Winner Take All Politics - Assignment Example

Winner Take all Politics How has the structure of the government (separation of powers, the legislative process, federalism, etc.) contributed to economic woes and inequality? In accordance to Paul and Hacker in their book titled, Winner-take-all-politics, the structure of the American government played a role in contributing to the rising inequality and economic woes. The American political system remains divided into the Republicans and the Democrats. In relation to which political party comes to power, decisions often become passed in relation to the ruling party (Hacker & Paul 6). A given party often passes decisions in favor of its people and ignores the interests of people from the other political party resulting to inequality. In addition, there have been a lot of financial laws changed over time in favor of some influential people. In the book, the author informs the readers of how economics laws have constantly been changing in each regime. An excellent example could be the congress cutting tax rates imposed on high incomes repeatedly plus at the same time relaxing the tax on capital gains and other incomes (Hacker & Paul 4). This led to windfalls profits gained the wealthiest Americans contributing to inequality. The overall goal of the structure of the government contributed to inequality in America. What roles have interest groups and election fundraising played? In accordance to Hacker and Paul, interest groups and election fundraising often played a crucial role in influencing politics. The two note how interest group politics changed since the 1970s. Furthermore, they insist on how business and financial elites rigged the political system in order to benefit from globalization (Hacker & Paul 22). They describe in their book as America changing from ‘Broadland’ to ‘Richistan.’ Hacker and Paul continue describing in their book how interest group politics influenced critical decisions relating to how wealth became created and then distributed occurring behind the scenes. Hacker and Paul then outline the roles played by the interest groups and election fundraising in election. First of all, interest groups play a crucial role in policy making. In election fundraising, politicians manage to solicit funds for campaigns from influential businessmen, thereby heading to their requirements once they get to power. In as much as citizens may not be seeing them in the limelight, such fundraisers and interest groups have a bearing on vital decisions in politics. The two give an example of fundraising in Washington politics that becomes contributed in terms of checks and balances. Fundraisers often are the high class majority and hence also do have a bearing on some critical decisions in politics (Hacker & Paul 24). Secondly, some of the interest groups and fundraisers in accordance to Hacker and Paul turn out to be business and financial lobbyists. These lobbyists, fund both Democrat and Republican politicians. Their main purpose in having an interest in politics became a move to counter the powerful influence posed by the trade unions. Has either party had an effective response? In accordance to Hacker and Paul, interest groups contributed a lot in some of the decisions made in politics. Often the interest groups consisted of individuals and business men with a personal interest of flourishing their business through political will. In having a number of politicians speaking and passing laws in favor of them, most of them end up making a lot of profits (Hacker & Paul 26). Furthermore, some election fundraising often sparks some form of favors once the given politician becomes in power. Since most fundraisers belong to the high class society in the society, they too tend to influence politics due to controlling some aspects of the economy. How could the politics be improved? With the Americans living in a place with increasing levels of inequality, more blamed on politics, Peter and Hacker in their book came up with solutions to improve the political system. In their book, the two authors emphasize majorly on rebuilding the organizational capacity occupied by the middle and working classes in an attempt to repair American politics (Hacker & Paul 34). Since a lot of high class people and the elite had quit an upper hand when it came to politics, Peter and Hacker suggested a means that the middle and working class could play a role in changing the existing politics (Hacker & Paul 34). The main purpose will be to restore plus balance the winner-take-all economy. In addition, a lot also had to be done in ensuring that interest groups and pluralist become eliminated in influencing political decisions. The major aim of all solutions will be to distribute the power of change to the American people instead of living most of it to the rich. In following the above, a reduction in inequality may occur. How do the majoritarian, elite and pluralist models relate to the “Winner Take All Politics” reading? Pluralism or majoritarian voting related to an electoral system whereby all the people in a given living geographical end up represented by one candidate though they may embrace different political beliefs. In accordance to Paul and Hacker, pluralism remains one of the key issues controlling politics. In accordance to the book Winner Take All Politics, pluralism plays a vital role in influencing politics. They remain some people from certain regions that are influential in politics due to their wealth and often become taken seriously by politicians and the government (Hacker & Paul 66). These people often make the decision regarding certain pertinent issues irrespective of what people from their region comment or feel. Hacker and Paul insist that politics nowadays has turned to be individually controlled. Once again, how do we deal with the issue of running a democracy with a poorly informed electorate with low participation? In relation to Paul and Hacker, poorly informed citizens often become blinded from what happens behind the curtain. Pluralists often exist in areas where the electorates remain poorly informed on pertinent issues (Hacker & Paul 30). Therefore, running a democracy composed of poorly informed electorates can be a tricky affair. Paul and Hacker discuss in their book that such people could become informed and use trade unions and lobby groups instead of pluralists making decisions for them. Do you disagree or agree with the book? Why? In accordance to the book written by Hacker and Paul Winner-take-all-politics, I totally agree with the authors. The two authors majorly sank right deep into the heart of the Americans by trying to explain the cause of America’s inequality originated from politics. From what discussed, today’s politics got a lot of influence sideways, for instance interested parties. The rich in the society and the business men play a prominent role in influencing politics (Hacker & Paul 45). In fact, many economic decisions passed by politicians could be traced to some of the prominent rich, people in an attempt to pay back for the contribution they played in making the come to power. For instance, major fundraisers often have a say in some decisions made by the government. With the increase in inequality in America, a lot got to be traced to politics playing a role in it. More so, Americans blame the government to having shadow people with personal interests in enriching their pockets at the expense of the normal American citizen (Hacker & Paul 10). Works Cited Jacob S. Hacker, Paul Pierson. Winner-take-all politics: how Washington made the rich richer- and turned its back on the middle class. Washington: Simon and Schuster, 2010. Print. Read More