Kirjahaku

Although we tend to use the terms "representative democracy" and "democracy" as synonyms, Michael Mezey maintains that they are not. Democracy means that the people govern; representative democracy means that the people elect others to govern for them. This raises the question of the extent to which representative government approximates democracy-a question that turns on the relationship between representatives and those whom they represent. Mezey reviews the literature on the meaning of representation and its relationship to issues of citizen control. In the empirical sections that follow, he draws on data from the United States Congress and from legislatures outside the United States to discuss the extent to which the composition of a legislature reflects the demography of its nation. The author also examines a legislature's various political and economic interests and the extent to which representatives are responsive to specific requests for assistance from their constituents and to constituent opinions on public policy questions. He further looks at the effect that interest groups, political parties, and election systems have on the relationship between representatives and their constituents. Finally, Mezey addresses the criticisms that have been leveled against representative institutions: that they are slow to act, inefficient and uninformed when they do act, that they are too inclined to do what is popular rather than what is necessary and, conversely, that their members are too removed from the opinions of their constituents and therefore unfaithful to their democratic obligation to respond to the wishes of those whom they represent. Rich in thoughtful analysis, Representative Democracy incorporates normative, empirical and comparative perspectives on representation. It is perfectly suited for use in an upper-level course on the legislative process or Congress.

Although we tend to use the terms 'representative democracy' and 'democracy' as synonyms, Michael Mezey maintains that they are not. Democracy means that the people govern; representative democracy means that the people elect others to govern for them. This raises the question of the extent to which representative government approximates democracy-a question that turns on the relationship between representatives and those whom they represent. Mezey reviews the literature on the meaning of representation and its relationship to issues of citizen control. In the empirical sections that follow, he draws on data from the United States Congress and from legislatures outside the United States to discuss the extent to which the composition of a legislature reflects the demography of its nation. The author also examines a legislature's various political and economic interests and the extent to which representatives are responsive to specific requests for assistance from their constituents and to constituent opinions on public policy questions. He further looks at the effect that interest groups, political parties, and election systems have on the relationship between representatives and their constituents. Finally, Mezey addresses the criticisms that have been leveled against representative institutions: that they are slow to act, inefficient and uninformed when they do act, that they are too inclined to do what is popular rather than what is necessary and, conversely, that their members are too removed from the opinions of their constituents and therefore unfaithful to their democratic obligation to respond to the wishes of those whom they represent. Rich in thoughtful analysis, Representative Democracy incorporates normative, empirical and comparative perspectives on representation. It is perfectly suited for use in an upper-level course on the legislative process or Congress.

Selecting political leaders by popular election is an unquestioned hallmark of representative democracies—the institutional manifestation of Lincoln’s promise of a government of the people and by the people. But in 2016, Lincoln’s promise seems to have given way to Hamilton’s nightmare—with his worries that popular elections would produce demagogues who paid an "obsequious court to the people," appealing to their passions and prejudices rather than to their reason. This book examines the commitment to the widest level of participation among the largest number of citizens in the selection of the president. It looks at two salient characteristics of our current presidential election environment that bring the wisdom of this commitment into question: the declining influence of political parties and the communication revolution in the form of the internet, social media, and cable television. Ultimately, Mezey asks whether our now fully democratized presidential selection process has in fact diminished the quality of our presidential candidates and the campaigns they run, whether the turn to demagoguery that the founders feared has materialized, what the consequences of our presidential selection process have been for American government, and whether or not it would be valuable to rethink our wholehearted commitment to popular election of the president. His answers do not topple our commitment to popular elections but rather point the way toward improving the quality of both participation and democracy.

Selecting political leaders by popular election is an unquestioned hallmark of representative democracies—the institutional manifestation of Lincoln’s promise of a government of the people and by the people. But in 2016, Lincoln’s promise seems to have given way to Hamilton’s nightmare—with his worries that popular elections would produce demagogues who paid an "obsequious court to the people," appealing to their passions and prejudices rather than to their reason. This book examines the commitment to the widest level of participation among the largest number of citizens in the selection of the president. It looks at two salient characteristics of our current presidential election environment that bring the wisdom of this commitment into question: the declining influence of political parties and the communication revolution in the form of the internet, social media, and cable television. Ultimately, Mezey asks whether our now fully democratized presidential selection process has in fact diminished the quality of our presidential candidates and the campaigns they run, whether the turn to demagoguery that the founders feared has materialized, what the consequences of our presidential selection process have been for American government, and whether or not it would be valuable to rethink our wholehearted commitment to popular election of the president. His answers do not topple our commitment to popular elections but rather point the way toward improving the quality of both participation and democracy.