Pildes: Democracy’s Power-Sharing Fuels Political Divisions

America’s democracy has given more weight to individual voices in selecting presidential candidates in the last century – diminishing the role of political parties – and that may not be a good thing.

That’s the conclusion of Tulane Law’s McGlinchey lecturer, Prof. Richard Pildes of New York University Law School, whose scholarship suggests well-meaning reforms over the past 40 years meant to empower ordinary voters may be tilting politics toward ever-greater polarization and dysfunction.

Missing, Pildes argues, is thoughtful “peer review,” through which established party leaders can vet candidates and moderate populist impulses toward ideological extremes. And, Pildes argued, campaign finance reform that celebrates the small donor isn’t helping, either.

 “I wholeheartedly believe in democratic self-governance. But my view is that since the 1970s, as our country gave more power to citizens through the primary process, as we had more participatory democracy, more distribution of power – the two major parties gave up their role in bringing forth the best candidates,” said Pildes, a constitutional law expert with decades following political processes and institutions. “This type of power sharing has perversely contributed to the divisions of today.”

The McGlinchey Lecture is named for Dermot S. McGlinchey (L ’57), a lion of the New Orleans bar and civic leader who passed away in 1993. He was a devoted Tulane supporter and helped found the McGlinchey Stafford firm, which has permanently endowed the lecture series in his honor.

 McGlinchey was president of the Tulane Alumni Association, served on the law school Dean’s Council, chaired the Dean’s Council Development Committee and the law school building fund and was vice chairman of the Maritime Law Center’s endowment program. He also helped revitalize the Louisiana Bar Foundation and was instrumental in forming its Pro Bono Project.