The foundations of our government (liberty, equality, justice, responsiveness, etc.) are being threatened by the increasing control and agenda-setting of elite interest groups. As Loomis and Cigler pointed out, the presence of interest groups in the United States is not inherently bad, and allows for increased involvement and participation for constituents who would not have that opportunity for direct engagement otherwise. The structure of a pluralist government accounts for the meaningful contributions of interest groups. Loomis and Cigler contend that this structure is important to our democracy, but fails when expectations of competition between groups decrease. The rise of powerful and issue-centric interest groups make competition of ideas and influence difficult, limiting public involvement in the process. Furthermore, Strolovitch highlights the failures not just between interest groups, but within interest groups of properly representing opinions.
The issue of political involvement, particularly the lack of involvement by specific "marginalized" groups plays a crucial role in the rise of interest group representation as well, and more importantly demonstrate the consequences of unequal representation. As Bartels discusses, citizen preferences are likely not equally represented amongst all groups. Certain demographic and socio-economic indicators are given more "weight" in the policy process than do other identifying features of groups. Those of lower economic standing are less likely to have their opinion reflected in policy by both parties. Verba adds to Bartels' notion of unequal representation, and argues that education is an enormous explanatory variable for political participation and ultimately representation. Verba offers several remedies to the issue of unequal representation, including decreasing resource disparity, political recruitment for group membership, direct government intervention, and political motivation. Mann and Ornstein also shared Verba and Bartels' perspective that fair representation is being threatened, attributing this shift to how we view news and gather information, campaign finance regulation, redistricting, etc.
Considering the two trends of increased power and influence of specialized interest groups and the decline of public participation and involvement of marginalized groups, what is to be done to ensure that those who wish to be involved in the policy process can be? More importantly, how do we address the needs of those who choose not to engage politically, and what are the moral obligations to do so?
Increased Education and Civic Engagement VS. Limiting Role of Interest Groups
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/208140
Because it seems representatives are not as responsive to many of these marginalized groups, and interest groups often only represent the aggregate needs of these groups, there seems to be no easy answer to this great question. First, I would hope that social welfare interest groups are or become aware of the wide ranging needs of the groups they intend to represent. Verba describes the possibility of the system becoming "overloaded" with increased participation and with so few social welfare organizations it is challenging to cover the wide range of needs of all marginalized groups. Instead, fostering an interest and critical eye to the political system earlier in life seems key. Many of the readings boasted the importance of education for participation in the political system with more results, mostly because education tends to foster an individual's ability to have consistent views and a belief in one's abilities. However, I do no think that years and years of formal education beyond high school is necessary for this, if someone exists in a supportive environment. If movements are built within the communities around a need not being met by interest groups, I believe change is possible.
As far as the interests of those who do not have an interest in developing a political voice, there are very few populations that are not represented by some individuals (it is just a much lower representation) and it is important the representatives and interest groups do their best to hone in on the opinions of those individuals and then make their best judgements from there. Having increased transparency in these circumstances is important because inappropriate responses will most likely gain the attention from someone who is affected and it is hoped that some sort of response will occur.
I agree with Lauren that there is no easy answer for how to ensure that the marginalized groups or individuals who do want to be involved are able. The readings this week emphasized education and I believe that education is crucial to acquire the skills and tools to better prepare marginalized groups to become more involved. Coming from a disadvantaged group, someone with an education gains a lot of support because it shows they are motivated and educated. Whether they chose to listen is another issue. While addressing some issues are easier than others, there are a lot of issues and topics that are harder or “not a topic that is openly discussed” (Strolovich, 906). By focusing on these hard issues of the needs of those who choose not to engage it could possibly encouraging more actively engaged members in addressing the issue(s).