Reflection on Representation

 

 

Assignment 1 Pols 300: Reflecting on Representation

Representation can be seen in many different ways. For me, it’s the idea that political actors are representing what the people desire while taking in consideration of minority groups. Saying that, I believe they need to follow through with what they were elected to do. The Stanford Encyclopedia gives the example definition as, “to make present again”[1]. The job of a representative is to represent the opinions and concerns of their constituents, or people that vote for them. Representatives are the elite and their pay is very generous, this is one reason their motives may be questioned. Reading this article it made me realize the different ways we can see representation. To me whether or not the people have trust in their representatives is one example. Many voters will not continue to support a representative unless they feel that their concerns are being represented. The voters trust their representative until they make a move that provides them the excuse not to. A representative may make a move that isn’t in the best of the people but in the best interest of themselves. This can be considered as substantive representation. It’s described as the activity of the representative and whether their actions are in the interests of those being represented. Andrew Rehfield argues that there should be a separation between what we see as a Delegate and a Trustee. I couldn’t agree more. With the separation it would allow political scientists to see the ways which representatives are partial delegates and partial trustees. Depending on their actions they would be placed in a narrower category. A delegate is to reflect the interest of the voters and groups in society. They are held accountable with how their actions benefit those people that put them in office. A trustee on the other hand is held accountable with how their actions influence the over-all well being of the country. One main job for representatives is to be in charge of promoting democratic consistency. As stated in the Stanford Encyclopedia reading by Young, the democratic representation is a dynamic process meaning that it moves between movements of accountability and authorization[2]. The citizens are then allowed to authorize their representatives and hold them accountable. This made me thinking a different way. By doing so we evaluate how a representative would be able to do the task we demand and if they are a good representation of our voice. A representative must build the trust from the community even from the disadvantaged groups. This can be achieved by building relationships with the community.

Another point that was brought us as reading was the idea that descriptive representation can end up suppressing other voices because stronger voices are being added. This becomes a problem for many representatives who have to represent many different views. The representative has to realize the diversity within the constituents and how representing one group may come at the expense of another. Descriptive representation is whether a legislatures membership reflects the diversity of backgrounds and interests in society[3] This made me really question all the groups, mainly minorities that are not getting their voices heard because their representatives are siding with the citizens that are going to benefit them more. A good member of congress should be able to gather with other representatives of diverse representation and discuss public policy.

[1] Dovi, Suzanne. “Political Representation.” Stanford University

[2] Dovi, Suzanne. “Political Representation.” Stanford University

[3] Davidson, Roger H., and Walter J. Oleszek. “Being There: Hill Styles and Home Styles.”