How do individuals and groups of people influence the political process?

The American political process is influenced by many people and organizations.  The majority of these people or groups consist of activists, labor unions, and business lobbyists.  The reasons they influence the process include: beneficial political change, beneficial social change or for personal gain which is typically monetary.  

Another type of organization that influences the political process is advocacy groups. Advocacy groups represent the interests of groups of people and organizations and through donations to specific political campaigns  they directly influence the outcome of elections and in turn the composition of our representative democratic government.  Too often though the interests of the private sector coupled with their monetary resources unfairly influence the political process.  More recently though the composition of different representative groups such as labor unions or manufacturing guilds has become more elite and less inclusive.  "more contemporary interest groups are centralized, professional advocacy groups as opposed to mass membership organizations."(2)

On a smaller scale social movements brought on by tragedy or social injustice can inspire politically neutral individuals to take up a cause and work to change public opinion and in turn the political process.  One example is when in the 1960's the blatant lack of regulations pertaining to the conservation of natural resources and the spoiling of the natural state of our country fueled the Environmental movement.  "The early environmental movement included conservationists who wanted the country's natural resources to be managed efficiently by the government and preservationists who wanted to retain the land in its natural state.".(1)

The cartoon depicts the tea party express which is representative of the recent conservative movement many individuals have become apart of.  They endorse and promote legislation that would limit government spending and limited taxation on a federal level.  

It is an example of a movement that I ideologically agree with.  I try to forget Mrs. Palin is a prominent member though. 

[1] Katznelson,Ira. The politics of power. 6th ed. New York , London: W.W Norton, 2011

[2] Katznelson,Ira. The politics of power. 6th ed. New York , London: W.W Norton,

2011

  

In what ways does public opinion influence the formation of a democratic society.

To answer the question assigned this week I will first define a democratic government.  A democratic government is one who's members are elected by the citizens of the country it represents and serves.   Now that we have established the definition, understanding of how public opinion influences the formation of our government is very obvious. The formation of our government is relevant because the people we elect to lead us shape our society by creating laws that affect all of us.  The rights and limitations of our society are solely based on the decisions and policy creation that happens in Washington, D.C.  The most disturbing aspect of how our political leaders are elected buy us is that the most popular candidate will typically win in a election regardless of how qualified he or she might be.

Popularity is something that some candidates have regardless of their politics.  It is common that less important factors like: party affiliation, race, religion or place of birth will have a greater affect on  candidates popularity among the people.   The last presidential election is a paramount example of how a race commonality awarded our current president Barrack Obama the presidency.  In that election ninety five percent of Black voters voted for Mr. Obama.[1]

          Another way public opinion can be swayed to award popularity to certain candidates is through marketing campaigns over different types of media or information outlets.  Some marketing campaigns are formed to establish the personal or political position of a candidate. Other campaigns are promoted as a declaration of intention to the voting body of citizens to reassure them.  The most common we find contemporarily are the slanderous campaigns that exploit an opposing candidates lifestyle or past dealings.  Through these typically false or loosely factual cheap shot the voting population’s opinions are changed one way or the other.  It is sad but “Citizens see and hear candidates through the medium of news reports.”[2].

---

[1] Katznelson,Ira. The politics of power. 6th ed. New York , London: W.W Norton, 2011

[2] Katznelson,Ira. The politics of power. 6th ed. New York , London: W.W Norton, 2011

How does the government intersect with the private sector

The relationship the government has with the private sector is one of reliance and hatred.  While the government relies on the tax revenue afforded by the success of our capitalistic American economy, our governments democratic policy making stops cold in the arena of private enterprise.  In a country where we believe we all have voices and opinions we find ourselves asking: “whether a government, political system, and society could be described as democratic if it tolerated, indeed promoted, the existence of a small group with immense wealth along with a far larger group with meager income”[1].    In addition I find that wealth isn’t the icing on the proverbial cake to the wealthy but the power to influence political affairs that makes being one of the elite worthwhile.

            The most straightforward example I can find where the private sector and the government intersect is with labor distribution nationally and internationally.  The practice of outsourcing labor to poorer countries is a subject most Americans are sore about.  The misnomer is that domestic corporations choose to keep their labor overhead low by outsourcing and by doing so they pass on the savings to the consumer but in fact the only thing that changes with a their low operating costs is an increase in profit margins for the corporations.  The problem is cyclical and drives the less fortunate into purchasing the occasional cheaper good or service which promotes the business practice indefinitely.  “The decisions made by business firms are usually regarded as nonpolitical or private.  Yet, because they deeply affect the entire society, we consider them as preeminently political.”[2] +

  The hard part is deciding whether the government should step in and regulate labor distribution of domestic corporations.  Would the regulations that could protect the jobs of American citizens eventually make corporations leave America entirely?  How would it affect future multinational corporations from basing their operations in America? 

The thin line that use to exist between the rights for free enterprise has been in my opinion totally cut.  After the government bail-outs of the auto and Banking industry I cannot see the merit in leaving our faulty and volatile economy in the clutches of greedy self serving evil people.  The leaders of almost all corporations attained their wealth and power by sticking it to the little guy better known as the working class majority.  On the backs of the blue collar has America become great not because of the exploits of CEOs. So now that the Democratic American governments has been forced to save them we should step in and make concessions and subsidies for American labor over foreign.  We should also make certain types of labor exclusively American.
 

[1] Katznelson,Ira. The politics of power. 6th ed. New York , London: W.W Norton, 2011

[2] Katznelson,Ira. The politics of power. 6th ed. New York , London: W.W Norton, 2011

What role does power play in government, economy, and politics.

           Power plays a significant role in government, economy, and politics by creating scenarios where either aforementioned topics effect the lives of Americans.   The power over policy doesn't always lie with the Federal government like many people believe.  The power to change the lives of citizens can sometimes rely on the current political climate or the current economic state.     More recently we find that power has shifted from politics and the economy to the government whom are trying to financially support domestic private corporations, domestic banks , and domestic auto makers because of the declining economy over the last 8 years.    Is that fair to do?  In a capitalist economy should the government step in and protect domestic business and in doing so protect the jobs and livelihoods  of it's citizens?

  The idea that the government should step in when necessary isn't a new notion.  Economist John M Keynes proposed that the government sometimes needed to change the way the economy runs.  His recommendation involved increasing domestic demand for goods and services by allowing more money into circulation during the great depression.  His idea would lead to the federal government running fiscal years into a deficit but it would create a safer market for consumers to spend money and pay more taxes.  The cyclical response to Keynes' idea is very interesting and proves that government intervention can prove positive in a capitalist economy. 

  More contemporarily  I find it comforting that the federal government is working very hard to turn the current economic and cultural low around.  The proof that power doesn’t always constitute the leverage a body has over policy is exemplified in the passionate messages our current President Barack Obama frequently gives us.  The president encourages young people to strive for a better future for themselves and for America.  One of the most profound things he has said is [1]"Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.”.  The power this current president has to inspire people is without equal.  The overtly publicized political climate nor the depressing state of the economy and job market can totally steal hope.

         

---

[1] Obama, Barack. "Barack Obama Quotes." 01012011.http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/barack_obama.html (accessed 02/06/2011).