Russia embodies the classic example of a country in which the perfidious actions of its leaders and the oppressive nature of its government in general taint the political interaction between the citizen and state. Corruption exists “as a system of informal norms based on particularistic principles enforced by state employees” and the issue of inequality, especially between state employees and citizens, represents the main problem in regards to the interaction between citizens and the state. In this system, citizens use bribes as a social equalizer (Rimskii).
Corruption is prevalent within the Russian government, in such forms as bribery and elite recruitment. According to one survey given in 2010 to members of social groups prone to bribery,
…show more content…
The style of government and restrictive political culture in Russia creates many weaknesses and hinder citizens’ ability to interact with the state. The Russian multiparty system has only existed for two decades. Before that the Soviet Union maintained a single party system with the Communist Party controlling all aspects of citizens’ lives. Despite currently having 78 political parties registered by Russia’s Ministry of Justice, the state Duma and the Federation Council (Russia’s bicameral legislature) only contain four political parties: A Just Russia, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, and United Russia--the party of President Putin and Premier Medvedev (“Government”). The Communist Party’s continued dominance within Russia politics illuminates one of the issues within Russia’s party system: it has not yet shed its soviet roots (Sakwa). Election fraud further undermines citizens ability to make political decisions within their own country. According “to an investigation by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, ‘the process deteriorated during the vote count, which was assessed negatively in almost one-third of polling stations observed due to procedural irregularities’ (source ?). Furthermore, many have made accusations of illegitimate voting practices such as “carousel voting” in which the government buses people around to multiple polling stations, so they can vote multiple times. Also, despite international scrutiny, Russia went to very little trouble to hide their blatant fraudulent actions (Clark). The inability of citizens to effectively elect their representatives undermines their chance to have a say in their own government and further discredits their interactions. **Restrictions in interest
This view is consistent with the theories of David Mayhew (The Electoral Connection, 1974) who asserts that the desire for
On the local level, people are very free to express themselves. Mr. Williams’ current firm does not handle the corrupted system in DeKalb country, but they are aware of the corruption. Mr. Williams feels like the mentality and civil culture that sustains a democracy has dissipated. He believes that we no longer have the same mindset as the founding fathers had, so he does not think that we are capable of sustaining a democracy. He is deeply suspicious of people who want to run for public office.
Concept: The Importance of Voting Article: “Patriot Connectors to Discuss Importance of Voting” My article began by introducing a group named the Patriot Connectors, and the entirety of the article expressed the group 's views on why people should vote and exactly how important voting is to American society. The group states that not voting or not even being registered to vote in essence, undermines America 's representative democracy. They attribute the lack of voters being related to the fact that many feel that their votes do not matter in a government system they see as unfair or rigged. The article relays the fact that voting is something citizens learn to do.
The effect of government delegation in a republic is that the views of the public are “refined and enlarged” to a certain extent by being passed through the citizens whom they elected to govern them. This causes the voice of the public to become more concerned with the public good rather than if the people were ruling themselves as is done in a democracy. However, this action can also backfire if people are elected who do not have the best interest of the people as their first priority and corrupt the system by “betraying the interests of the people” they are representing.
When the Democratic System in America was founded in 1787, it was built on the sturdy ideals of equality and fairness. The founding fathers of the constitutional convention developed the Electoral college system with the best interests of the American people in mind, as the average person was highly under-educated and they did not trust them to make a decision as important as the But over time as society and even our democracy has changed, it has become ridden with flaws and corruption especially in the electoral college and voting system. The effects of the Electoral College’s inefficiencies oppose the very ideas our democracy was built off of. Because of the over-representation of small states, the broken promises of political equality, and
After performing their civic duty and voting for a candidate, Americans feel disappointed if their candidate wins the popular vote while failing to be appointed to office(Drew Desilver, Pew Research Center). Disappointment equates to a feeling of hopelessness which, in turn, deters Americans from voting in future elections. If a candidate can win without the popular vote, then does their vote even matter?(Drew Desilver, “Pew Research Center) Discouragement has even been shown by presidential candidate Hillary Clinton who stated “it’s time to move away from the electoral college and move to the popular election of our president”(Mahler and Eder, “The electoral college is Hated by so many. So why does it endure?”).
It would be unjust and oppressive in the extreme to shut out the poor in having a share in declaring who shall be the lawmakers of their country, and yet bear a very heavy share in the support of [the] government. Would not the rich complain grievously if they had no power of electing representatives?… (Gazette
Correspondingly to the rising corruption in government, President Theodore Roosevelt gave a speech addressing the issue of rising corruption and what the government has done to end said corruption (Doc. 2). President Roosevelt informs the audience that the government has put regulations on business corporations as a solution to alarming monopolies and political machines (Doc. 2). When analyzing President Theodore Roosevelt’s speech at Rhode Island, it is evident that the purpose is to convince the audience that the government is trying to protect the citizens from big businesses by placing regulations. Furthermore, when inspecting the voting system, Americans spotted flaws that made the system not as just as it was perceived. It is unmistakable that voting is corrupt because many citizens suffer through the pressure of being subconsciously forced to vote for their alderman (Doc.1).
The United States House of Representatives is one of the two houses of Congress, the legislative branch of the federal government. The House of Representatives is composed of 435 voting members, who are elected every two years from their respective congressional districts. However, many experts believe that this number is too low to effectively represent the interests and needs of the American people. In this essay, I will argue that the number of representatives in the US House of Representatives should be expanded to better serve the American people. First and foremost, expanding the number of representatives in the US House of Representatives would help to ensure that every American citizen is more accurately represented.
They should understand their circumstances and their troubles. Therefore, the number of representatives should be so large that both rich and poor people will choose to be representatives. If the number of representatives is small, the position will be too competitive. Ordinary people will not attempt to run for office. A middle-class yeoman (farmer) will never be chosen.
Despite the waning support for amending the constitution to alter the way American’s cast their ballots, throughout each election cycle media outlets discuss the fear surrounding the minority candidate, in terms of the popular vote, becoming the President. In an interesting article published by Forbes magazine just before the 2012 elections Taylor Broderick discusses the fifteenth, nineteenth, and twenty-sixth amendments and explains how these create a precedent for altering the U.S. voting system through amending the Constitution (Brodarick, 2012). He also argues that the Electoral College incites voter apathy in states which are not saturated with campaign efforts. In other words, people are more likely to participate in an election if they live in swing-states where candidates are actively campaigning. For these reasons, along with American’s historical opposition, Broderick believes politicians should gain public support for Congressional action, as Bayh did in the late 1960s, to throw out the current voting procedure.
Big powerful special interest groups have interfered with politicians’ decision to do what’s right; it appears that the political system has become corrupted and money plays a big role in their decision and money is very influential in getting the legislators to pass bills. One would believe that our politicians are making the battles between the political parties personally; it appear that if the parties don’t agree with another, they resort to drastic measures such as shutting down the government causing more hardship on
The United States currently faces a severe problem with one of their governmental processes. In the democratic system of the United States, politicians are elected by voting from the citizens, in most cases. The problem the United States is facing is that people are no longer voting in elections for officials. This problem is discussed in the article, “In praise of low voter turnout”, written by Charles Krauthammer. The main idea behind this article is that voters are no longer interested in politics, as they were in previous generations.
In the United States, people always talk about freedom and equality. Especially they want elections could be more democratic. In American Democracy in Peril, Hudson’s main argument regarding chapter five “Election Without the People’s Voice,” is if elections want to be democratic, they must meet three essential criteria, which are to provide equal representation of all citizens, to be mechanisms for deliberation about public policy issues, and to control what government does. Unfortunately, those points that Hudson mentions are what American elections do not have. American elections do not provide equal representation to everyone in the country.
Many people believe that the election plays the most important role in democracy. Because a free and fair election holds the government responsible and forces it to behave on voter's interest. However, some scholars find evidence that election itself is not enough to hold politicians responsible if the institutions are not shaping incentives in a correct way. In other words, the role of the election on democracy, whether it helps to serve the interest of the public or specific groups, depends on other political institutions. I