“(T)he grand objective of the haves is obstruction … Organization is not always necessary to obstruct; it is essential, however, for the promotion of a sustained program in behalf of the have-nots.” – 20^th century political scientist V.O. Key

In political science there is an idea developed by scholar Daniel Elazar called state political culture. A state’s political culture is the dominant beliefs, values and norms about how state citizens relate to government and political activity beyond just looking at if the state is red or blue.

Alabama, along with most Southern states, falls into Elazar’s traditionalistic political culture. In this culture most people have little interest in what government does and even what it is supposed to do, so few people get involved.

The people who do make the effort to get involved tend to come from wealthy and high social status groups, and they tend to protect their own interests and pocketbooks.

So while the state had a sea change from the Democratic to Republican Party between the 1980s and the 2010s, there was no major change in how our state government operates. We still have an impractical state constitution and tax structure, though we have made small improvements to both along the way.

Government power continues to be concentrated at the state level with little power to make decisions provided to city governments and less still provided to county governments. This was very much intended based on how the state constitution was written.

A traditionalistic culture also creates a political structure where political parties have little power to affect state policy. This may sound odd since anyone who is running for a statewide office has to run as a Republican, but the party itself has little influence over how any of the Republican statewide officials or state legislators vote.

Whenever government does not work as citizens expect it to, it is difficult to hold the party in power accountable, on the whole, because the party often does not take a clear and detailed position, and average citizens are not involved in government enough to organize a movement to pressure elected officials to change.

Without clear direction from the party and little threat of citizens organizing against an elected official in the next campaign, elected officials tend to listen to what special interest groups want because they have the expertise, experience and resources to make that official’s chances of reelection easier or more difficult.

A classic example is the current lottery issue. Though I personally oppose a lottery, polling shows a majority of Alabamians favor it.

Why did the lottery not pass the legislature? The short-term answer is while there were a few legislators who, like me, oppose it on moral grounds, the main reason is interest groups who want casino gambling legalized insist on having gambling included on any constitutional amendment presented to voters concerning the lottery.

These gambling interests did not approve of the legal outlines in this year’s legislation for how casinos and gambling would operate and barely were able to round up enough votes to block a lottery or gambling bill from passing the state senate.

The long-term answer, and maybe the better answer, for why lottery legislation did not pass is living in a traditionalistic state means having government and political structures in place that makes change difficult even when change is desired.

How do you hold anyone accountable for the lottery bill not passing? The Alabama Republican Party does not have a position on a lottery on its online party platform, and Republicans in the state legislators were split in how they voted on the issue, so it is difficult to blame the party.

Additionally, since citizens are not engaged in government, it is difficult to organize any kind of popular movement to get the legislature to act, and politically experienced interest groups are already in place to try to blunt any grassroots effort they oppose.

Getting involved, staying involved and convincing others to do the same is the best way to have an accountable government when politics organize around only one political party. If this sounds like a lot of work, that is because it is a lot of work.

Your only other option may be to split your ticket at election time and empower a second political party.

States tend to have better overall citizen outcomes when political parties can do the heavy lifting of holding government officials accountable and establishing clear positions on political issues. When one party is in total control of government, it is less likely the party will hold its elected officials accountable to the people’s will.