary because it was the largest unit for electoral office. This force has had a dominant bang on the substance of much significant national legislation throughout the last century, starting from social insurance to environmental fortification.