L. M Bartels in his book “Unequal Democracy” revealed the fact that the economic equality is pertinent in the nation, in this case in United States of America, often results in political inequality. Bartels argued that even though democracy refers to equal participation of every citizen from each constituency, in realty public or rather elected officials give more importance to the affluent constituencies that are there. Bartels is the opinion that during the period of 1980s and 1990s, the views of elites were taken into consideration in the parliament, although, people with lower incomes were not given importance in the policy making process that is there (Bartels, 5).
Thesis Statement: The public responsive attitude towards income inequality against political capacities is not appropriate. Therefore, it can be argued that the delegate representation of the elected officials should be given importance for the low income constituencies while talking about the policy preferences.
The book “Unequal Democracy” by L.M Bartels carries out a multifaceted examination of the political consequences and the causes, in case of the political inequality that was pertinent in contemporary America. According to Bartels, the fact that economic inequality has an effect on the democratic nation is an issue which had been dealt by even Aristotle. Bartels argued that the elected representatives who are there often are very unresponsive to the low income groups of the people, and while providing preferences, they provide more preferences to the ideological whims of the elite class of the society. Although Bartels had not been totally or fully negative in his books, there are words of optimism that could be easily found in the book. Especially in the chapter five of the book, because in this chapter the author tries to provide such an overview of the society, where rich people has to pay more tax and had to bear the larger share of the tax burden (Bartels, 143). The chapter five of this book talks about few salient economic groups, such as the rich and the poor people, labor unions and the big businesses that are there in the society. The analysis in this particular part reveals about the consequences of economic inequality among contemporary Americans. It emphasizes and provides considerable sympathy to the working classes who are there in the society and to the poor people.
The particular part however, deals with or rather reveals about the ignorance and the misconnection that is there among the values, beliefs and the policy preferences, who pays less or little attention to the public affairs and the policies that are there. Moreover, it reveals the fact that among the better informed people there is a kind of misperception and this particular misperception is actually a politically motivated misperception. Therefore, at the end, the latitudes of the political elites are retained and the policy ends of these people are only pursued.
In the year 2001 and 2003, the Congress and the President Bush brought two important tax cuts or rather introduce them in the nation. The word “tax cut” apparently sounds good, but later on it was found out that it is good for mostly the affluent people living in the economy not so much for the middle class and the lower income group people. According to various official reports and especially according to the report of Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy, it has been found out that the introduction of the new tax cut reduce 25% burden of tax pay for the richest people there in the economy, who accounts 1% of the total population. 21% burden of taxpaying was reduce for the next richest people who actually account 4% population of the nation and reduce only 10% burden of the other tax payers, who is generally there at the bottom line and account for 95% of the total population is in the country (Bartels, 155).