The organization of American Democracy

What do we know about American Democracy so far?

o Our Democracy is a regulated Democracy in which at sometimes, for some
purposes, the people rule and rule directly. But, in other ways, the popular
influence is counter acted by some other influence. Ex: house & senate in
which democracy is more represented in the house. So whenever senate
would beat house, the people lost. They lost to their states and the federal
version of America. Ex: electoral college- the popular influence is potent but
sometimes it is regulated and competes with the republic that is America
and the federalist America.
o Dangerous/tyrannical- Tocqueville believed it was potentially tyrannical &
madison thought it was dangerous. We look back and think government by
the people is a good thing- but not everyone agrees. Some believe that elites
should rule or should at least be afforded some regard.
o In a democracy there is going to be a majority faction that will infringe on the
minorities.
Majorities can sue the powers of the govt that are adverse to interests
of minority and common good.
Democracy is not a benefit, it is potent political power.
America ahs no resistance from lords or kings therefore, it is more
powerful than a king according to tocquville because it has nothing to
keep it in check- at least king has people to keep him in check
o So democracy ahs ever been problematic
This potent political force that is restrained by constitution, is potentially
counteractable by breaking it up into smaller factions & keeping majority
from ruling.
o How is it that we organize democracy? It is a big potential and how do we
harness it?
Madisons point it to make democracy unorganized because when
democracy is organized, takes overs can occur.
We organize democracy by linkage institutions- link the people to the
government. In one way and only one way they allow us to control
government.
o These kinds of institutions are political parties
Ex: Jackson organized the democratic party
o Elections
Means by which the people control the government- how we
have the opportunity to throw out bums and put some elites
in power.
Antifederalists did not like elections because they felt the
people did not control elections enough.,
Ex: electoral college, senate being in for 6 terms and
the judges being there for life.
o Media
Not really a representative institution even though they see
themselves as such
Allow people more info about government
o Interests groups- powerful organizations in American politics in
which people join groups and groups lobby politics (these is what
lobbyists do and these organized interests do)

Ex: organized labor union

means by judging public opinion
We equate the results of polls with public opinion
However, they are not the same.
The construction of a poll can get it wrong and sometimes its
mismeasurmenets
More fundamental reason: political opinion was a powerful
political force because we started polling people
But polls are an increasingly important way we measure
public opinion.
A more structured and formal way to measure public opinion
is thought elections and interest groups.
Reciprocal linkage- the government gets something out of all these
linkage institution. Those in power benefit from all these things. Linkage
institutions are not things we use to control government, they are also
things the government uses to control us. (what we get out fo the
relationship, what they get out fo the relationship)
o Everytime we talk about linkage institutions, we are going to talk
about what we get out of it and what they get out of it.
o What do those in power get from organizing us, engaging us, having
us participate
o Ex: polling- which is like surveying in which they really get more out
of it than we do.
What does the government get when we participate?
o They get legitimacy, consent, their actions become legitimated (this si what
the people voted for).

o Polls

The aggregation principle- by EE schaltschneider

o Public opinion exists and somebodies got to organize it (aggregate
it- add all the opinions up).
o In adding them up, you are going to miss some.
o You are going to double count other & distort public opinion just in
putting it all together.
o Organization is the mobilization of bias.
o However you organize opinion changes it, give some more voice
compared to other.
o Makes it more likely that one side will win and another side will
loose
o And each of these linkage institution there is bias, predictable bias
and explainable bias but also consequential bias (ex: someone is
more likely to win if interests groups are more important than
parties in this particular fight and vice versa). There is also media
bias.
o E.E. believed in political parties- if you do not have parties, you do
not have democracy and people to win and get something done. He
preferred parties because he thought they were fairer to a broader
range of society than interests groups. He believed the process of
interests groups and organizing interest groups through lobbying

and suing costs money. The mere act of organizing the group costs
money.
o People who believe in more groups are called pluralists (madison)the more the better and no one will dominant
Everyone had a say, everyone represented.
o Because of what it costs to organize and participate in an interest
group, E.E. believed there was a bias towards the wealthy in an
interest group. Harder to organize poor people vs. wealthy so
wealthy people win.
o So an aggregation principle is trying to find the bias- who is more
likely to be heard.
Public opinion
Public opinion (both at the individual and collective level) has
direction and intensity.
The substance of opinion someone holds is the direction.
o Your views, what you think, what you are leaning towards.
o Ex: who do you support in the 2012 election? Obama is a direction
o Sometimes we even use directional terms in politics (should the
republicans move to the left or the right? Or should we lessen the
debt ceiling or high debt ceiling?)
Intensity- how deeply people hold an opinion
o More likely to take action if you feel more intensely
o How passionately they give voice to their views (direction)
Note: someone can have a direction but not be intense about it (more just
like sure). People can have the same direction but differ on intensity.
If you have this direction, and intensity, the more likely you are to act.
Direction and intensity exist at the individual level (individuals have hold
the opinion and thus have a direction & have some intensity- either less
or more).
At the collective level:
o Saliency
For an opinion or issue to be salient, it means it is importantrises to the top of public awareness, conversation & media
attention. At the forefront of the agenda. Some issues are
more prominent than others.
An important aspect of politics is making your issues more
salient than the other parties issues and that will make you
win.
o Latency
Existing but not developed or manifested
Latent opinion can be very potent (important) but not
manifested- it underlies the surface. Everyone know this
opinion though.
Art of politics is manipulating latent opinion- bringing the
latent opinion to the surface and making it salient or letting it
lie dormant.
Might want to let it lie dormant because you know the
answer & that it does not work in your favor.

Latent opinion is sometimes very politically powerful

o Ex: some president coming out and saying they want to
make America communist- the latent opinion is that
people will not agree with this.
Public opinion is therefore likely to change
o Change direction, change in intensity, become salient or latent
o Opinion is always there as a potential force, a potentially tyrannical force
according to Tocqueville
o Sometimes the elitists can win sometimes by making an issue salient or
making it latent.
Public opinion existed before polling but in contemporary American politics, polls
are the primary way we unveil public opinion.
Poll is like an instrument that aggregates opinion- the poll is merely a means of
trying to capture public opinion. & what do we know about the aggregation
principle?
o That polls is organizing public opinion, brining it together and providing a
report that promotes something that can be done with it.
o Public opinions also mobilize bias
Polls just get things wrong (looking at the bias that (mis)measure
public opinion which also has to do with the aggregation principle)
Word choice- wording can move public opinion in one way or
another
o Asking question to get a result that supports their political
aim.
o Asked in ways designed to get a particular result
o Sometimes there are just some words that spark opinion.
o Embedded in question is an argument that creates bias in
the results because you are not giving the other side.
Increasing saliency of one side rather than the other.
Sampling- who they ask, what is the sample size
o Polls can be poorly represented
o Not polling enough people or a range of people ect.
Also a constrained response- limited on your options for answers.
Possible that non of the choices match your opinion.
Word order

We have a 95% confidence in our poll (that 95% of polls are

right), and we are comfortable with this.
o So polling is imperfect but its still valuable
o People pay a lot of money for it
o Useful for political elites
o We need to use critical judgment when someone says the
public is on my side- one of the most powerful things you
can say in American politics. We need to find polls that
justify when politicians say this.
Notes: surveys are good at measuring direction but not intensity
Polling transforms public opinion
Opinion expression prior polls- all wild, dangerous, political acts (behaviors which
are means by which people have expressed their political opinion.

o Protest
o Riots
o Boycotts
o Voting
o Assassination
Ginsberg talks about the transformation of these wild acts to polling
o The term he sues to describe what polling does, it domesticates us- polling
takes that which is wild, and potentially dangerous, and turns it into a docile,
predictable pet.
o Polling tames these wild acts.
People do not need to protest, riot ect. to show their opinions, all they
need to do is take a poll.
o Helps politicians to find if people are upset before it becomes behavioral
o People become predictable and docile in respect to political elites when they
know our thoughts before it becomes actions
o Polls provide stability so it might be good for us that elites do this, but fi it is
good for us, it is great for them.
Elites get more out of elections than we do
Mandates, and legitimacy (can get to do what they want) & the
rest of us are left to participate and do not really have a say.
The more we participate in government (votes and answering
polls), the more we are legitimizing the elites and government
and feeding into them.
However, if you do not vote, you are introducing bias into the
system because other views are being revealed more than yours.
In not voting, other votes matter a whole lot more.
Elites can determined how many people agree with them and
thus, who might vote them back in next year. Also, can
determine how likely people are to turn their opinions into
behaviors.
Ways public opinion is transformed
o External subsidy- when polling makes it more likely that less intense
opinions will be heard.
People more likely to fill out polls that go out than riot or protest
because these behavioral acts take more energy.
o Behavior to attitude- Government and political elites do not care about
our attitudes or what we think, they care about the subsets in the public that
are likely to become behavioral. They are concerned with the opinions that
will result in voting, protests, riots ect.
Polls making an behavior an attitude, it gives elites the idea how far
they can push them until they act.
Government has the opportunity to find out public opinion and
interfere before it becomes a behavior so behaviors are transformed to
attitudes that never take action as behavior.
o Individuates- Polling individuates public opinion
Breaks us down from groups into one, one individual with one question
being asked
For a lot of the behavioral acts you need a group and party
With polling, the individual can participate

Individuals are manageable, groups are dangerous