Democracy Lesson Plan for High School Teachers: Appreciating Representation--Student Handout A--Overview

Appreciating Representation

A Lesson Plan for High School Teachers of Civics, Government, and U.S. History

Review Online HTML files: Main Contents Page
Complete Lesson Plan (36-pages): Download to Word or Print in PDF format.

Student Handout A: An Overview

Factors Influencing Legislative Decision Making
   Merits of the Case
   Constituents
   Interest Groups
    Political Parties
    Conviction/record

Our governmental system at both the national and state levels is based on the principle of representation. People do not themselves govern, nor do they ordinarily vote to adopt laws and public policy. Rather, they govern indirectly by electing legislators to represent them.

For the framers of the U.S. Constitution, the legitimacy of the government came from the consent of the governed. The House of Representatives, with its members elected by specific geographical areas throughout the nation, was designed to reflect the views of the people. The Senate, with its members originally selected by state legislatures, was designed to reflect the sovereignty of the states. The will of the people would find its way through legislative chambers by means of lawmakers who would assess the preferences and interests of the people they represent and take them into account in deciding on matters of public policy. Legislators would lead, interpret and reflect public opinion as they assembled in Congress.

Today, members of both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate and the houses and senates of the 50 states (except Nebraska, which is unicameral and has a senate, but not a house) are elected by the people and are considered to be representatives of the people.

At the state level, for example, legislators represent their constituents in a number of ways. They help people in their district who may have problems with governmental regulations or the provision of services, such as welfare benefits, unemployment compensation, driver’s licenses, insurance costs, taxes--almost anything under the sun. They try to get projects, such as the construction of a court house or funding for travel by a high school band, for their districts. And they are constantly looking for as many state dollars as possible to be channeled to their districts as school, county, and municipal aid. Insofar as possible, legislators also attempt to give voice to the policy views of their district and its residents. It is not always easy for legislators to figure out what the policy views of their constituents are because they probably vary. It is easier, however, to help individual constituents with problems they have or fight for projects and state aid for their districts.

Legislators themselves have little doubt as to the quality of the jobs their institutions do with regard to representation. When asked in a recent survey about their legislature’s performance representing constituencies, almost nine out of ten members responding characterized the job as “excellent” or “good” (rather than “only fair” or “poor”). Smaller proportions thought their legislatures did as well making laws or balancing the power of the executive. ^³

Overall, Americans approve of the job their own representative is doing. Public opinion polls offer evidence of this, as do election results that show incumbents winning 80 percent to 90 percent of the time in both Congress and state legislatures. Yet, people don’t feel the same way about representatives other than their own or about the system in general. As surveys conducted by the University of Michigan show, confidence that government officials listen to “people like me” has declined over the past 50 years. A recent survey, sponsored by the National Conference of State Legislatures, found that almost half the people with opinions think that elected officials don't care what plain people thought and more than half with opinions think that elected officials work to serve their personal interests rather than the public interest. Further evidence of the lack of public support for the representative part of democracy is suggested by the fact that only 30 percent of those surveyed believe that making laws is a job best left to elected representatives, while 47 percent believe that the public should decide issues directly by voting on them.⁴

Americans are not only represented in legislative chambers by members whom they elect. They are also represented by political parties and interest groups to which they belong or with which they share values, interests, or priorities.

Party matters to people, even though most people are critical of the two major political parties and think they have too much power in the political system. Fifty years ago, party mattered even more. Then, roughly three out of four Americans identified themselves as either Republican or Democrats, while the rest identified as independents. Since then, the proportion of independent identifiers has increased, but, still, about two out of three people consider themselves to be either Republicans or Democrats. The remaining one-third are independents, but even among them a number lean Republican or Democratic.

Not only do Americans identify with the parties; they normally vote for their party’s candidates. It is no accident that, in the 2004 presidential elections, about 85 percent of Republicans voted for George W. Bush and almost as high a percentage of Democrats voted for John Kerry. If party preferences play such a vital role in the voting decisions of high-visibility elections such as that for the presidency, they provide even more important cues to voters in less visible contests, such as those for the state legislature. The political parties represent different constituencies in the population. Republicans are more likely to have higher incomes and be church goers, while Democrats are more likely to have lower incomes and be less religious. Finally, the political parties take different positions on issues--not all issues, by any means, but several significant issues, such as the role of government, abortion, and the distribution of tax cuts.

Interest groups also provide a channel for representation, although few people recognize this. Indeed, most Americans think that interest groups (or “special interests” as they are pejoratively termed) have too much power and do more harm than good.

If, as the public believes, interest groups are the enemy, then, in the words of the comic-strip character Pogo, “we have met the enemy and he is us.” That is because seven out of ten Americans belong to one interest group or another, and four out of ten belong to more than one group. Of course, the political and policy opinions and interests of all of us are represented by groups to which we do not belong but with whom we share values or interests. It may well be that (as the case of their attitude toward their own representative in comparison with their attitude toward everyone else’s representative) people think that the group to which they belong is pursuing, not a “special” interest, but rather the public interest, while groups whose interest they do not share are self-serving.

The concerns of the constituency, political parties, and interest groups all come to bear on the lawmaking process. So also do other factors, the most important of which are the merits of the particular case, that is the substantive arguments for and against a particular bill, and what individual representatives themselves believe and what their past records are like.

Most of the discussion that takes place in the legislative process--whether in committee or on the floor or by lobbyists for various groups--is over the merits of proposed legislation. Arguments, supported by evidence, are made in favor of a proposal, while arguments, also supported by evidence, are made against a proposal. These opposing arguments are critical grist for the legislative mill. In the deliberation that takes place, arguments on one side or the other often are the decisive elements in how many legislators vote; and, if not decisive, they still play an influential role. Legislators, of course, have their own convictions, values, and beliefs–ones that they have acquired over time. Many, for example, feel strongly one way or the other about gun control; many feel just as strongly on issues relating to gay rights. Moreover, they have records that they have made while serving in public office. They may, for instance, have consistently supported increased expenditures for state aid to education. If they change course, they will look inconsistent and in their next election campaign they can be taken to task for switching positions. So, in the legislative process, as elsewhere, the past helps to shape the present.

Factors Influencing Legislative Decision Making

Hundreds or even thousands of bills are introduced in a state legislature each year. The numbers range from about 15,000 introductions in New York, to about 8,000 in Massachusetts and about 500 in Wyoming. These bills run the gamut in terms of the problems that are addressed and the issues that are raised, and the variation in terms of scope and importance is tremendous. Most of the bills are non-controversial and pass easily. But many bills are contested. Some of them are on major matters of wide public importance, such as the budget bill, tax bills, and legislation on issues like capital punishment, gay rights, and abortion. In all of these cases, legislators have to decide where they stand and how they will vote. Many factors can affect their decisions, depending on the nature of the issue.

The following factors are among the most significant ones affecting how members of a legislature decide. Other factors, such as the views of one’s colleagues and the recommendations of the legislative committee that held hearings on and studied a particular bill, also count. But (1) the merits of the case, (2) constituents' views, (3) special interests, (4) political party position, and (5) the conviction and/or record of the individual legislator usually count most heavily. It is worth examining each of these factors briefly.

Merits of the Case

Although negotiation and bargaining are important parts of the legislative process, probably the most important and pervasive part is deliberation on the merits of the case. Sponsors and advocates of just about every bill that the legislature considers will argue the merits of their proposal. “It will help the economy,” “improve health,” “attract business to the state” are typical claims based on the merits. Those who oppose the bill will argue the merits of their case against the proposal. “It will create a burden for citizens,” “costs too much money,” or “simply cannot be implemented” are also typical claims on the negative side. Ordinarily, in their efforts to win a majority of members (or keep proponents from obtaining a majority) both sides offer a rationale and data to justify their position. Deliberation then takes place in which each side tries to convince the other, but especially the uncommitted legislators, of the merits of its own position and ideas. This does not mean that everybody is open to persuasion. Most issues a legislature considers are not new; they have been around in similar form for a while. So, some legislators already have positions and even a voting record. Other legislators may have decided on other grounds. But a healthy number of people are open to persuasion.

Most of the discussion that takes place in Congress and state legislatures is of a deliberative nature, revolving around the merits as seen by various participants in the process.

Constituents

Our governmental system, at both the national and state levels, is based on the principle of representation. People do not themselves govern, nor do they ordinarily vote to adopt laws and public policy. Rather, they govern indirectly by electing legislators who represent them in Washington, D.C., and the capitals of the states.

Members of both the U.S. Senate and U.S. House and the senates and houses of the 50 states (except Nebraska which is unicameral and has a senate, but not a house) are elected by and serve as representatives of the people. At the federal level, two senators are elected from each state, while each member of the house is elected by voters in districts or constituenies of 645,632 people. At the state level, the population of senate and house districts varies from state to state. But each member of the senate and each member of the house is elected by voters in a particular district or constituency.

Representation by legislators entails both serving the interests and expressing the views of constituents. Legislators perform their representational tasks in a number of ways. They help people in their districts who have problems with government, such as not receiving welfare benefits, signing up for unemployment compensation, renewing a driver’s license, or disputes over the amount of income tax they are expected to pay. Legislators try to get projects--such as the construction of a court house or funding for travel by a high school band--for their district. And they are constantly looking for as many state dollars as possible to be channeled to their district as school, county, and municipal aid.

Insofar as possible, legislators try to give expression to the dominant policy views of their district and the people in it. However, with respect to most issues on which legislators have to vote, the overwhelming majority of constituents have no views. On some issues, constituents do have views; but their views may be split, with roughly half of them for and half of them against a particular measure. On few issues do constituents’ views generally run in the same direction. Only then does a dominant constituency position, sometimes referred to as a “constituency mandate,” exist.

Interest Groups

The so-called “special interests,” more neutrally known as “interest groups, ” are people who organize and engage in political actions to promote values, interests, and views that they have in common and feel strongly about. Thousands of interest groups exist at the national level and hundreds exist in each of the 50 states. There are groups promoting a cleaner environment, animal rights, the mentally ill, for example, as well as trade associations, industrial associations, businesses, labor unions, and student associations. There are groups that favor abortion rights, and other groups that oppose abortion. Some groups favor the death penalty, others oppose it. And so on. Virtually every political interest or point of view is organized to some degree or another. Each of them is entitled by the U.S. Constitution to advance and defend its common interest through the lawmaking process in Congress and state legislatures.

Interest groups provide a channel of representation for people who share values, interests, views, and such. Whether politically active or not, practically all Americans have some values or interests that concern them. Whether people are members or not, some groups or group is representing values and interests that they hold. If, for example, you personally favor the decriminalization of marijuana, you would be represented by several organizations that are trying to promote that objective legislatively. Just about everyone, therefore, has one or several “special interests” that they want to see advanced.

Interest groups organize in order to maximize their chances of success in their political efforts. A group in a state that represents thousands of members or hundreds of businesses has advantages over individuals who represent only themselves. Some groups have large memberships, others are economically important; some are zealous in pursuit of their objectives, others rely on political skills and forming coalitions or alliances with like-minded groups. Take teacher associations, for instance. These groups are very influential in practically every state in the nation. Their influence derives from the following: they have a relatively large membership; members are dispersed throughout all the legislative districts of the state; members can be mobilized for political action; membership dues provide substantial financial resources; association lobbyists are skillful; and teachers lay claim to advocating for education, which is highly valued by people in the state.

Political Parties

In both the nation and states, a two-party system prevails (except in Nebraska where elections to the legislature are nonpartisan), with Democrats and Republicans contesting control of both the executive and legislative branches of government. The parties perform several functions: they represent people; they compete in elections in order to place their members in executive and legislative offices; they offer different policy choices to the electorate; and the party that wins a majority of seats organizes and runs government and attempts to enact its policy agenda.

At the state legislative level the political party has become both a significant electoral force and a governing force. The senate Democrats and house Democrats and the senate Republicans and house Republicans take major responsibility for getting their incumbents reelected and replacing incumbents of the opposing party with challengers of their own. In their campaigns, the legislative parties, led by legislative party leaders, help recruit candidates, raise funds that are allocated to targeted (that is, competitive) races, provide polling and other information, and even suggest strategies for their members. If a party wins control of the state senate or state house by electing a majority of the total membership, it takes the lead in organizing the body. Its members will preside over the chamber and chair all or most of the committees that serve as the major work groups in the legislature. Moreover, the majority party sets the agenda for the important policy issues to be considered.

Conviction/record

Like anyone else, people who serve in public office have core convictions which affect the decisions they make. Many legislators, for example, are opposed to abortion on moral or religious grounds. Others are almost as equally zealous in defending a woman’s right to choose. Given their convictions, these legislators are not likely to be moved much by reasoned argument, persuasion, or most anything else. Other issues may also affect a legislator’s conviction or conscience, although most issues do not. Some legislators are staunch in their support of the environment, others feel strongly about civil liberties, and for still others civil rights are a matter of principle.

Related to conviction is the record that a person in public office develops over time. Given the fact that state legislators cast as many as a thousand or more votes overall in a two-year legislative session, perfect consistency in one policy domain or another cannot be expected. But generally, legislators vote in accord with their record, rather than otherwise. It should be noted, however, that on many issues legislators do not have a record that in any way limits how they decide to vote.

_______________________________

³Alan Rosenthal, Heavy Lifting: The Job of the American Legislature (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2004), p. 233.
⁴Karl Kurtz, Alan Rosenthal, and Cliff Zukin, Citizenship: A Challenge for All Generations, (Denver, Colo.: NCSL, September 2003), p. 9.

Prepared by Alan Rosenthal, Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University, as a project of the National Conference of State Legislatures, the Center for Civic Education and the Center on Congress at Indiana University. The author can be reached at alanr@rci.rutgers.edu or (732) 828-2210, ext. 251. The current version was completed in November 2005.

Posted 12/5/05

Visitor counts for this page.