Essay Sample on the Link Between Elected Officials Decisions and the Policy Preferences of Their Constituents

Introduction

Citizens play a fundamental role in influencing public policy in a democratic government. Therefore, the connection between public opinion and the actions of the government is essential in analyzing the quality of governance in a democracy (Jacobson 34). As such, elections play an important role in helping policymakers or elected officials in understanding and considering the incentives of their constituents. There exists a link between the decisions made by elected officials and the policy preferences of the constituents. The notion that the preferences of the constituents count equally in realms of governance and politics is a basic principle in a democracy. However, in the real-life political environment, the preferences of the constituents are not counted equally by the elected officials. Income inequality affects political representation because the US Congress responds to the views of affluent constituents while ignoring those of the poor (Bartels). Political representation in the US is biased as income determines the policy preferences of the constituents adopted by elected officials. With this note, the trustee model of Congressional representation has failed the American people with respect to unequal political representation and policy implementations. Americans should pursue the delegate model of representation to match the complex political nature of US democracy.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Bartels argues that the poor are unrepresented in the political sphere of the United States. In his study, he found out that there is consistency in the senators' response to affluent or well-up constituents. The magnitude of disparity in political representation stems out from the reasons that the poor in the society are less engaged in the process of politics even when considering voter turnout (Bartels 274). The lack of political participation in low-income constituents could be as a result of the lack of political information. In other words, the poor lack political know-how of the imminent issues pertaining to political governance and public policy. Bartels also suggests that the elected officials ignore the preferences of poor constituents because of their inability to communicate their policy grievances (Bartels 275). On the other hand, affluent constituents are actively engaged in the political process. They support their preferred electoral candidates in campaigns, endorsement and using their finances to fund them. The affluent are knowledgeable of the policy issues that need immediate attention and follow-up on public policy implementation. Furthermore, their contribution to the electoral process and network helps to fuel the disparity in representation. Therefore, the financial muscle, information, and political participation persuade representatives to address the issues spearheaded by affluent constituents. Furthermore, the affluent are associated with elite groups and interest groups that lobby the elected officials to shape public policy based on their views leading to unequal political representation (Bartels).

For the last decades, the United States has experienced rapid disparity in terms of wealth and income distribution. The gap between the poor and the rich has been on the rise and has become a hotly contested political debate on how to end inequality. Unfortunately, the egalitarian values that make the US are only in theory. The societal divide in terms of wealth and income distribution indicates that wealthy Americans do not care about egalitarian values, unlike the low and middle-income earners. Widespread inequality in the US is evident in ideology and partisanship particularly visible through the conservative nature of Republicans. The Republican Party is viewed as a party for the rich and the affluent in mainstream US society. On the other hand, liberals and Democrats endorse egalitarian values that promote equality for all by creating structural policies with the aim of nurturing economic opportunities for every American (Bartels). That is why the poor vote and advocate for representatives who promote egalitarian politics to uplift every American out of poverty and achieve the American Dream. Nevertheless, the perception of inequality in the US indicates that elected officials act on policy proposals supported by affluent constituents who are generally wealthy with the support of big businesses, interest and lobby groups (Bartels 143). This aspect of the political environment indicates the bias in political representation assessed through the lens of economic inequality.

According to the normative theory of ordinary citizens, each and every individual in a democratic nation is expected to show interest in political affairs (Berelson et al. 307). The election period is full of activities where incumbents and new candidates fight to win the hearts of the citizens using policy proposals among other political promises. The campaign period involves various political rallies across a nation where citizens are expected to participate through reading campaign materials and following media proceedings. For instance, affluent and wealthy citizens sponsor their preferred candidates using monetary resources to fund the campaigns. The democratic theory stipulates that ordinary citizens should have the motivation to participate in political affairs and make decisions based on their analysis. Likewise, knowledge is an essential element that citizens are expected to have in a democratic stated with respect to the political environment. Ordinary people should be informed about the political affairs of their nation (Berelson et al. 308). However, not every citizen is knowledgeable about the state of political affairs. The poor and the uneducated are less likely to participate in the political process because they lack information about its importance. As such, the democratic theory expounds that knowledge is fundamental for ordinary citizens so that they can avoid misconceptions during political processes. Furthermore, being informed ensures that people are aware of the history, facts, and current issues of the state's affairs. However, misinformed citizens make poor decisions that affect their political participation in the long run and blame politicians for lack of performance, yet they elected officials with a poor track record or wooed by money and fame to support certain candidates.

Berelson et al. further indicates that ordinary citizens should be principled and cast their votes bearing interests for the common good. Selfish desires, racial and ethnic stereotypes should not guide people in making political judgments. However, a majority of voters cast their ballot to support their affiliated groups or in other words to show allegiance to their cause instead of using principle. For example, people across partisan states participate in elections and other political affairs on party lines. Some people keep quiet even when a party is headed in the wrong direction in terms of public policy. Finally, the ordinary citizen is expected to act with rationality according to the democratic theory. Citizens should make rational decisions while choosing their candidates of choice in the political process (Berelson 309). When casting the ballot, people should make rational judgments and elect officials that represent the people with inclusivity. Decisions should not be made on racial, ethnic, religious gender lines but on experienced leaders and managers to control public resources. Nevertheless, most people make rational decisions guided by their own interests. The rich support conservative Republicans to get lower tax incentives as a return while the low-income people suffer in poverty and underrepresentation.

The by-product theory of information has failed in improving public awareness, attention, and participation in the American political sphere (Popkin 22). Besides the expectations stipulated by the democratic theory for ordinary citizens, there are other factors that determine the information available to individuals. The media, in particular, has played a central role in broadcasting the state of politics in an economy. Most citizens rely on the media to get up to date news about government performance and social issues they face. Most Americans scan major news outlets such as CNN, Magazines, newspapers and the radio to get vital information about the state of the economy. They use the information obtained to discuss with their friends and family to understand the implication. Apart from the news, people learn through life experience about politics, governance, and participation. Nevertheless, news media plays a fundamental role in disseminating information that helps citizens to make rational and informed decisions. On the contrary, despite spending many schooling years, a majority of citizens possess civic ignorance that contributes to the discontinuity between policy and preferences of the constituents (Popkin 34). It is important to note that educated people are more likely to participate in political processes than uneducated counterparts. Education broadens the voter awareness about political affairs but it does not deepen their understanding of the current issues affecting the country such as immigration reforms.

Representation is a tool of power because it is an institutional mechanism by which political power is structured in the sphere of American politics. Representation has tremendous influences on creating, sharing, and limiting the power between citizens and the government (Jacobson 56). The models of representation in the US are as old as the American Constitution itself. America's Congressional representatives can be either trustees or delegates while fulfilling their public duty. A trustee model of representation is whereby constituents entrust a person to make major public policy decisions on their behalf. As such, the elected official acts as a trustee of the citizens on policies both at the local and national level. Trustees have a level of autonomy as they have the duty of making rational and informed decisions for the greater good of the people while prioritizing national interests. Trustees can forego the policy preferences of the constituents in pursuit of national interests since Americans are politically uninformed due to civic ignorance regardless of their political expectations (Popkin 32). On the other hand, the delegate model of Congressional representation is distinct from the trustee model. Delegates are empowered by the wishes of the constituents and act as the mouthpiece of the voters. Delegates do not have the power and autonomy to make their own decisions, unlike trustees. Therefore, delegates work duly to comply with the grievances of the people or promoting party agendas. Proponents of the delegate representation argue that a government whose elected officials fail to adhere to the policy preferences of the people cannot be considered as a representative democracy (Jacobson).

The debate regarding the best representation model in the complex American democracy has been ongoing for decades. Conservative politicians have worked tirelessly to support the trustee model in fear that direct democracy can lead to majority autocracy (Jacobson 78). On the contrary, Democrats and populists truly believe that delegate representative focuses on the interests of the people. Unfortunately, the American public has often adopted the trustee model of representation that has denied them legislative power leading to the structural social and political problems ailing the United States. The trustee model is the reason why elected officials align their interests and policy proposals with the affluent and corporate elites undermining the grievances of the poor (Bartel). As a result, the majority of Americans are losing...