In the controversial question over who runs congress, the definitely answer would be the legislators; instead it is a battle between the constituents and the lobbyists. The answer to that question seems obvious depending on who is answering; constituents believe that lobbyist is the muppet masters and lobbyists believe that constituents are agenda blockers to their special interests. However, legislators tend to straddle the fence depending on which side is more beneficial at the moment.
Is there a right or wrong answer to this looming question, should it not be a collaboration of both worlds coming together to ensure the benefits of proper policy making for the greater good of the public. Lobbyists are advocates that are employed by …show more content…
They see these individuals as obstacles that make it difficult for constituents’ voices to be heard. According to an article written in 2011 from the Washington Post,” Americans are frustrated and disappointed with Congress, and would like nothing more than to call for all of the legislators jobs” (The Washington Post, 2011). In some cases the leaders will be so sharply constrained by what most people want that the actions of officeholders will follow the preferences of citizens very closely (Horton, 2015). Those cases exemplify what is known as majoritarian politics. In this case elected officials are the delegates of the people, acting as the people would act were the matter put to a popular vote (Dilulio, 2000). “The issues handled in a majoritarian fashion can be only those that are sufficiently important to command the attention of most citizens, sufficiently clear to elicit an informed opinion from citizens, and sufficiently feasible to address so that what citizens want done can in fact be done” (Dilulio, 2000). Legislators who represent marginal districts tend to follow the path of delegates, realizing that their power and position is given by their constituents, ensuring legislators loyalty. Those legislators who play the role of delegates reflect the will of the majority of their constituents whether than bow under the …show more content…
Identifying who possess majority of these factors could reveal who has more influence over legislators and capabilities. The elastic clause gives Congress the power to passed laws that they deem are ‘necessary and proper’; exemplifying the imperfect representation of its constituents as well as providing a gateway to give powers to entities other than the people, like lobbyists. Were the Framers considering the influence lobbyists could have over Congress when they give them such great power; or was there intent to ensure the people voices would be heard in policies that affected them most? However, there is no definitive answer over which entity has more influence over legislators. Both constituents and lobbyists play important role in aiding legislators in which policies to
Is there a right or wrong answer to this looming question, should it not be a collaboration of both worlds coming together to ensure the benefits of proper policy making for the greater good of the public. Lobbyists are advocates that are employed by …show more content…
They see these individuals as obstacles that make it difficult for constituents’ voices to be heard. According to an article written in 2011 from the Washington Post,” Americans are frustrated and disappointed with Congress, and would like nothing more than to call for all of the legislators jobs” (The Washington Post, 2011). In some cases the leaders will be so sharply constrained by what most people want that the actions of officeholders will follow the preferences of citizens very closely (Horton, 2015). Those cases exemplify what is known as majoritarian politics. In this case elected officials are the delegates of the people, acting as the people would act were the matter put to a popular vote (Dilulio, 2000). “The issues handled in a majoritarian fashion can be only those that are sufficiently important to command the attention of most citizens, sufficiently clear to elicit an informed opinion from citizens, and sufficiently feasible to address so that what citizens want done can in fact be done” (Dilulio, 2000). Legislators who represent marginal districts tend to follow the path of delegates, realizing that their power and position is given by their constituents, ensuring legislators loyalty. Those legislators who play the role of delegates reflect the will of the majority of their constituents whether than bow under the …show more content…
Identifying who possess majority of these factors could reveal who has more influence over legislators and capabilities. The elastic clause gives Congress the power to passed laws that they deem are ‘necessary and proper’; exemplifying the imperfect representation of its constituents as well as providing a gateway to give powers to entities other than the people, like lobbyists. Were the Framers considering the influence lobbyists could have over Congress when they give them such great power; or was there intent to ensure the people voices would be heard in policies that affected them most? However, there is no definitive answer over which entity has more influence over legislators. Both constituents and lobbyists play important role in aiding legislators in which policies to