Oligarchy-- It's Never Too Late For Americans To Recapture Democracy

Martin Gilens at Princeton and Benjamin Page at Northwestern just published an academic paper everyone interested in the struggle for equality in America should consider reading, Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites Interest Groups, and Average Citizens. It pretty much proves what you probably already sensed: the plutocrats rule the country and the United States of America is better defined as an oligarchy than a democracy.

Each of four theoretical traditions in the study of American politics – which can be characterized as theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic Elite Domination, and two types of interest group pluralism, Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased Pluralism-- offers different predictions about which sets of actors have how much influence over public policy: average citizens; economic elites; and organized interest groups, mass-based or business-oriented.

A great deal of empirical research speaks to the policy influence of one or another set of actors, but until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions against each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues.

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.

Who governs? Who really rules? To what extent is the broad body of U.S. citizens sovereign, semi-sovereign, or largely powerless? These questions have animated much important work in the study of American politics.

While this body of research is rich and variegated, it can loosely be divided into four families of theories: Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic Elite Domination, and two types of interest group pluralism-- Majoritarian Pluralism, in which the interests of all citizens are more or less equally represented, and Biased Pluralism, in which corporations, business associations, and professional groups predominate) Each of these perspectives makes different predictions about the independent influence upon U.S. policy making of four sets of actors: the Average Citizen or “median voter,” Economic Elites, and Mass-based or Business-oriented Interest Groups or industries.

Each of these theoretical traditions has given rise to a large body of literature. Each is supported by a great deal of empirical evidence-- some of it quantitative, some historical, some observational-- concerning the importance of various sets of actors (or, all too often, a single set of actors) in U.S. policy making. This literature has made important contributions to our understanding of how American politics works and has helped illuminate how democratic or undemocratic (in various senses) our policy making process actually is. Until very recently, however, it has been impossible to test the differing predictions of these theories against each other within a single statistical model that permits one to analyze the independent effects of each set of actors upon policy outcomes.

Here-- in a tentative and preliminary way-- we offer such test, bringing a unique data set to bear on the problem. Our measures are far from perfect, but we hope that this first step will help inspire further research into what we see as some of the most fundamental questions about American politics.

The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.

Yesterday was Tax Day, as you no doubt know. Progressive candidates from one end of the country to the other made a point of demanding a more equitable tax system that guarantees everyone pays their fair share, a policy the plutocrats and their allies sheer at. In Maine, Shenna Bellows is running for the seat held by corporate handmaiden Susan Collins. "Here in Maine," she told us yesterday morning, "it’s pothole season. The roads are in terrible shape because of lack of investment in infrastructure. The public university system is facing devastating cuts. Maine small businesses and families are paying what they owe so that our economy can grow and our citizens can have the services they need. It's time for the country's largest corporations and wealthiest individuals to pay their fair share of taxes. It’s time for tax policy that places principle over politics and treats everyone fairly. We can only build a strong America if everyone has a fair chance to succeed. And if everyone’s going to have a fair chance, then the largest corporations and wealthiest individuals in this country must pay their fair share."

Straight across America, the independent progressive running for the seat Henry Waxman gave up, Marianne Williamson, was thinking a lot like Shenna. This is from a statement she sent to her CA-33 followers:

Today is the deadline for filing our tax returns.  In doing so, millions of Americans across the country are contributing to the infrastructure and well-being of our nation. And most Americans are happy to pay their fair share for our bridges and highways, schools and roads, brave firefighters and emergency workers who stand at the ready,  teachers and storm drain workers, forest rangers who keep our water supplies safe, and the overseeing of our beautiful State and National Parks.

But our tax system contains one of America's dirty little secrets, as well. Many corporations dodge their taxes, sending their profits offshore or finding loopholes to avoid their obligations. Too many corporations-- banks, big oil, big pharma, the list goes on-- shirk their civic responsibility to our country. Some, even after avoiding paying taxes, grab government subsidies that rob our public treasury. Why should taxpayers pay billions in subsidies to Big Oil, while they are already making trillions in profit?

Today, on Tax Day 2014, let us join to end the climate of greed and pillage by which billionaires and huge corporations are able to buy political influence and use it to lower their own tax rates at the expense of the American people. My campaign is refusing all special interest, corporate PAC and Lobbyist money, and any candidate decrying the undue influence of money on the one hand while accepting special interest money with the other is simply perpetuating a system of political double-talk. The movement for fairness starts on June 3rd at your voting booth. I hope you will join me in non-violent resistance to a system of economic injustice by which our tax system is used as a give-away to America's richest citizens. Such unfairness is ethically wrong, it is undemocratic, it is unsustainable-- and I will do what I can to stop it.

Also in California, albeit in a drastically different kind of district than Marianne's, Eloise Reyes is running against a worthless corporate shill and Chamber of Commerce hack, Pete Aguilar, for an open seat in the Inland Empire. Yesterday morning Eloise addressed a forum of national progressives discussing the Ryan budget which she pointed out is "not a fiscally conservative proposal. It’s a shell game. He masquerades as a fiscal conservative proposing spending cuts to programs that actually help people climb out of poverty and move into the middle class and he replaces them with huge tax cuts for billionaires, oil companies and big corporations.Those are not our priorities."

When I win this election I will represent San Bernardino CA. San Bernardino is the second largest city in the US to declare bankruptcy.

San Bernardino can be great again. If families here are to climb out of poverty, if San Bernardino is to make it back to the great city it once was then we have to invest in jobs and education and keep Medicare strong for our seniors.

The Ryan budget cuts $125 billion from the Pell Grant program. Pell Grants and student loans are an investment in our future. They provide the hand up that will help middle class and low income kids here in San Bernardino County attend college and put themselves in a better position for the future.

The Ryan Budget ends Medicare as we know it. And that will affect San Bernardino County seniors, especially female seniors. Female seniors make up an overwhelming majority of Medicare beneficiaries. And statistics show that older women on average are poorer than older men and I am sure that is true here in San Bernardino County. If Mr. Ryan’s budget ever became law we would see seniors right here in San Bernardino County slip deeper into poverty.

When I am elected to Congress I will support progressive budgets that ask the wealthy and big corporations to pay their fair share so we put people to work building and repairing schools, roads and bridges. I’ll support budgets that invest in education, that keep our promises and commitments to veterans and budgets that strengthen Social Security and Medicare.

A strong middle class has always been the backbone of a robust US economy. It’s always been that way. That’s where we should be investing… in programs that strengthen our middle class. When we do that we broaden our tax base and everyone wins. The Ryan Budget does not do that.

Blue America-backed Michael Wager, the progressive running for Congress against Big Business shill David Joyce in the very northeast corner of Ohio, is running on a platform almost solely dedicated to pushing back against the plutocrats on behalf of working families. This morning, he announced they are pushing back against him: "Just days after Congressman David Joyce voted to give millionaires a tax break and pay for it by cutting Medicare and raising taxes on the middle class, another SuperPAC is stepping up to say thank you for Joyce's handouts to the wealthy and special interests. We just got word that the right-wing U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending over $200,000 supporting Congressman Joyce and they’re going on the air tomorrow to try and buy this race."

The Kochs, the conglomerate of multimillionaire and billionaire Rove contributors, the slimy Adelsons, the U.S. Chamber… these are the forces of evil arrayed against America's working families. Real and profound evil which means to enslave us all. Never too late to fight back.