Jonathan Bernstein

Jonathan Bernstein is a political scientist who writes about American politics, especially the presidency, Congress, parties and elections.

Recent Articles

Three's a Crowd

AP Photo/Ron Heflin
Flickr/Gage Skidmore H ere we go again: the false hope, or in some cases fear, of a massive crack-up of the two major parties, with third- and fourth- and maybe more-party candidates running viable races for the presidency. It’s not going to happen. This time, it’s Ron Fournier who reports on insiders who envision the parties breaking apart . In the world of Fournier and his sources, “social change and a disillusioned electorate threaten the entire two-party system.” The result could be Rand Paul and a regular Republican both landing on the ballot in November 2016—and if Hillary Clinton doesn’t run, perhaps a Democratic splintering as well. As Brendan Nyhan documents , we've heard all of this before (and Fournier is a specialist ). I won't say it's impossible that we'll get a "serious" third-party candidate in one of the next few presidential cycles, but it's not likely, and to the larger point, the parties are most certainly not cracking up. To the contrary: The Democratic and...

The Moderate's GOP Survival Guide

AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta
AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta Former Delaware Republican Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell, who made waves in her 2010 campaign when she said she "dabbled into witchcraft." K arl Rove and big Republican donors are trying to rescue the GOP from more Christine "I am not a witch" O'Donnell-type embarrassments by funding a new group dedicated to stopping terrible candidates from winning Republican nominations . The impulse is a healthy one, but it’s going to take a lot more than some attack ads to stop extremist candidates. After all, most of the ugly Republican candidates from the last two cycles were relatively underfunded in their primaries; a little more money thrown into the pot against them is unlikely to make a difference, and it might, as Salon columnist Steve Kornacki has argued , even backfire if it winds up drawing Tea Party activists into a fight they might otherwise have ignored. At best, it will help on the margins. The larger question is what Republicans who want to...

Obama's Trump Card: Breaking the Filibuster

AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster
AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster President Barack Obama announces that he will re-nominate Richard Cordray, left, to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a role that he has held for the last year under a recess appointment, January 24, 2013. D id a hack conservative judge just lay the groundwork for the end of the filibuster? It’s very possible. At least, if the Supreme Court goes along—and if Democrats, as they should, fight back. The road begins not with last week’s D.C. Circuit Court decision, which if upheld would knock out virtually all recess appointments, but with the Senate Republican plan that Brookings scholar Tom Mann has called “ a modern form of nullification .” That was a scheme to prevent some government agencies—the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the new Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB), and others—from functioning by blockading any presidential appointments, using the filibuster to require 60 votes and then keeping the Republican Senate conference...

Don't Go Chasing Reagan Myths

AP Photo/Peter Southwick
AP Photo/Peter Southwick President Ronald Reagan gives the thumbs up gesture during his acceptance speech at the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas. T he verdict from pundits is in: Barack Obama’s Inaugural speech signaled his ambition to be the “liberal Reagan,” and the Big Question about his second term is whether he’ll achieve that goal. People mean different things by what Ronald Reagan achieved as president, and therefore what it would mean to be a “liberal Reagan.” The Prospect ’s Paul Waldman says that to be like Reagan, Obama would need to “define an era that continues even after he leaves office.” At The New York Times , conservative columnist Ross Douthat talks about “a long, Reagan-like shadow over subsequent policy debates.” T he Washington Examiner ’s Philip Klein considers whether Obama will match Reagan as “a president who not only wins elections (as Bill Clinton and George W. Bush did), but one who ideologically shifts the nation in his direction.” I think,...

In the Three Branches, Sharing is Caring

AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster
AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster O ne of the most misleading things that high school civics classes teach is that the United States government is based on strict separation of powers: Congress legislates, the executive branch carries out those laws, and courts judge. But as Obama’s announcement on gun regulation yesterday—in which the president laid out 23 executive actions he could take on gun safety without congressional approval—shows, that’s just not the system the framers of the Constitution gave us. In fact, as Richard Neustadt, the late founder of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, explained long ago , we have a system of separated institutions sharing powers. Yes, Congress legislates. But not only does the president have a direct role in the legislative process thanks to the veto; he signs executive orders and issues regulations through agencies that look an awful lot like making law. You won’t hear it from House Republicans and other conservatives, who are talking impeachment...