Predicted Paper 3 USA · Q2 · 12-mark comparative theory

US and UK parties: differences and theory

"Examine how US and UK political parties differ in their organisation and discipline. (12 marks)"

1. What a 12-mark Q2 wants

This is the 12-mark Section A comparative-theory question, marked AO1 and AO2 only - no AO3. It asks you to explain a difference, and to do so you must integrate one comparative theory.

Spec hook. US political parties; comparative theories. The question pairs US parties with the UK parties you study in Paper 1.

One theory, used well, is enough. Do not bolt three theories on at the end. Choose the theory that best explains the difference and weave it through every paragraph.

2. How US and UK parties differ

Set the two party systems against each other on organisation and discipline.

Organisation: US parties are decentralised and federal, built around individual candidates; UK parties are centralised and national, built around the party leadership.
Discipline: US parties have weak discipline - legislators frequently vote against their party; UK parties have strong whip discipline, and rebellions are the exception.
Candidate selection: US candidates are chosen by voters in primaries; UK candidates are selected within the party.
Funding: US candidates raise their own campaign money; UK funding is more party-centred.

3. The three comparative theories

You may use any one. Each explains a difference through a different lens.

Theory	Explains differences through...
Structural	Institutions and rules - the constitution, federalism, the separation of powers, the electoral system.
Rational	The incentives facing individuals - politicians act to maximise re-election and career advancement.
Cultural	Shared values and beliefs - the political culture of each country.

Best fit here. The structural theory explains the difference cleanly: the separation of powers and primaries decentralise US parties, while fusion of powers in a parliamentary system forces UK party discipline. The rational theory works just as well and is often easier to develop.

4. Applying the theory

Take party discipline as the worked example.

Structural explanation. In the UK, fusion of powers means the government must hold a Commons majority to survive, so the whip system is strong and rebellion is rare. In the US, the separation of powers means a legislator's vote does not threaten the survival of the executive, so there is little structural pressure to follow the party line. Primaries, a structural feature, let voters rather than the party choose candidates, which further loosens party control.

Rational explanation. A UK MP depends on the party for selection and for any ministerial career, so it is rational to obey the whip. A US legislator owes election to a local electorate and to primary voters, not to the national party, so it is rational to defy the party when local interests demand it.

Integration, not bolt-on. Name the theory in your opening, and explain every difference through it. A theory mentioned only in the last line scores poorly.

5. Writing the answer

Choose three or four differences. For each, write one developed paragraph.

State the difference in a clear opening sentence.
AO1: give accurate knowledge of both the US and the UK party systems.
AO2: explain the difference through your chosen theory.

Banned move. Do not evaluate which party system is better - that is AO3 and earns nothing here. Keep every paragraph comparative, explanatory and theory-led.