Unequal Representation: Income, Education, and Class Flashcards
ideological congruence
how closely the political views of elected representatives align with those of the electorate
income and education independently affect political representation
income = Economic issues such as tax policies and wealth redistribution are better represented for wealthier citizens
education = Cultural issues, like multiculturalism and European matters, see a stronger influence from educational background
political bias in dutch government
members of the Dutch parliament are more likely to represent the views of higher-income and higher-educated groups
creates a political bias, as people with lower income or education levels have their views underrepresented
especially visible in cultural and economic issues (multiculturalism, integration)
likelihood of being politically represented
Higher income and education increase the likelihood of being politically represented, leading to gaps in representation for lower socio-economic groups
mechanisms behind representation gaps
political participation
party recruitment & selection
political participation - mechanism behind representation gap
wealthier and more educated people are more likely to engage in politics, influencing political decisions and candidate recruitment.
This participation gap contributes to why parliament is skewed towards the interests of these groups.
wealthier / educated people more likely to engage
party recruitment & selection - mechanism behind representation gap
Political parties tend to recruit candidates from higher socio-economic backgrounds, leading to a parliament that mirrors these demographics.
educational attainment plays a significant role in party membership and recruitment, favouring those with university degrees.
four main theories about who holds the power in US politics and how they influence government policies
majoritarian electoral democracy
economic-elite domination
majoritarian pluralism
biased pluralism
majoritarian electoral democracy
suggests that U.S. policies reflect the will of the average citizens, especially through democratic elections.
economic-elite domination
argues that wealthy individuals (the economic elites) have a dominant influence on policy decisions.
majoritarian pluralism
focuses on the role of interest groups that represent a wide range of the population, with the belief that their competition leads to policies that broadly serve the public.
biased pluralism
claims that the influence of interest groups is skewed towards business interests, professional groups, and the wealthy, resulting in policies favouring elites.
Mechanisms of influence:
average citizens - whether the general public’s preferences influence government decisions, often described as the “median voter” effect. this theory suggests that politicians should align policies with what the average voter wants
economic elites - focus on the wealthy’s ability to shape policies, implies that their resources/interests lead to significant control over political outcomes
interest groups
mass-based groups = Represent large numbers of ordinary citizens, such as unions or advocacy groups.
business-oriented groups = Represent companies, industries, and professional organizations, which are often more influential due to better resources.
mass-based groups
Represent large numbers of ordinary citizens, such as unions or advocacy groups.
business-oriented groups
Represent companies, industries, and professional organizations, which are often more influential due to better resources
which of the four theories on who holds power is supported
looking at the data individually, each group seemed to have influence. But when analysed together, the data revealed that only economic elites and organized interest groups had a real impact, overshadowing the average citizen’s preferences
supports theories of Economic-Elite Domination and Biased Pluralism, not Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism
who has impact on US policies
economic elites and business-oriented interest groups have substantial and independent impacts on U.S. policies
the influence of average citizens and mass-based interest groups is minimal or non-existent
suggests that American democracy might be more influenced by a minority of wealthy individuals and organized business groups than by the majority of average citizens
disproportional lawmakers
Legislatures worldwide are disproportionately populated by individuals from privileged social and occupational backgrounds, with working-class individuals being significantly underrepresented.
challenges the conventional wisdom that lawmakers’ class backgrounds do not affect their political behaviour
characteristics of legislators & policies
personal characteristics of legislators can affect the kinds of policies they sponsor or support.
Legislators’ class backgrounds influence their economic attitudes and legislative behaviours
- Working-class legislators are more likely to support leftist economic policies
- lawmakers from white-collar professions lean towards rightist policies
bias policy outcomes in legislature
underrepresentation of working-class citizens in legislatures biases policy outcomes towards the interests of more privileged groups
highlights the need for greater attention to the social class makeup of political institutions in studies of representation and policy-making
