Representation, Elections, and Voting Lecture 1 PDF

REPRESENTATION, ELECTIONS AND VOTING LECTURE 1 PART 1 REPRESENTATION Representation is broadly, a relationship through which an individual or group stands for, or acts on behalf of a larger body of people (Heywood, 2019) Hanna Pitkin (1967) provides, perhaps, o...

REPRESENTATION, ELECTIONS AND VOTING LECTURE 1 PART 1 REPRESENTATION Representation is broadly, a relationship through which an individual or group stands for, or acts on behalf of a larger body of people (Heywood, 2019) Hanna Pitkin (1967) provides, perhaps, one of the most straightforward definitions: to represent is simply to “make present again.” On this definition, representation is the activity of making citizens’ voices, opinions, and perspectives “present” in public policy making processes. Political representation occurs when political actors speak, advocate, symbolize, and act on the behalf of others in the political arena. In short, political representation is a kind of political assistance. Theories/Models of Representation 1. The Trusteeship model/theory 2. The Delegate model/theory 3. The Mandate model/theory 4. The Resemblance model/theory The Trustee/ Trusteeship model A trustee is someone who acts on behalf of others, using his or her superior knowledge, better education, or greater experience. A trustee is a person who is vested with formal (and usually legal) responsibilities for another’s property or affairs. For Edmund Burke (1975), the essence of representation was to serve one’s constituents by the exercise of “mature judgement” and “enlightened conscience.” In short, representation is a moral duty; those with the good fortune to possess education and understanding should act in the interest of those who are less fortunate. This view has strong elitist implications since it stresses that once elected, representatives should think for themselves and exercise independent judgement on the grounds that the mass of the people do not know their own best interests. John Stuart Mill (1806-73) expressed a similar view in his liberal theory of representation. He proposed (inter alia) that rational voters would support politicians who can act wisely on their own behalf rather than those politicians who merely reflect the voters’ own views.  Trustee representation thus portrays politicians as representatives insofar as they are members of an educated elite. It is based on the understanding that knowledge and understanding are unequally distributed in society, in the sense that not all citizens know what’s best for them. The criticisms of this model include the argument that if politicians are allowed to exercise their own judgement, they will simply use that latitude to pursue their own selfish interests. The Delegate model A delegate is a person who is chosen to act for another on the basis of clear guidance and instruction; delegates do not think for themselves. A delegate is a person who acts as a conduit conveying the views of others, while having little or no capacity to exercise his or her own judgement or preferences (eg. Ambassadors in most instances). For instance, a trade union official who attends a conference with instructions on how to vote and what to say is acting as a delegate. Those who favour this model of representation usually support mechanisms that ensure that politicians are bound as closely as possible to the views of the represented. Frequent interchange between representatives and their constituents in the form of regular elections, short terms in office, initiatives (a type of referendum through which the public is able to raise legislative proposals), the right of recall (a process whereby the electorate can call unsatisfactory public officials to account and ultimately remove them) are seen as means of giving the public more control over politicians.  Advantages of this model include the fact that it provides broader opportunities for popular participation and serve to check the self-serving inclinations of professional politicians. Disadvantages include the argument that the delegate model tends to breathe narrowness and foster conflict. Furthermore, it limits the scope for leadership and statesmanship since politicians are forced to reflect the views of their population or even pander to them. Politicians are thus not able to mobilize the people by providing vision and inspiration. The Mandate Model A mandate is an instruction or command from a higher body that demands compliance. This model is based on the idea that, in winning an election, a party gains a popular mandate that authorizes it to carry out whatever policies or programmes it outlined (in its manifesto) during the election campaign. As it is, the party rather than individual politicians is the agent of representation. The mandate model therefore provides a clear justification for party unity and party discipline. In effect, politicians serve their constituents not by thinking for themselves or acting as a channel to convey their views, but by remaining loyal to their party and its policies. The strength of this model is that it takes account of the undoubted practical importance of party labels and party symbols. It also provides a means of keeping politicians to their word.  Some criticisms include the argument that the mandate model is based on highly questionable voting behavior, insofar that it suggests that voters select parties on the grounds of policies and issues. It is argued that voters are not always the rational and well-informed creatures that this model suggests. They can be influenced by a range of “irrational factors” such as the personalities of leaders, habitual allegiances, etc. Additionally, voters may not be attracted by all manifesto provisions. The model also imposes a “straightjacket” approach to policy implementation in that it limits government policies to those positions the party took up during the elections.  The Resemblance model The resemblance model carries the notion that representatives are selected on the basis that they typify or resemble the group they claim to represent. This model suggests that only people who come from a particular group, and have shared the experiences of that group, can fully identify with its interests. This is the difference between ‘putting oneself in the shoes of another’ and having direct and personal experience of what other people go through. By this standard, a representative government could sometimes be said to constitute a microcosm (a miniature version) of the larger society, containing members drawn from all groups and sections in the society in terms of social class, race, ethnicity, gender, age etc., and in numbers that are proportional to the size of the group in society at large (referred to as microcosmic or descriptive representation). This model is credited with countering systematic exclusion of minority groups thereby increasing the level of diversity in elected bodies, thus ensuring that better decisions are made for the common good.  ELECTIONS An election is a formal group decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual/s and/or party to hold public office. Elections have been the usual mechanism by which modern representative democracy has operated since the 17th century. Elections may fill offices in the legislature, in the executive, and for regional and local governments. This process is also used in many other private and business organizations, from clubs to voluntary associations and corporations Schumpeter links democracy with elections, and sees elections as a means of filling public office by a competitive struggle for the people’s vote. The representative process is therefore intrinsically linked to elections and voting Election may not be in themselves be a sufficient condition for political representation, but there is little doubt that they are a necessary condition and are at the heart of the democratic process. The rules and mechanisms which guide the conduct of elections should address; A. Which offices or posts are subjected to the elective principle? Some political offices are subject to the elective principles (the legislature and executive in particular). Others such as the judicial branch, and other experts and bureaucratic are not subject to elective principles, but are based on experience, knowledge an expertise. B. Who is entitled to vote? All adult citizens (subjective) are usually entitled to vote. Restrictions on the right to vote based on factors such as property ownership, education, gender, and racial origin etc. have been abandoned in most countries C. How are votes cast? Modern elections are generally held on the basis of secret ballot. The secret ballot is usually seen as the guarantee of a “fair” election, in that it keeps the dangers of corruption and intimidation at bay. Electoral fairness is also dependent on voters’ access to reliable and balanced information, the range of choices they are afforded, the circumstances under which the campaign is carried out, how scrupulously the vote is counted and so on. D. Are elections competitive or non-competitive? This speaks to whether the elections offer the electorate a genuine choice of both party and candidates. This gives people the right to stand for election and political parties the ability to nominated candidates In former Orthodox Communist states, the electorate were allowed to vote only for a single candidate proposed by the communist party E. How are elections conducted? This depends on which electoral system or combination of electoral systems a country utilizes… Functions of elections The central functions of elections are: 1. Recruiting politicians: Elections are the principal source of political recruitment, taking account of the processes through which parties nominate candidates. Politicians thus tend to possess talents and skills that are related to electioneering such as charisma, oratorical skills and good looks, serving on committees, running government departments etc. Note: Elections are not run to fill specialist posts that require specialist knowledge or experience such as those in the civil service or in the judiciary. 2. Making governments: Elections make governments directly in states such as the USA, Russia, Venezuela, France etc. in which the political executive (President or Prime Minister) is directly elected. In parliamentary systems, elections influence the formation of governments, most strongly when the electoral system tends to give a single party a clear parliamentary majority. 3. Providing representation: Elections (when they are fair and competitive), are a means through which demands are channeled from the public to the government. Short of the use of initiatives and recall, the electorate has no effective means of ensuring that mandates are carried out, apart from its capacity to inflict punishment at the next election, 4. Influencing policy: Elections often deter governments from pursuing radical and deeply unpopular policies. However, only in exceptional cases, when a single issue dominates the elections campaign, can they be said to influence public policy directly. In many instances, government policies are shaped more by practical dictates such as the state of the economy than by electoral considerations. 5. Educating voters: The process of campaigning provides the electorate with an abundance of information about parties, candidates, policies, the current government’s record, records of past governments, the political system etc. Education occurs only if the education that is provided, and the way it is provided engages public interest and stimulate debate, as opposed to apathy and alienation. Parties and candidates today often look to persuade rather than educate; they sometimes have a strong incentive to provide incomplete, inaccurate and distorted information. 6. Building legitimacy: Elections help to foster legitimacy by providing justification for a system of rule even in the case of dictatorial or authoritarian governments. This happens because the rituals involved in campaigning somehow confers on an electorate/voters a ceremonial status and importance. Most importantly, by encouraging citizens to participate in politics, even in the limited form of voting, elections mobilize active consent. 7. Strengthening elites: Elections can also be a vehicle through which elites can manipulate and control the masses. However, because of universal suffrage, political discontent and opposition can be neutralized by elections, since elections allow governments to come and go.  Primary source Heywood, Andrew. Politics. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019 Chapter 10