American Government Vs Us Government

In the United States, public policy is shaped by multiple factors, from average citizens voices in elections to interest groups and organizations. In their study, “Testing theories of American politics”, scholars Benjamin Page and Martin Gilens explore the impact of average citizens, the economic elite and interest groups have on the passage of public policy. Additionally through their, Page and Gilens(2014) have found “that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence” (Pg 535). This means that when it comes to the creation of public policies, rich people and groups

Comparing the U.S. governments ability to meet the needs of its citizens compared to that of a dictatorship is far superior. A dictatorship is designed to benefit one or few individuals that have achieved power using capital or force. Their only concern is for themselves and what will increase their power. The U.S. form of government is restricted to the power of the constitution.

Americans only see few ways to affect real change on government because politicians are too reliant upon large donations. Groups contribute money, and later on receive a kickback of bill that favors them or supports their positions. “Candidates who raise lots of money say it indicates broad support. Candidates with little money point out that voters, not donors, decide elections” (2012 Presidential). Candidates spend large amount of time fundraising, which decreases people’s confidence in the government’s ability to do their

Electing judges contradict the impartial and independent nature of the judicial system. Judges are not politicians. It is

Elissa Nunez of NBC News reports that 64% of Americans believe that the big money in politics discourages many great candidates from running (Nunez). On top of this number, 76% of people believe that "money has a greater influence on politics and elected officials today than in the past," (Nunez). These numbers lead to a fundamental issue in our government; a huge distrust in our federal government. Only a month after 9/11, 60% of citizens said they could trust the federal government, however, following the Iraq war and an economic downturn the number dropped to a mere 24% in 2007

All these wealthy groups and people would benefit from passing of a certain law. For example, big banks and central banks have an interest group, who uses congressmen to try to influence politicians so that they won’t make strict policy regarding banks systems and how they operate. Those rules may be affect banks or big business in generating fewer profits. Majority believe that it is a bad thing that interest groups and lobbyists are involved in legislating because their voices and ideas do not come directly from ordinary citizens. Their interest to grow their business and wealth may not benefit the general ordinary citizens of United States. The big business and wealthy groups may try to influence a bill to be passed for their interest and not for the interest of the general public. Nevertheless, Congressmen may listen to the big central banks because they have money to play around with. This includes donating to Congress campaigns to be

In the State of Texas, we have a rather odd way of selecting which judges will and will not be able to have a job in the State of Texas. The way we select them is the same way that we decide who is going to be the governor of the State of Texas, we elected them. There are many flaws with choosing election as the way of picking who will be judges. Some of the flaws are that there will possibly be a lack of minority chosen, voters tend to know little to none information about the local election let alone the candidates up for judges, and finally people contributing to campaigns. While few people know that this how we elected judges in Texas, but even fewer realize the consequences the will continue to pile up if we do not do something to put an end to this ludicrous way of choosing an influential position of office.

This means they will likely raise money in any way possible to increase their chances of winning. This leads many members of Congress to give less consideration to the needs of low-income individuals when developing legislation. Since these low-income individuals do not have the means to give large amounts of money to re-election campaigns, their views are often ignored. Many members of Congress endorse legislation that would benefit their largest donors. This leads to a Congress that is not a true representative of the broad interests across the United States (Flavin 2015).

One of the issues I am most passionate about is that of money in American politics. Increasing campaign costs, coupled with a decrease in the number of donors contributing to those campaigns, is a disturbing trend which has caused many to feel the need to question the state of our democracy—myself included. The problem of mainstream political corruption and legalized bribery is one that I was made aware of three years ago, and has since become one of the things keeping me up at night most often.

They own the elections and can shape the entirety of them, it is unfair to the average person because the ideals of the person they are voting for can be easily swayed by money from a special interest groups. Now that out of the way it leaves us with the issue of money, you can not have an election without money and financial backers. However left unchecked this could be a dangerous tool as proven by special interest groups who have led to the outcome of decisions throughout history. In the late 1800’s it was the sugar and banana lobbies that made us go into the latin countries and colonize them because it was the proper place to grow their crops.throughout the 1900’s the cigarette lobbies fought for laws to back them and not having to make them show what is in cigarettes. How do we solve this you ask? Well you show who is backing you and how much money they gave you this would show what the cause for every action you make is. If they are being backed by a big industry like oil and they put in place a law that favors oil and we will know why because money talks and it has some crazy ideas sometimes. These special interest groups are the real power behind the election along with the electoral college.

Judicial Selection: Part I. Reform: Are Campaign Contributions Compromising the Intendent Judiciary is an article by Adam Skaggs and You May Know the Law but I Own the Judge: Why Congress Can and Should Get Involved in State Judicial Election Reform, is an article by Jonathan Berman are the two articles are critiqued. They are both about monetary funds that are donated to campaign funds of judiciary election candidates. They both look at how large amounts of funds are donated by different entities for many different reasons. Most being for self-gain which lead to corruption in the system

Texas is one of seven states that elect judges in partisan elections. Judicial selection begins with partisan elections and notable amounts of money for campaigning in order to win the election or reelection. Partisan elections influence the electorate in a consistent party label voting procedure. With the present day option of split-ticket voting, the electorate can simply vote for their party. Judges are removed only by failure to be reelected by the Supreme Court due to incompetence, official misconduct, negligence, or by impeachment from the House or trial in the Senate with a two-thirds vote.

Wayne, Lasser, Miller and others tend to agree that lobbyists and PACs have a great amount of influence over congress members because they may have direct connections and give campaign contributions. Recently, the airlines industry convinced congress to pass a $15 billion aid package it needs in order to survive. “The airlines had plenty of resources to draw on: 27 in-houses lobbyists, augmented by lobbyists from 42 Washington firms, including former White House aides and transportation secretaries, as well as the airlines own chief executives and corporate board members, whom all are well known in the halls of congress”(Wayne, NYT, 10/01/01. Lasser, American Politics, 1999. Miller, The American Prospect, 10/23/00. Geiger, Washington Post, 11/4-10/91.)

Alyssa Battistoni makes some very good points in her article, “The Public Overwhelming Wants It: Why Is Taxing the Rich So Hard?” regarding how the wealthy have a big part in influencing the government and taxes. Her article makes valid points on how we, as citizens, under estimate the political influence of the rich and that we have a hard time understanding the magnitude of the economic inequality and the relationship it has with political power (Battistoni, 720). She states that many of the politicians themselves are in the wealthy category. This article shows the frustration Battistoni feels by the tone and wording she uses to make her examples such as when she states that we are getting caught in a negative feedback cycle as the rich

Because those who are in power are the rich, they have influence on the political system to approve or disagree with laws