1.2: Political Culture of Texas

Political culture refers to broadly shared values, beliefs, and attitudes about how the government should function. Shared American values include the values of liberty, equality and democracy and these are central to Texas values as well. However, cultural differences between the states can and do shape attitudes about the role of government and there are noted differences.

Daniel Elazar, in his book, American Federalism: A View from the States, divided the country into three political cultures: moralistic, individualistic, and traditionalistic. He explained that as the early settlers migrated across the country, they took with them their ideas about the role of government and their religious beliefs. Each of these groups had their thoughts about the role of government, citizen involvement and the role of political parties. One can see the migratory patterns of the three different groups in Map 1.2.2.

Map \(\PageIndex{2}\): Elazar’s Cultural Classification by State. Daniel Elazar posited that the United States can be divided geographically into three types of political cultures—individualistic, moralistic, and traditionalistic—which spread with the migratory patterns of immigrants across the country. SOURCE Texas Government 1.0.

Moralistic Political Culture

The moralistic political culture developed among the Puritans who settled the New England colonies in the seventeenth century saw government as a means to better society and promote the general welfare. In America, they intended to create “a city upon a hill,” as Puritan leader John Winthrop put it, so that the world could see their righteousness.\(^2\) New England reflected the Puritan culture, promoting government as a means to improve society in the same way that Puritans embraced a lifestyle of pious, consecrated actions. As generations passed, the settlers continued westward all across the northern boundary of the U.S. Immigrants from Northern Europe and from the Scandinavian countries shared Puritan values and joined with them as they continued through northern portion of the Midwest and finally along the West Coast.

The moralistic political culture, citizens expect their elected officials to be honest and to put the needs of the people they served above their own interests. This culture puts a positive spin on the political process, believing they are working to better their community rather than profiting financially from their service. They would embrace the idea of bigger government and creating new programs to solve the problems of the society.

Political engagement and citizen participation is expected from the citizens. In this society, citizens would relish donating their time and their resources to elections and it would be their duty to turnout to vote. According to Elazar, there are two reasons for this. First, states should make it easy for the citizens to register to vote and then actually vote because it was the right thing to do. Second, they expected that elections would be contested with competition in each of the races. Therefore, it was an honor to participate and it was a worthwhile endeavor. Elazar also believed that in a moralistic culture, those running for public office would do so because of their qualifications, not party loyalty. They certainly would be more open to third parties. Supporting the community was more important than supporting the party.

Individualistic Political Culture

According to Elazar, the individualistic political culture originated with settlers from non-Puritan England and Germany. The first settlements were in New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey eventually spreading to the middle portion of the United States from Ohio straight to Wyoming. As the name implies, government in this culture should address the issues that matter to us as individuals. Government is expected to provide needed services and in return, the officials would be compensated for these efforts. It is no longer about serving the community as a whole but rather meeting the interests of individuals. Once government receives support from the voters, then they serve the needs of those individuals.

In this culture, citizens will get involved and participate only if they have a personal interest or if they expect certain benefits from government. Many times the citizens will expect some type of reward such as a political patronage appointment, perhaps even with financial compensation. Politics is not seen as a noble profession as in the moralistic culture. Citizens are much more tolerant of corruption in their political leaders in this culture. They are not necessarily looking for candidates with great ideas, but only remain loyal to the candidates with the same party affiliation as themselves. Candidates running for political office outside the mainstream political parties find it difficult to find success in this individualistic environment.

Traditionalistic Political Culture

Elazar associates traditionalistic political culture with the southern portion of the United States, where it developed in the upper regions of Virginia, the first of the southern colonies. It then spread to what we refer to as the Deep South (Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi) and on into the Southwest. Slavery was prominent in these states so government was necessary to maintain the existing social order, the status quo. The elites would dominate politics, so any new policies would reinforce the interests of those in power.

In this traditionalistic political culture, voter turnout tends to be lower, in part because there may be more barriers to participation. History has shown us that the southern states have more consistently reduced voter turnout by the use of tactics like poll taxes (fees charged for voting), among others, to diminish the minority vote. Today, barriers to voting could include the requirement to produce a photo ID at the time of voting. Voting in a traditionalistic political culture was considered more of a privilege for those that met the qualifications. Competition will be between the factions within the dominant party. Between the 1870s and the 1970s, the Democratic Party dominated Texas state politics and the competition was between the urban and rural Democrats. After the civil rights movement and the Republican realignment that took place in the South, Republicans are the dominant party in Texas today. Now, the competition is between the moderate and the far right Republicans.

Texas Political Culture and Elazar’s Theory

These cultures can and do co-mingle, of course. Elazar’s theory claims that Texas is a mixture of traditionalistic and individualistic political cultures. So, if the individualistic political culture focuses on individual achievement—think lonesome cowboy out on the range getting the job done to the best of his ability—then government activity should focus on opportunities for individual achievement. The traditionalistic political culture represents the Southerners who migrated to East Texas and brought the values of a hierarchical society with traditional moral values and discourages government activity except to keep the power in the hands of those dominant groups. Both of these cultures describe Texas today—a conservative state with little governmental interference in the economy, keeping our taxes low, and spending little. But we must also recognize the tension between the two cultures. While individualistic political culture stresses individual freedom with little government intrusion, traditionalistic political culture promotes the values of the traditional social order.

Texas political culture currently prizes itself on being pro-business, with low government regulation, and having no state income tax, in keeping with both traditionalistic and individualistic cultures. It has also historically been characterized by low voter turnout, lower than most other American states––with the argument that Texans view political participation as an economic perk versus the value of contributing to society. Texas is also a state with a history of voter suppression of minorities.

However, in 2018, the senatorial race between Republican Ted Cruz and Democrat Beto O’Rourke brought a record turnout of almost eight million people in a non-presidential election year.\(^3\) Compare this to only 4.6 million people that turned out in 2014.\(^4\) There was speculation that Texas would see more competition between the political parties in future elections, and even that a Democrat might win in a national election in Republican Texas. In 2020, sixty-six percent of Texas’s registered voters participated—the highest voter turnout Texas since has since 1992 when two Texans were on the ballot, H. Ross Perot and George H. Bush; seventy-three percent of eligible Texans voted that year.\(^5\) As a point of comparison, the national average in 2020 was 66.3 percent, with the highest state turnout in Minnesota at nearly eighty percent and the lowest state turnout at a little less than fifty-five percent in Oklahoma.\(^6\) Finally, Texas was closer to the national average.

The division of power between federal, state, and local governments, known as federalism, gives states the ability to set up its own governmental structures, determine how elections will be conducted and which policies they choose to prioritize. In other words, it allows states the ability to set up a government that suits the culture within the respective state. There is no reason to believe that Texas government should be set up like the government of New York. While Elazar’s contribution is still widely accepted, there is a new description of culture emerging that takes into consideration economic and social changes. There have been societal and demographic changes that have taken place. Immigrants are no longer coming primarily from Europe, but also from Asia and countries to our south. In Texas, we also have people moving here from other states with different political cultures, primarily California, New York, and Illinois. We now live in a highly mobile society where people choose their residence based on factors that suit their lifestyles. This new political culture sees cities that are more socially diverse and more tolerant of non-traditional lifestyles. Texas may be changing, and it will be interesting to see how these new factors affect political culture, but when thinking about the political culture of Texas, keep in mind that changes take place over time.

---

2. John Wintrhop. “A Modell of Christian Charity (1630).” From the Collections of the MA Historical Society (Boston, 1838), 3rd series 7:31-48).
3. “Turnout and Voter Registration Figures (1970-current),” Texas Secretary of State, Ruth R, Hughes, https://www.sos.state.tx.us/election...al/70-92.shtml
4. “Turnout,” https://www.sos.state.tx.us/election...al/70-92.shtml.
5. Shannon Najmabadi and Mandi Cai, “ Democrats Hoped High Turnout Would Usher in a Blue Wave across Texas. It Didn’t,” Texas Tribune, Nov. 4, 2020, https://www.texastribune.org/2020/11...out-democrats/
6. Kevin Schaul, Kate Rabinowitzm and Tec Mellnik, “2020 turnout is the highest in over a century,” Washington Post, Nov. 5, 2020, upd. Dec. 28, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...voter-turnout/