How The Income Levels And Wealth Of Members Of Congress

Each year billions of dollars are spent on getting candidates of various offices of government elected. Many candidates have had tremendous success through the efforts of much needed monetary contributions to their campaign. Contributors range from unions, religious leaders, organizations such as Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD), the National Rifle Association (NRA), and senior citizens groups. When these groups, known as special interest groups, donate to candidate’s campaign, they expect the candidate to respond to their issues. Because special interest groups, as well as private citizens donate more and more money to campaigns, there is some concern that there is a great need for campaign finance reform.

The inter workings of Congress have been studied extensively by Richard Fenno and David R. Mayhew. Mayhew’s study of Congress took place in Washington, while Richard Fenno conducted his research by following politicians within their congressional district. Mayhew attributes three primary goals to congressmen- getting reelected, achieving influence within Congress and making “good Policy”. Fenno also attributes three basic goals, having influence inside the House than other congressmen. Second, helping their constituents and thereby insuring their reelection, and lastly helping make good policy. The purpose of this paper is to research a member of Congress and to make a direct connection between his activity in Washington and his home district. The paper will answer whether the congressmen is a delegate or trustee. Are the actions a pursuit for reelection? Are the committee assignments a path for movement within the House or outside? What legislation has he/she sponsored or co-sponsored and does it directly reflect his/her districts political view. And finally, do major industries and interest groups within his/she district affect the way he/she votes.

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).

Stephen Medvic, In Defense of Politicians, discusses why Americans feel that politicians are dishonest. In 2007, a Gallup poll about honesty and ethical standards for occupations, showed that only 12 and 9 percent of people felt that Congressmen and State office holders held high standards, (Medvic p. 2). In addition, Americans tend to like their representatives more than the members of Congress because they view them as actual people. Americans view Congress as a group of politicians who are greedy and not representing their interests, (Medvic p. 4).

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.

Throughout the book Congress: The Electoral Connection there is a common theme that the author, David Mayhew, brings to our attention. He argues that the members of Congress have one exclusive goal, to get reelected; because of this goal, it effects their behavior and actions during their time in office. There are four reasons that Mayhew puts an emphasis on the goal of reelection, those being political reality, the lack of focus on parties but rather on individuals, the constant struggle for power and, in his opinion, most importantly it establishes an accountability relationship with an electorate. As the book progresses Mayhew provides an abundance of evidence as to why he believes this is the primary goal of the members of Congress.

Due to the need for campaign funds by both the Democratic and Republican party, representatives and party leaders are easily influenced by the alluring presence of money presented by the wealthy. Consequently, in terms of economic position, laws and policies tend to favor the privileged rather than the overall majority. For instance, beginning in the 1970s, corporate America started to invest more money and focus into politics. A large amount of corporate spending is on lobbying. In contrast, most Americans don’t have an organization to lobby for them. This being so, because the wealthy have more lobbying clout, the government tends to pay closer attention to the concerns of the very privileged.

First, Lazarus argued that most members of Congress received small donations from the same organizations for which they pursed earmarks. While this is not illegal, it certainly is not ethical. In the most glaring cases, at least five United States Representatives received over $100,000 due to earmarks. Lazarus points out that these numbers do not include donations made to members by lobbying firms on behalf of the companies seeking earmarks, as well as, money donated by individuals associated with those companies. Taking all of these factors into account, Lazarus concluded that on average members received $30,000 in campaign donations per earmark. Finally, supporters of the ban on earmarks argue that only the most skilled or powerful politicians will secure beneficial earmarks for their constituents. Therefore, the areas that need federal aid the most will not be fairly served by earmarks, unless their representative is particularly skilled or

Vladeck (2002, para.14) addresses the issue of monetary power and its impact on universal health care coverage in the United States further pointing out that while politicians in the United States were able to succeed without huge electoral support, they couldn’t succeed without money behind them. As industry began to grow in the United States and contracts came up for large infrastructure projects such as the railroad, building canals or bridges and mining, the concept of political donations in return for lucrative contracts began to get established. Vladeck (2002, para16) also points out that wealthy groups and individuals have always been

Members of Congress are held accountable to a variety of political forces ranging from the district and federal level. Overall, members of Congress’ predominant goal are to be reelected. To accomplish this feat, the support of the constituents is the driving influence. When analyzing

Many times the American people have asked themselves why certain topics take precedent over other topics that may seem worthy of attention. The common speculation is that money from special interest groups have infiltrated re-election campaigns are the ones who really have the power and last say on what occurs in government. Many people have campaigned in order to pass a reform that would disclose how a political campaign is funded or set a limitation on how much can be donated to a specific campaign. Some people may argue that doing so may infringe on the rights of voters and their decision on how much to donate or that it prevents individuals from expressing their opinions on political issues, but by not having rules in place on what can

While the district size and its geographic make up varies from region to region and state to state, it is oftentimes plausible to categorize a district as either homogenous or heterogeneous based upon its racial and ethnic pluralities, as well as the constituents relative economic status. A homogenous district typically is comprised of individuals who are like-minded with similar opinions and district goals. However, in a heterogeneous district, there is a “difference between the dominant district group and the average voter” (Bishin, 2009, 126). Furthermore, the prominent industries within the district often also influence representatives because a large number of their constituents are employed by or affected by the actions of that industry

Democratic theory supposes that there is at least some kind of association between the votes taken by members of Congress and the political preferences of who they are representing. Based on each Congress member’s constituency, elected officials can make decisions by representing their constituency’s political preferences. However, most representatives of a few different types are not as responsive, or are not even responsive at all, to certain groups of people due to reasons such as what income level those groups are. This level of responsiveness is unfair and inappropriate for having an accurate representation of what a constituency really needs. Elected officials need to acknowledge all citizens to gain an accurate idea of certain group’s

Summary: The article, “Campaign Cash and Corruption: Money in Politics, Post-Citizens United” is mostly about exactly what it says. Mentioned is, among other things, the massive influence money has in political campaigns in the US, not just among national elections but in senate elections, representative elections, and even state and local elections. Another thing touched upon throughout the article is the revolving door with people becoming senators and then leaving their job as senator to become a lobbyist and make tons of money to in turn try to convince senators to create certain laws.

The power elite is able to exert power over society. The power elite’s control over politics demonstrates how inequality is functional. This validates the class-domination theory of power, which is distributed based on economic power. By controlling economic resources, the power elites political influence in government shapes law and those involved in government to the power elites benefit. In today’s American society these laws have impacted both the corporate community and the elite. Furthermore, the author’s portrayal of the elite displayed how the elite have control concerning choices in government policies, elections, and laws.