Features of Decision Making in a Political System

It is evident that interest groups have more of an influence than a citizen’s ability to

Pressure group strategy and influence are “determined largely by factors such as size…financial resources, prestige position of the organization, quality of leadership and staff, and relations with the political parties…” (Turner, 1958, p. 64). It is these factors that make pressure groups, to some extent, incompatible with representative democracy as some groups are able to make their views heard ‘louder’ due to factors which can be difficult for them to change, such as the prestigious position of an interest group.

Public interest lobbies form a linkage element between citizens and governmental elites. In lobbying they articulate what they perceive to be the issue positions of certain sectors of society. Public interest groups also play an important role in facilitating the political participation of their members and related attentive publics. By helping to bring new issues to the table, interest groups influence the shape of political agendas.

Issues from the linkage institutions do not always make it to the policymaking system because if it did not get much attention from the people it would not be considered. Because interest groups and political parties sometimes are based off particular issues, they are not always apart of the government’s agenda.

There are many advantages of interest groups which is why the government has only tried to regulate them in the past instead of out ruling them altogether. Interest groups provide representation

At present, there are approximately 3,000 different interest groups that are formally recognized by the European Union (Kirchner 2011). These interest groups represent a variety of interests and vary in the amount of influence that they actually have on the policy making process. These groups represent the interest of multiple sectors of both social and economic life within the European Union. Interests range from AGRICULTURE to BIG BUSINESS to HUMANITARIAN AID. In a truly pluralist nature, these groups are competing, either directly or indirectly, with each one another to have an influence in the legislation that is produced by the European Union. It is without a doubt that these interest groups within the European Union play an important

There are four kinds of significant “political actors”, “Political Party,” “Social Movement,” “Interest Group,” and “Group Organization,” which citizens in the United States can join and support in order to influence politics and government. These four important “political actors” have a long history and their ability to influence the politics and government can not be underestimated.

One key debate among the authors is what is actually influenced by lawmaking. On one hand, Hansen (1991) takes the perspective that lobbying influences the relationship between interest groups and lawmakers. Hansen bases his argument on the belief that because legislators want to be reelected and they lack information about the “issue preferences of their constituents, the salience of issues to their constituents, and the effectiveness of various policy options,” they will seek information to reduce this uncertainty. The service that interest groups provide the, is this information. Certain interest groups, Hansen argues have “competitive advantage,” (p. 13) in the sense that they can provide certainty about constituent beliefs in an efficient and effective manner, in order to help lawmakers get reelected. Given that elections re-occur, an additional point Hansen makes is for interest groups to have some kind of influence over lawmakers, the conditions that provide this competitive advantage must be expected to recur. When these conditions are met, interest groups

The political and administrative arms of government could be identified as the power structures described within the case study. The political arm being responsible for the legislation and the administrative arm for advice and implementation. Without these power structures the impacts of the legislation may never have arisen. The issue is both an individual and societal problem, due to culture, behaviour and norms that have allowed these problems to arise and grow. The societal aspect is the bigger influencer here

Further, the Commission’s institutional structure is a factor putting great weight on perceptions of the democratic deficit since it lacks democratic credentials yet largely dominates EU law-making in spite of the presence of the EP as its democratic face. Commissioners are not elected, directly nor indirectly, as is with most sovereign executives. Follesdal and Hix however argue that the exercise of these executive powers requires contestation of political leadership and policy. They also suggest that direct elections by citizens or national parliaments should be allowed for the contestation of the Commission President who holds the most powerful EU executive position, so as to increase democratic input. Contrary to this position is that of Moravcsik, who discounts the idea of elections as a possible remedy and rejects the notion of

Political parties and interest groups play important roles in government. These groups have similarities and differences that I will be approaching, after identifying the function of each group. Their aims, interests, policies and goals are what distinguish them apart.

From a macro scope it is evident the EU is strong promoter democracy and has deeply embedded democratic features, however, as Peterson and Shackleton point out that “understanding politics always begins with understanding institutions not at least the EU”. Taking this advice the essay will seek to examine the two main legislative bodies within the EU,

Governmental policies and politics play a critical role in the realization of change in a public agency since the policies are developed and implemented at various levels (Dukeshire & Thurlow, 2002). Since these policies may range from formal regulations and legislation to informal guidelines in an agency, understanding them is important in the achievement of change in a public agency. A Public agency basically functions based on the established policies and politics in the government. Therefore, the accomplishment of the change in a public agency requires an increased understanding of the politics and policies of government.

Decision-making is very vital in the study of administration. Decision-making is the act of deciding the best choice or alternative that brings success or advantage to a situation that will ensure maximum benefits and least risk. Probability can be applied to decision-making in public administration because it is possible to estimate the probability of occurrence of specific events. A part of decision-making in relationship to public administration has to do with goals. The probability of you meeting those goals depends on decision-making. For example a restaurant owner has received more revenue on Thursdays than on any other day And less Revenue on Saturdays than any other day. The owner has looked at everything that could have influenced his sales. The owner realized that the only things that were different on Thursdays than any other day was the chief special and the drink special. According to the receipts of the last four Thursdays the probability that a customer orders a drink special is 60%. The probability that a customer orders the chief special is 50%. The probability of them ordering both is 42%. This shows the restaurant owner that Thursdays drink special should be considered on both Thursdays and Saturdays.

Admittedly, it is important to have an effective government for the growth and development of a nation. Equally, it is important to maintain a democratic government. While there are different ways of understanding what constitutes a democratic government, in public administration, democratic government can be viewed as a government that is responsive to the perspectives of its citizens and exhibit responsibility to the citizens. This can be promoted by the public institutions and public administrators (King, Feltey, & Susel, 1998). They can use various processes to ensure a democratic government including collaborative governance, decision making, citizen participation, administrative reforms, and budgeting. This paper seeks to discuss and analyze the efforts that the public organizations and the public administrators can make with regards to collaborative governance, citizen participation, and decision making to maintain a democratic government.