Should every person should have an equal say in how our government is supposed to function? To my understanding our government consist of a Judicial, Executive and Legislative branches. The people in these branches are selected by elections, political parties and interest groups organized by the people. According to Dictionary.com a Democracy is “a system of government in which power is vested in the people, who rule either directly or through freely elected representatives.” So I ask again, should every person have an equal say in how our government should function? This question is answered in Larry Bartels book Unequal Democracy. He proves the conspiracy of how the U.S government favor the rich and wealthy “Unequal Democracy”. Bartel elaborates …show more content…
The two major political parties are the Democrats and Republicans. These two parties have been the majority since the constitution was written. The Republican Party are commonly known for their conservative views on certain stand points. For example studies show that Republican presidents have aided the economy over the past several decades. But studies also show how Republican parties favor the rich and wealthy populations/voters. On the other hand, there are Democrats. Democrats are known for their American liberalism, so to speak. This group respectfully consist of middle and working class people, which is the majority of the U.S population. With the upper hand in numbers wouldn’t it be logical that the Democratic Party would be in favor for political ideas? The answer is no. The Republican Party has dominated the white house for several decades. This is because with the republican population around 30%, about 80% vote during elections. However the Democratic population is around 70% but only 20% vote. Why aren’t people voting? Some say there is no valuable gain to vote when one person one vote isn’t really true. People believe this because Republicans have more access to resources than Democrats because of their wealthy stature. To my understanding these resources may aid candidates with publicity and networking benefits making their candidate more dominate than others running for …show more content…
Interest Groups are extensions of political parties. These groups discuss collective action problems and find solutions to these problems. However with so many people trying to find a common goal or solution to their beliefs. It is hard to find order or one major voice to propose a solution. In example an issue brought up a lot is education. Obviously the wealthy will have their children in well-developed schools and the lower classes will have their children at mediocre public schools. The curriculum may be the same but the discipline in classes are highly different. For example, a child from a low income family is usually brought up in less developed communities where their parents may not have an education that excels over the 12th grade. So school may not seem as big of a deal to them. Whereas parents that are wealthy most likely graduated from a 4 yr University with a Masters or Ph.D. Now this child has high standards to go to school and excel in their studies. The comparison between the two children is un-fair. When born into a successful family the odds are you may be successful as well. And vice versa for the poor family, if you start off poor you need to work harder in order to get your foot in the door. That is the sad truth in contemporary America. Contemporary America isn’t the same as when the founding fathers created it. Modern day political parties have evolved to Political Powers. Larry Bartel elaborates on how Politics are corrupted by money, wealth and
Andrew Gelman splits the book into three sections each part explains the paradox in even more detail. Part one of the book discusses how the Republican and Democratic Party have changed throughout the years. It explains how the voting patterns between democrats and republicans are changing and how pundits on both sides are puzzled. Gelman lets us know which states have higher income and if income is a high predictor of votes in that state. He informs the reader about which party does better every year.
“Hardball” by Chris Matthews challenged my perspective on how politics works. Before reading Hardball, I knew that money and advertising played large roles in presidential elections. However, after reading Hardball, I have come to understand that rather than simply being a single factor out of many, money, advertising, and retail politics control almost all of any major election. The best candidate may not always win, but the candidate with the most corporate backing, funds, and connections will.
Today’s America has evolved differently from the intention of a certain group of the founder’s. This essay takes the stance that America in 2017 is moving closer to the viewpoint of the Federalists, compared to the Republicans. First, one must analyze the two parties, then draw the conclusion with supportive facts. Lastly, the comparisons will be summarized and the differences will be minimized.
A political party has more influence on American political processes. In Chapter 6 of the W. W. Norton book, it explains what the goals or a political party and an interest group are while giving examples of what each of them is trying to accomplish. I will use this book to help example my arguments in the paper. Firstly, I would like to explain what an interest group and a political party actually is, and what are some differences between the two.
Party system refers to the way parties are organized, the balance of powers between and within the parties, and the issues or ideas which the parties are organized around. The Federalist and Jeffersonian Republicans were the first party system to immerge in the seventeen nineties. The federalist focused on the concerns of New England merchants. The wanted to rebuild a relationship with Britain, assumption of debt from the revolutionary war, and programs with encouraged manufacturing. The Jeffersonian republics were run with southern agriculture in mind.
It’s very interesting that even most of the lazy kids from the rich families have a brighter (financial) future than many of the kids who are hard-working but live in poverty. Anyone who claims that, for all people to get out of
The reason may appear to be historic and far previous accumulating factors have encompassed a maximum level. A limited explanation to the concept was added by Mickey Edwards a former republican congressman who identifies American government as a war between two combatant tribes than a two-party system government (Broderick and
The correlation between ideology and party voting for Congress has increased dramatically since 1968. At that time, democratic ballots for House candidates was cast by 60% of democrats and 40% of republicans cast. However, in 2012, these ratios had become 90% and 20% respectively. Some scholars also argue that the two parties are not only more distinctive in their coalitions, but also sorted in more ways than before. Besides ideology, each party has distinctive groups of members and supporters from different income, age, race, religiosity, and region groups.
Republicans vs. Democrats When the United States of America was founded, George Washington warned against the formation of political parties. By the time the second election came around there were already two political parties, the Federalist and Democratic-Republicans. These parties eventually turned into the Republican and Democratic parties we have today. While these parties have shifted to become almost polar opposites politically, they still share some common goals.
This is where the fact comes into play, society tells you who to treat good or not to even look at. Where the higher class is treated with all respect, and the ones who live in poverty do not even get looked at or get the chance to show off what they can do. As a matter of fact, “...Whereby a small group of wealthy but untalented children controls vast segments of the U.S. economy and penniless, talented children can’t compete” ( Krugman
A political party is an alliance of like-minded individuals who work together in an effort to win elections and control the government in their favor. They compete against each other for political power and the ability to put their ideologies into affect. There are two major parties in the United States, the Democrats and the Republicans. Their philosophies and political platforms are very different. Democrats believe in a strong federal government that has an active role in citizens lives while republicans believe in a small government that should have little to no role.
In the past 4 elections there has been an average voter outcome which is all around the same, but there is still a chunk of people who don’t go out and vote. Another reason people may not go out to vote is the unfairness of elections. For example, in this past election the two candidates were Donald Trump (Republican) and Hillary
American political parties are always changing and very divisive on various subjects, making it difficult to choose which side one agrees with more when it comes time to vote. Voters need to make informed decisions regarding which party they most agree with when it comes to issues which they consider the most important. This is a significant step which can be taken before analyzing each specific candidate. There are many minor political parties, but there are only two major political parties to choose from during elections. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party are very potent and influential parties, both of which differ when it comes to philosophy, stances, and consistency.
First of all, “an interest group is a collection of individuals or organizations that share a common interest and advocate or work for public policies on behalf of the members’ shared interests.” They are even called advocacy, lobbying, pressure, or special interest groups. It is also important to note that there are public and private interest groups. “An interest group can have more or fewer members than a political party.” Interest groups take positions on key public policy issues and they help work on their member’s goals.
Representation of citizens is essential to a legitimate government because it completes a proper social contract: people give up some freedom to make decisions to their government, and in return, the government protects them. Leadership resulting in abuse of human rights, mass famines, genocide, or other major injustices indicate a breach of the social contract. Rousseau’s social contract, the main focus of his writing, sounds rather utopic: people give up freedoms to be part of their society and their community as it governs itself. However, there are problems that arise from giving too much power to people. The main issue with giving too much power to citizens is that a society can almost never be well-educated enough to consistently act in its own self interest.