“In a meaningful democracy, the people’s voice must be clear and loud – clear so that policy makers understand citizen concerns and loud so that they have an incentive to pay attention. (Verba)” There is no doubt there exists a severe inequality in the participation of the American political process. Kay Lehman Schlozman, Sidney Verba and Henry Brady, a trio of university professors, set out to explain that it is not about how many people participate in our democratic process, it is about who is taking part. In the article: “The Big Tilt: Participatory Inequality in America,” published in the liberal non-profit magazine The American Prospect, the authors conclude that political participation is not equal amongst the social and economical classes in America. Verba, Schlozman and Brady begin building credibility by referencing their own book while also citing …show more content…
statistics from multiple studies conducted over a 20 year period. The authors examine the role of time and money, who participates, how and what their concerns are, and finally how to answer the growing participation gap plaguing our nation’s political process. Throughout the article, the three authors reference multiple strong sources that strengthen their credibility and appeal to ethos. These sources include their own book, “Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism and American Politics,” as well as a study conducted by one of the authors, Verba, to prove to the reader that they are a very creditable source on the topic. The authors utilize a strong appeal to logos which only enhance the ethos appeals by quoting direct statistics from the study Verba took part in. This study proves that, although there is an overall decline in the participation of politics, one form of involvement that has seemed to increase is contributing to political campaigns. The 1967 study of participation and a 1987 replication of that study shows, “that the proportion of Americans contributing to campaigns has nearly doubled over the past 20 years, rising from 13 percent to 23 percent of the population.” The authors contribute this rise to the role of paid professional campaign managers versus volunteers as well as the role technological advances have played in campaigning. “Data from the Citizen Participation Study show that more than two-thirds of all those who donate time or money to political campaigns limit their involvement to check writing. (Verba)” Money is quickly replacing time as the most effective way to contribute to a campaign and because of that, the number of people who can participate is diminished greatly. Due to this, the wealthy are much more likely to be active in politics than the poor. With this growing gap in participation, those who cannot contribute are less likely to have their concerns addressed or their voices heard because as we all know far too well, money talks. “Contributors at the top of the income ladder gave, on average, nearly 14 times as much as those at the bottom.”The authors do go on to compare how income inequality effects time donated as well: Compare the top tenth in income (those with family incomes above $75,000) with the bottom fifth (who made $15,000 or less). The latter are about three-fifths as likely to vote, only half as likely to go to a protest or to get in touch with a government official, only one-third as likely to engage in informal activity within the community—and only one-tenth as likely to make a campaign donation. Considering only those who were active as campaign volunteers, those in the lowest income group actually gave more time—an average of four hours a week more—than did those in the highest income category. Those statistics certainly appeal to logos while supporting the claim that household income has a direct effect on political participation. Each person’s social, economic, and financial status has a direct influence on the issues in which they find most important in politics and due to this, the authors convince the reader that we must care that some people are much more active others. Verba, Schlozman and Brady appeal to logos by referring back to multiple pie graphs published in their book showing the distribution of votes from various income groups during the 1988 presidential election. They sum up the results of the graphs by simply stating, “When dollars substitute for hours as the essential unit of political input, participation becomes more unequal. Growing income inequality in the United States will only exacerbate the situation.” Nearing the end of the piece, the authors begin to focus on how to answer the growing issue of participation inequality.
They appeal to pathos by appealing to two things that many Americans may hold dear, their faith and their right to unionize. Verba goes on to explain how involvement in churches and unions are an ideal start in making the step to political involvement because they develop communication and organizational skills that could transfer over to politics. The authors argue that because churches and unions function quite similarly in developing future political involvement, the strength of religious organizations would counter the weakness of labor unions. They reach this conclusion because at the time, labor unions represented a lower amount of workers and in order to drive home that point, they provide us with this example, “a blue-collar worker is more likely to practice civic skills in church than in a union—not because American unions are particularly deficient as skill builders, but because so few American blue-collar workers are union members and so many are church
members.” The authors ultimately do a fantastic job making their argument that there is a drastic inequality when it comes to involvement in the American political process. These university professors have been a part of multiple studies and even written a book on the topic, which they refer back to in order to solidify their credible status on the issue at hand. American citizens must organize and volunteer to become more involved in politics in order to close the gap in this inequality however it must be a donation of time rather than money. As long as people continue to donate funds instead of hours, the voices heard in Washington will never represent the masses across all social and economical classes.
The use of participatory techniques by Americans disempowered in the political and working system in the United States to make their voices hear and express their concerns. The language of the disempowered conceal institutional forms to make understood the discrimination and inequality that they are facing in the workplace by powerful companies or corporations and to stop the improper destruction of the environmental through unsuitable modernization projects where capitalists would be the survivors. The disempowered use elections and interest group lobbying in order to make their voices hear and bring about political change. Providing evidences from articles such as: “Protest and Disruption: The Political of Outsiders” by Greenberg, and “Detroit: I Do Mind Dying,” Chapters:1-2 by Dan Georgakas. We are going to explore the “outside the system” of the disempowered that those authors provide in the process to protect themselves and their interests.
The "silent majority" of the American people is now accepted as the status quo, the way things always have been and will be. Voter turnout is now the litmus test for political participation. Non-voters are becoming rampant in our democracy, with voter turnout hovering around a low 60% for general elections. At this rate, a candidate would have to win over 80% of that 60% vote in order to have true majority support. Thus, inactivity in voting threatens the very legitimacy of our government. In the recent November 7, 2013 midterm election, a few counties reported a mere 4% of eligible voters actually participated, in some cases to vote for a policy referendum that would aff...
Domhoff discusses the prevalence of labor unions in the New Deal era. In fact, by 1945, with the help of the liberal-labor alliances, union membership had increased five-fold to fifteen million in that past decade (pg. 172). However, after 1945, the liberal-labor alliances never saw a victory against corporate conservatives. Because of the corporate world’s domination of policy implementation, politicians rules time and again against labor unions because it works in corporate America’s favor. Labor unions serve as many working class Americans’ avenue into the political sphere; denying them a right to unionize is not only a fundamental violation of free speech but also morally and ethically wrong. Overall, Domhoff’s critique of wealthy politicians (primarily Republicans) is merited considering he argues empirically with statistics supporting extremely skewed voting trends against unions. Additionally, Domhoff’s argument exudes sympathy toward those less fortunate; I share Domhoff’s sentiment that is imperative we promote equality amongst classes, one way in which we should do so is through advocacy of labor
Throughout American History, people of power have isolated specific racial and gender groups and established policies to limit their right to vote. These politicians, in desperate attempt to elongate their political reign, resort to “anything that is within the rules to gain electoral advantage, including expanding or contracting the rate of political participation.”(Hicks) Originally in the United States, voting was reserved for white, property-owning gentleman
"Miller light and bud light…either way you end up with a mighty weak beer!" This is how Jim Hightower (a Texan populist speaker) described the choices that the U.S. electorate had in the 2000 elections. This insinuates that there is a clear lack of distinction between the parties. Along with numerous others, this is one of the reasons why the turnout is so low in the U.S. elections. In trying to explain the low figures at the U.S. elections, analysts have called American voters apathetic to indifferent to downright lazy. I disagree that the 50% (in recent elections) of voters that fail to turnout to vote are lazy and that they have just reason not too. I will also show that the problem lies within the system itself in that the institutional arrangements, electoral and governmental, do not create an environment that is conducive to mass participation. I will address these main issues and several others that have an effect on voter participation. In doing so I will compare America to other established democracies.
Among the many ways Americans can participate in politics, voting is considered one of the most common and important ways for Americans to get involved. The outcome of any election, especially at the national level, determines who will be making and enforcing the laws that all Americans must abide by. With this in mind one might assume that all Americans are active voters, but studies show the voter turnout is actually astonishingly low. With this unsettling trend it is important to know what statistics say about voter turnout as was as the four major factors that influence participation: Socioeconomic status, education, political environment, and state electoral laws, in order to help boost turnout in future elections.
Beginning in the late 1700’s and growing rapidly even today, labor unions form the backbone for the American workforce and continue to fight for the common interests of workers around the country. As we look at the history of these unions, we see powerful individuals such as Terrence Powderly, Samuel Gompers, and Eugene Debs rise up as leaders in a newfound movement that protected the rights of the common worker and ensured better wages, more reasonable hours, and safer working conditions for those people (History). The rise of these labor unions also warranted new legislation that would protect against child labor in factories and give health benefits to workers who were either retired or injured, but everyone was not on board with the idea of foundations working to protect the interests of the common worker. Conflict with their industries lead to many strikes across the country in the coal, steel, and railroad industries, and several of these would ultimately end up leading to bloodshed. However, the existence of labor unions in the United States and their influence on their respective industries still resonates today, and many of our modern ideals that we have today carry over from what these labor unions fought for during through the Industrial Revolution.
The paper will discuss minicases on ‘The White-Collar Union Organizer’ and ‘The Frustrated Labor Historians’ by Arthur A. Sloane and Fred Witney (2010), to understand the issues unions undergo in the marketplace. There is no predetermined statistical number reported of union memberships in this country. However, “the United Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) excludes almost 2 million U.S wages and salary employees, over half of whom are employed in the public sector, who are represented at their workplaces by a union but are not union members. Not being required to join a union as a condition of continued employment, these employees have for a variety of reasons chosen not to do so. Nor do the BLS estimates include union members who are currently unemployed” (Sloane & Witney, 2010, p.5). Given this important information, the examination of these minicases will provide answers to the problems unions face in organizational settings.
Wealth inequality and income inequality are often mistaken as the same thing. Income inequality is the difference of yearly salary throughout the population.1 Wealth inequality is the difference of all assets within a population.2 The United States has a high degree of wealth distribution between rich and poor than any other majorly developed nation.3
“If workplace voice and civic voice are compliments, in the sense that they foster a shared understanding of democracy’s value and common cause, then we would expect the decline of union representation to affect the civic attitudes and democratic behavior of individuals outside the workplace as well.” (Bryan, Gomez, Kretsckmer & Willman)
The highest earning fifth of U.S. families earned 59.1% of all income, while the richest earned 88.9% of all wealth. A big gap between the rich and poor is often associated with low social mobility, which contradicts the American ideal of equal opportunity. Levels of income inequality are higher than they have been in almost a century, the top one percent has a share of the national income of over 20 percent (Wilhelm). There are a variety of factors that influence income inequality, a few of which will be discussed in this paper. Rising income inequality is caused by differences in life expectancy, rapidly increases in the incomes of the top 5 percent, social trends, and shifts in the global economy.
I believe that there is too much wealth and income inequality in the United States
Income inequality not only harms us fiscally, but also affects our mental and physical wellbeing; therefore, it is important to identify the right ways to control wealth distribution among people.
Within the article Caring Democracy: Markets, Equality, and Justice, the author Joan Tronto highlights and critically examines the United States and its democratic lifestyle after the attacks on 9/11 on the World Trade Center and Pentagon and the events after the 2008 financial crisis. Since these events the United States the average citizen is now facing to many demands for them too adequately for their children and themselves. During a set of recent elections examined by Joan Tronto she found that public involvement was at an all-time low by the citizens of the United States. Although political involvement should support us to care more about our surrounds and society but it does not. However, the American democratic process has become more
Voter turnout has been declining in the United States throughout history, due to the potential voters’ personal choice not to vote and ineligibility. According to research, a large percentage of individuals are not voting because political parties fail to appeal to the voters and this leads to the voting population losing interest in the campaign, while others postpone registering and by the time they realize their delay the election is upon them. This downward trend of voter turnout can be traced to the reforms of the Progressive era. Turnout in post-Progressive era America remained low, never reaching the levels attained before the Progressive era reforms. This would be expected, since there is little in the political history of these years that would indicate a return to a collectively oriented system of voter participation.