Erik Jon Brenner
Sept. 8, 2015
*Revised* POLS 300 Assignment 1 : Reflecting on Representation
The concept of democracy in American politics heavily relies on proper representation of the people. Because democracy is defined as a system of government run by it’s whole population, representation is the major link between people and power. My personal idea of proper political representation is when groups of people have elected a leader, by a free, fair and open election, and who is accountable for them, hears what they have to say, and acts upon the needs of the people not for his or her own benefit, but rather the true benefit of the people. There are different levels of representation and varying degrees. An example of “good” representation would be when a group, minority or majority, has representation that covers all the multiple traits of their unique social distinction. Factors that comprise the groups traits range from: age, gender, socio-economic and educational status. More and different factors may be necessary for different groups but these seem to be the most common factors that affect every type of group in politics today. Naturally, If the group is seeking more group cohesion and representation especially when competing against other groups, they would elect someone who is similar to themselves. This poses a potential problem however. Just ‘looking’ like the constituents they represent does not legitimize their effectiveness in manufacturing policies that actually help the people being represented. A candidate or representative that represents a group based on what they actually do is an example of a ‘substantive’ leader. It is important to have substantive representation for groups and it is a major factor in defining what ‘good’ representation is. In my opinion, the highest and truest form of representation is acquiring a healthy balance of descriptive and substantive traits in a leader when representing a group. Ultimate transparency and accountability are also necessary traits for political actors who are representing constituents.
In a world of varying political theories and agendas it is difficult to make sense of everything. However, it is the representative’s job, and arguably their primary interest, to seek out what is necessary in order for who they represent to flourish. Instead of listing ideas or activities a member of congress does in order to represent their constituents, I will list what I believe is a more pragmatic ideology. Concrete behavior of a representative, and perhaps the most obvious is to actually meet face to face with their constituents and the various types and groups of people within and respond to letters from constituents that are sent to the representatives like we saw for Harold “Biz” Johnson. Attending seminars of matters that groups find important and to speak publicly at those events. How will the representative be able accomplish their job of delegating without knowing about, experiencing and listening to the very people they represent? I believe the best behavior a member of congress can engage in is taking the needs and wants from the various constituents and doing everything they can, within the legislative process and without bias towards one group, to represent them. Members of congress must also know when to act more as a delegate with utter transparency versus when to introduce their own judgement or experience, and act more as a trustee. “Any adequate theory of representation must grapple with these contradictory demands” (Dovi 2011) We will not know when we have reached proper and true representation. The reason is because not everyone will be happy or feel represented, mostly due to constituents opposing viewpoints and stances on matters. However, in my opinion, it is the representatives job to seek the most fair and balanced views of his or her constituents and do everything within their power to represent those views.
/ / / *REVISED* / / /
*Revised* POLS 300 Assignment 1 : Reflecting on Representation
The concept of democracy in American politics heavily relies on proper representation of the people. Because democracy is defined as a system of government run by it’s whole population, representation is the major link between people and power. My personal idea of proper political representation is when groups of people have elected a leader, by a free, fair and open election, and who is accountable for them, hears what they have to say, and acts upon the needs of the people not for his or her own benefit, but rather the true benefit of the people. There are different levels of representation and varying degrees. An example of “good” representation would be when a group, minority or majority, has representation that covers all the multiple traits of their unique social distinction. Factors that comprise the groups traits range from: age, gender, socio-economic and educational status. More and different factors may be necessary for different groups but these seem to be the most common factors that affect every type of group in politics today. Naturally, If the group is seeking more group cohesion and representation especially when competing against other groups, they would elect someone who is similar to themselves. This poses a potential problem however. Just ‘looking’ like the constituents they represent does not legitimize their effectiveness in manufacturing policies that actually help the people being represented. A candidate or representative that represents a group based on what they actually do is an example of a ‘substantive’ leader. It is important to have substantive representation for groups and it is a major factor in defining what ‘good’ representation is. In my opinion, the highest and truest form of representation is acquiring a healthy balance of descriptive and substantive traits in a leader when representing a group. Ultimate transparency and accountability are also necessary traits for political actors who are representing constituents.
In a world of varying political theories and agendas it is difficult to make sense of everything. However, it is the representative’s job, and arguably their primary interest, to seek out what is necessary in order for who they represent to flourish. Instead of listing ideas or activities a member of congress does in order to represent their constituents, I will list what I believe is a more pragmatic ideology. Concrete behavior of a representative, and perhaps the most obvious is to actually meet face to face with their constituents and the various types and groups of people within and respond to letters from constituents that are sent to the representatives like we saw for Harold “Biz” Johnson. Attending seminars of matters that groups find important and to speak publicly at those events. How will the representative be able accomplish their job of delegating without knowing about, experiencing and listening to the very people they represent? I believe the best behavior a member of congress can engage in is taking the needs and wants from the various constituents and doing everything they can, within the legislative process and without bias towards one group, to represent them. Members of congress must also know when to act more as a delegate with utter transparency versus when to introduce their own judgement or experience, and act more as a trustee. “Any adequate theory of representation must grapple with these contradictory demands” (Dovi 2011) We will not know when we have reached proper and true representation. The reason is because not everyone will be happy or feel represented, mostly due to constituents opposing viewpoints and stances on matters. However, in my opinion, it is the representatives job to seek the most fair and balanced views of his or her constituents and do everything within their power to represent those views.
Dovi, Suzanne, “Political Representation”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/political-representation/>.
