As stated before civil disobedience allows for minorities to have say when it comes to making laws. Other forms of protest like legal protest, boycotting, and protest with permit are not as good. These methods are not as likely to get the attention of the majorities because you are not putting yourself at risk and not showing how bad the law is. They also cost money and time for the person to use these forms of protest. If a person performed civil disobedience and got arrested for it, the majority can then see the effect of the
These can easily be seen in the U.S. legislature with the use of filibuster. When only a small portion of the population desires partisanship then legislators will have little reason besides personal belief to refuse to compromise, but if a large portion of representatives refuse to budge and are split, or polarized, on the topic then little can be done to progress or improve the discussion. These same unmoving individuals continue to be reelected, because they are satisfying their population’s desire for partisanship (Lee 170). Polarization by itself can also hinder the democratic process, because it can reduce the competitive nature of politics (Sørensen 430). It does so, because constituents would likely keep the “bad” politician in their party in power, instead of voting for the other party’s representative (Sørensen 432).
One great way to deal with factions is by having a government that knows how to control and deal with their effects. Madison believes that a republic can do that job better than a democracy, because a democracy is a small society of people who can not admit there is a cure to factions. He believes that a large republic would work out well for the States, because a larger government causes less negative impacts on the people, even though all of the people won’t be known, the government won’t be too centralized and only focused on the
This principle is for the people because they wanted to feel safe, they wanted the power of choosing their representatives and they wanted to chose someone who can keep their promises and protect the rights of the citizens. The inalienable rights is the first Amendment in the bill of rights which consist on the people having the power of asking the government to change or make a new law. This principle was established because the people have the right to have a voice and speak or ask the government to change something they don't like. These three principles of the Constitution all have in common the power of the people because each one shows how the people wanted to have different places they can recruit and these three principles join together are like an absolute power against the government power. Another reason for these power was that the people wanted an equal
In addition, the winner-take-all system, also known as “unit rule”, while not always necessarily representative of the popular vote, “the electoral college and unit rule provide decisive majorities that lend stability to our presidential election system” (Josephson, Ross 162). This stability compliments the argument that it simply isn’t worth the effort to make any changes to the Electoral College because of the work involved and how functional it is. The Electoral College may not be the most ideal system, but it performs the functions it was designed to do. As said by Alexander Bickel on the
Individuals may not apply impression management, but they should know the cons for not delivering what the organization wants and needs (Slideshare.net, 2015). Individuals can create better supervisor impressions when they use these tactics, given that they have high in political skills. On the other hand, individuals who have low political skills and engage in high levels of impressions management are likely to be viewed as less favourably, avoid using impression management tactics will be a better option (Crant, 1996). Impression management is neither good or bad, it is an integral part of our social interaction and everyone gets involved in it every day (Slideshare.net, 2015). Therefore, politicians who do well in impression management can get immediate political advantage compared to the others.
Thus, sometimes compulsory voting is known as an effective remedy to solve the low turnout rate problem. (Quintelier, Hooghe, & Marien, 2011) The compulsory voting can make sure the full turnout, which can overcome two kinds of common reasons for “rational abstention”: information uncertainty about other potential voters’ aims and the transaction and opportunity costs of voting. The compulsory voting enables voters to solve the problem of the lack of information, not only for the value of individual vote, but also relate to other voters’ intentions. For instance, during the elections, it is rational for a poor to vote, which can protect his interest and right. However, this rationality holds only when he knows that most of the people who share the same circumstance as him vote.
Nonetheless the failure of censensus formation leading to voting might contribute to the tyranny of majority, which considered by the minority as unjust. Notwithstanding the contribution of deliberate democracy to a just social order, it is not a necessary condition as there are other nondemocratic of rule could also achieve a just social order. Therefore deliberate democracy is not a necessary condition but provides instrumental value to achieve a just social
Popular vote is very direct; one vote for every person. It’s a common belief among political critics that the popular vote is a more fair system and will encourage a higher number of voter turnout. Under the restrictions of the Electoral College, specifically in lower populated states, some voters could feel an overwhelming sense of support for a specific candidate. This would give the voter the feeling that their vote would carry no meaning and in turn could cause a lower voter turnout. Since higher populated states have more electoral votes, many believe that the lower populated areas will be neglected.
“Voting ensures that our system of government is maintained and individual voices are clearly heard by elected officials.” For instance, this responsibility was set to be a guide law to citizens for them to understand the importance of voting. This is because, leaders are most of the time referred to people who are cause of different problems. Therefore, since they are the ones who can elect a good leader, then should understand the importance of their involvement. In addition to this responsibility, Americans are responsible to respect and obey federal, state, and local laws (US Citizenship and Immigration Service, n.d). This is a complement to the first responsibility.
People should not have to worry about losing their lives just because of the simple fact that they are standing up for their rights. If the government tried to put the interests of citizens before their own, and not allow the citizens to get punish for what rights are obligated for them then they will see by putting the people first will benefit America as a whole. In my opinion I feel that the constitution is a petty factor for determining the democracy of a government and the rights of the people in that
Finally a third reason is due to the fact that people are simply not educated. Voting will change our lives, if we just speak up everything will be just the way we want it. We need to take advantage of our freedom and not let only a part of the state control our wants and needs. It is important to vote because that will be the only way our voice could be heard and it will then satisfy our needs and wants. The
The issue of separate registration process should also be minimized to make the voter registration process easier. This is because, in the US, the registration system is complicated, discouraging voters from participating in the voting process because they have to undergo various registration systems (Abrams, Iversen, & Soskice, 2005). If the government enacted comparable laws, the American political system will benefit in various ways because such law would provide a system that are more representative of the general public. Most importantly, this law will instill a sense of civic responsibility in the American electorate, hence escalating involvement in voting among citizens (Lund, 2013). It is also suggested that government should introduce and implement compulsory voting legislation, which will instill or foster a sense of public responsibility pertaining to voting among
The Democrats are more supportive of government action on social welfare issues and efforts to regulate the economy; and Republicans typically support government action on national defense and foreign policy. Because of the increased ideological differences between the parties it has been more difficult to reach a compromise. Republicans are ideologically extreme and oppose compromise on principle. With more Moderate Republicans and less Conservative Democrats it makes compromise a lot less likely as there is no middle man to mediate and influence those on the extreme side of their party. Because of this polarization and unwillingness to compromise, Congress is now divided and practically dysfunctional, and it has caused legislative gridlock, and has also undermined the power of the President.
The Federalist system of our government requires there be a sharing of power between branches, which is very much enforced with the Electoral College. There are speculations that with the abolishment of the Electoral College, the Federalist system would be lost with it. The Electoral college also helps to promote the two party system, and while some people may take issue with this, it is a way of creating stability in our government. With the distribution of power the Electoral College promotes, this allows the minority to be represented. However, there is a big issue in that the majority vote is not properly reflected by the Electoral College.