Pluralism and Public Choice

Deborah Stone begins her book, Policy Paradox, by stating, “a theory of policy politics must start with a simple model of political society, just as economics starts with a simple model of economic society.” Deborah Stone examines two policy-making models to describe the paradox’s of the process model for public policy. The two models include: the market (rational model) and the Polis (community) model. Stone states she contrasts these two models to “illuminate some ways the market model distorts political life.” As discussed in class, the market model follows five steps:

This paper will serve as a way of introducing the three competing theories of American democracy, which are Pluralism, the Elite theory, and Hyper pluralism. The following theories can all be applied as a lens to see American politics through, each serving as an essential part of government. Among this paper, we will come across a bill (S 256), this bill was fighting to overhaul the federal bankruptcy code, making it harder for people to file for bankruptcy. To file for bankruptcy individuals would have to go through the means test first. This paper will also examine what theory of American democracy is best portrayed within the bill.

Comparative politics is the empirical comparative study of political systems. It involves the classification and comparison of institutions - ‘a rule that has been institutionalised’ (Lane and Ersson, 1999: 23) - in order to determine the nature of political regimes. The study of comparative politics has come to be guided by three major research schools: rational choice theory, culturalist analysis and structuralist approaches; each of which spearhead a distinctive notion over what about institutions affects the nature of the political process. Rationalists are methodological individualists who assert that

Presently, there are three theories that have been posed to explain the American political process. They are, elite theory, hyperpluralism, and pluralism. While all of them have sufficient evidence in regard to discussion and debate, pluralism undoubtedly best explains the American political process. Pluralism states that our democracy is best achieved by the existence and cooperation between various groups, and individuals, which participate in government by means of election. In context of American politics, pluralism is the core which our political process revolves around.

Deborah Stone compares the market and polis models of policy making with the intent to show that the original origin of the public policy discipline was to be grounded in a practical science, economics, but to also show how and why the economic approach to policy making has significant limitations. Stone is arguing against the view that policy decision making is rational decision making. Deborah Stone’s main reason for comparing the two models of policy making is to identify and critique the simplistic assumptions that have been used in the market and rationality project. Stone is attempting to point out the paradox that exists between the two because the two models are evidently contradictory, the market being ground in rationality and the polis being based on emotion. Stone compares the two policies in order to show that economics cannot be solely used to understand policy making because the two are fundamentally different. She also points out that policy is made in a political society and because of this the polis model seeks to explain public policy as it actually happens in reality since the field and study of public policy was created to allow government to make decisions that would best benefit their citizens.

Government failure happens when policies veer away from traditional institutional norms, electoral mandates, and industrial market forces. According to the public choice theory, public policy outcomes often conflict with public opinion, public awareness, and the economic forces of markets. Eg: Crowding out – government spending encroaches on private sectors.

A voter can be defined as an individual who votes, or has the right to vote, in elections. Voting behaviour is explained using the concepts of expressive voting and strategic voting. A rational voter would act more strategically, that is, the voter would vote to produce an election outcome which is as close as possible to his or her own policy preferences, rather than voting on the basis of party attachment, ideology, or social group membership (expressive voting). Strategic voting has become more important than voting on the basis of political cleavages (expressive voting), so voters have become more rational in their approach, however there is always an element of expressiveness in their behaviour. Political parties were initially formed to represent the interests of particular groups in society however, as these parties became more universal in the appeal of their policy programmes, voting behaviour shifted from expressive to strategic. This essay explores the reasons behind the declining importance of political cleavages, and the rise of strategic voting.

As exemplified above, one decision could fit the bill for one of your groups, but then completely alienate another. Two, elections have gotten to the point where they more or less can be “bought”. If a tobacco company wants a politician to convince people to buy lots of cigarettes, all they need to do is write a big enough check to the campaign. In tandem, these two points raise an important question: how good can our government really be if it cannot effectively represent all people and support of a policy can be bought by those with fat wallets? This is an important question to think about, especially as our political environment becomes more polarized by the

Two-tiered pluralism differs from pluralism because of the effect it has upon the minority groups of the nation. While there is an equal legal backing for all racial and ethnic communities, minorities are still undermined by the system thus becoming segregated. Moreover in politics, minority groups tend to be under seclusion even though the current enacted laws grant equality at all stages. The amount of resources given to minorities are very different to elites leading to the practices and outcomes to be unequal (Lecture 6). Pluralism is very different from the two-tiered pluralism framework as it focuses upon group-based competition and that everyone has equal opportunities

Politics is an integral part of our society, and in order for the citizens of any society, or a county to protect their rights and interest, electing the right people, and right theories are necessary. When it comes to government, Elitism and Pluralism are two systems which can be used as a structure of how the powers will be distributed. While the theory of Elitism prefers the distribution of power to be based on wealth, ancestry and intellect; Pluralism theory is much more diverse in the distribution of power, as it ensures equality for everyone, regardless of any differences. Pluralism serves as the model of modern western democracy. In the case of Baltimore, the pluralist theory is much more efficient due to its views on authority, rights

Duclos, Denis. "Dehumanization or the Disappearance of Pluralism?" Diogenes 49.195 (2002): 34-39. Expanded Academic ASAP. Gale. Maize High School Library, KS. 27 October 2004 .

Pluralist theory views politics and decision making as a competitive phenomenon where different groups and individuals have different views and that there is no single elite group that exercises influence (Davis & Go, 2009). The theory holds that power is relatively broadly distributed among different interest groups. These groups hold different views of the same aspect and compete with each other for

Pluralism is a worldview in which the society members structure their culture based on acceptance and diversity. These common traits all strive for the common good of all and also realize there is some truth in other beliefs (Pluralism, 2015). This worldview stresses the importance of tolerance of other religions but does not however deviate from their own beliefs.

In exploring contingent value a large portion of the findings collected by surveys are representative of the current electorate. In diving deeper into this point, I must stress and demonstrate how the electorate can change even though a large number of voters are the same voters that might have had a different opinion some time ago. This is highlighted by the ultimate

Buchanan describes the public choice theory as methodologically individualist. Public choice theory according to Buchanan is the "Individual Theory of Politics" which examines the actions and behaviors of individuals who are largely elected from organic units such as parties, states or nations. Within this framework, there will be preferences of individuals at the center of the decisions taken in the public enterprises, which are part of the public sector. Because the parties of the political decision-making process act within the framework of maximizing utility. In the public economy, the preferences of the individuals are on the front plan because, the parties are made up of individuals. So, public choice theory focuses on the actions