Is The Unites States Political System A Legitimate Democracy? Essay, Research Paper

In any system which claims to be democratic, a question of its

legitimacy remains. A truly democratic political system has certain

characteristics which prove its legitimacy with their existence. One

essential characteristic of a legitimate democracy is that it allows

people to freely make choices without government intervention. Another

necessary characteristic which legitimates government is that every vote

must count equally: one vote for every person. For this equality to

occur, all people must be subject to the same laws, have equal civil

rights, and be allowed to freely express their ideas. Minority rights

are also crucial in a legitimate democracy. No matter how unpopular

their views, all people should enjoy the freedoms of speech, press and

assembly. Public policy should be made publicly, not secretly, and

regularly scheduled elections should be held. Since "legitimacy" may be

defined as "the feeling or opinion the people have that government is

based upon morally defensible principles and that they should therefore

obey it," then there must necessarily be a connection between what the

people want and what the government is doing if legitimacy is to occur.

The U.S. government may be considered legitimate in some aspects, and

illegitimate in others. Because voting is class-biased, it may not be

classified as a completely legitimate process. Although in theory the

American system calls for one vote per person, the low rate of turnout

results in the upper and middle classes ultimately choosing candidates

for the entire nation. Class is determined by income and education, and

differing levels of these two factors can help explain why class bias

occurs. For example, because educated people tend to understand

politics more, they are more likely to vote. People with high income

and education also have more resources, and poor people tend to have low

political efficacy (feelings of low self-worth). Turnout, therefore, is

low and, since the early 1960s, has been declining overall.

The "winner-take-all" system in elections may be criticized for being

undemocratic because the proportion of people agreeing with a particular

candidate on a certain issue may not be adequately represented under

this system. For example, "a candidate who gets 40 percent of the vote,

as long as he gets more votes than any other candidate, can be

elected?even though sixty percent of the voters voted against him"(Lind,

314).

Political parties in America are weak due to the anti-party,

anti-organization, and anti-politics cultural prejudices of the

Classical Liberals. Because in the U.S. there is no national discipline

to force citizens into identifying with a political party, partisan

identification tends to be an informal psychological commitment to a

party. This informality allows people to be apathetic if they wish,

willingly giving up their input into the political process. Though this

apathy is the result of greater freedom in America than in other

countries, it ultimately decreases citizens? incentive to express their

opinions about issues, therefore making democracy less legitimate.

Private interests distort public policy making because, when making

decisions, politicians must take account of campaign contributors. An

"interest" may be defined as "any involvement in anything that affects

the economic, social, or emotional well-being of a person." When

interests become organized into groups, then politicians may become

biased due to their influences. "Special interests buy favors from

congressmen and presidents through political action committees (PACs),

devices by which groups like corporations, professional associations,

trade unions, investment banking groups?can pool their money and give up

to $10,000 per election to each House and Senate candidate"(Lind, 157).

Consequently, those people who do not become organized into interest

groups are likely to be underrepresented financially. This leads to

further inequality and, therefore, greater illegitimacy in the

democratic system.

The method in which we elect the President is fairly legitimate. The

electoral college consists of representatives who we elect, who then

elect the President. Because this fills the requirement of regularly

scheduled elections, it is a legitimate process. The President is

extremely powerful in foreign policy making; so powerful that scholars

now speak of the "Imperial Presidency," implying that the President runs

foreign policy as an emperor. The President is the chief diplomat,

negotiator of treaties, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

There has been a steady growth of the President?s power since World War

II. This abundance of foreign Presidential power may cause one to

believe that our democratic system is not legitimate. However,

Presidential power in domestic affairs is limited. Therefore, though

the President is very powerful in certain areas, the term "Imperial

Presidency" is not applicable in all areas.

The election process of Congress is legitimate because Senators and

Representatives are elected directly by the people. Power in Congress

is usually determined by the seniority system. In the majority party

(the party which controls Congress), the person who has served the

longest has the most power. The problem with the seniority system is

that power is not based on elections or on who is most qualified to be

in a position of authority. Congress is also paradoxical because, while

it is good at serving particular individual interests, it is bad at

serving the general interest (due to its fragmented structure of

committees and sub-committees).

The manner in which Supreme Court Justices are elected is not

democratic because they are appointed by the President for lifelong

terms, rather than in regularly scheduled elections. There is a

"non-political myth" that the only thing that Judges do is apply rules

neutrally. In actuality, they interpret laws and the Constitution using

their power of judicial review, the power explicitly given to them in

Marbury v. Madison.

Though it has been termed the "imperial judiciary" by some, the courts

are the weakest branch of government because they depend upon the

compliance of the other branches for enforcement of the laws.

The bureaucracy is not democratic for many reasons. The key features

of a bureaucracy are that they are large, specialized, run by official

and fixed rules, relatively free from outside control, run on a

hierarchy, and they must keep written records of everything they do.

Bureaucracies focus on rules, but their members are unhappy when the

rules are exposed to the public. Bureaucracies violate the requirement

of a legitimate democracy that public policy must be made publicly, not

secretly. To be hired in a bureaucracy, a person must take a civil

service exam. People working in bureaucracies may also only be fired

under extreme circumstances. This usually leads to the "Peter

Principle;" that people who are competent at their jobs are promoted

until they are in jobs in which they are no longer competent.

Policy making may be considered democratic to an extent. The public

tends to get its way about 60% of the time. Because one of the key

legitimating factors of government is a connection between what it does

and what the public wants, policy making can be considered 60%

legitimate. Furthermore, most of what the federal government does never

reaches the public. Public opinion polls represent the small percentage

of issues that people have heard about.

Though the individual workings of the American government may not be

particularly democratic, it must be somewhat legitimate overall because

without legitimacy, government fails. However, "the people who run for

and win public office are not necessarily the most intelligent, best

informed, wealthiest, or most successful business or professional

people. At all levels of the political system,?it is the most

politically ambitious people who are willing to sacrifice time, family

and private life, and energy and effort for the power and celebrity that

comes with public office"(Dye, 58-59). The legitimacy of the United

States government is limited, but in a system of government which was

designed not to work, complete democracy is most likely impossible.

Bibliography

Dye, Thomas R. Who?s Running America? The Clinton Years. Englewood

Cliffs, New

Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1995.

Lind, Michael. The Next American Nation: The New Nationalism and the

Fourth

American Revolution. New York: The Free Press, 1995.