Advanced searches left 3/3
Search only database of 12 mil and more summaries

Third party officeholders in the United States

Summarized by PlexPage
Last Updated: 18 January 2022

* If you want to update the article please login/register

General | Latest Info

Women's elective office-holding stands at all-time high in United States. Yet women ARE from parity. This underrepresentation is surprising given MORE women than men vote. Gender-As feature of both society and politics-has always worked alongside race TO determine which groups possess formal and informal and opportunities critical for winning elective office. But how gender connects TO office-holding is not fix; instead, women's access TO office has been shaped by changes law, policy, and social roles, as well as activities and strategies of social movement actors, Political PARTIES, and organizations. In contemporary period, data from Center for American Women and Politics reveal that while women ARE growing share of Democratic officeholders, they ARE declining share of Republican officeholders. Thus, in era of heightened partisan polarization, women's as candidates increasingly depend on PARTY. Kira Sanbonmatsu is Professor Of Political Science and Senior Scholar at Center for American Women and Politics at Eagleton Institute Of Politics at Rutgers University. Her publications include Seat at Table: Congresswomens Perspectives on Why Their Presence Matters, MORE Women CAN Run: Gender and TO State Legislatures, and Where Women Run: Gender and PARTY in American States. Elective officeholders in United States have always been majority male. This gender imbalance in politics may seem unremarkable and unworthy of investigation precisely because it appears TO be permanent feature of political system. But closer inspection reveals that underrepresentation of women is, fact, quite puzzling. American women vote at higher rate than men and have for four decades. 1 Women majority status As voters should dispel idea that women ARE somehow less political than men. IF one looks subnationally, variation in level of women's office-holding becomes apparent. Indeed, women in 2019 will hold majority of seats in Nevada Legislature, first time that women constituted State legislative majority in US history. At moments in some places, women have outnumbered men as of city councils and as statewide officials. Several States have been by two women US senators simultaneously. And woman-nancy Pelosi-presides over US House Of Representatives as speaker, which represents return to TO position she held from 2007 to 2011; she is third in TO presidency. Still, American women far from parity with respect to elective office-holding. Ideals of American democracy may not require that representatives precisely mirror public demographically, but quality of representational relationship has been intimately connected to women's descriptive representation-or lack thereof. 2 While scholars may assume that social and economic equality will give rise TO political equality, reverse may be true: Women political equality may be needed in order TO achieve in other domains. 3 challenges women face in politics ARE partly structural. United States Has Typically Lags Behind Other Nations With Respect TO Women Representation Because Of ITS Single-member Congressional Districts.

* Please keep in mind that all text is machine-generated, we do not bear any responsibility, and you should always get advice from professionals before taking any actions.

* Please keep in mind that all text is machine-generated, we do not bear any responsibility, and you should always get advice from professionals before taking any actions

Chapter Study Outline

Lobbying describes pay activity in which special interest groups argue for specific legislation decision-making bodies. Lobbying in United States describes pay activity in which special interests hire well-connect professional advocates, often lawyers, to argue for specific legislation in decision-making bodies such as United States Congress. It is highly controversial phenomenon, often seen in negative light by journalists and American public, and frequently misunderstood. Current Pattern Suggests Much Lobbying Is Done By Corporations, Although Wide Variety Of Coalitions Representing Diverse Groups Are Possible. Lobbying happens at every level of government, including federal, state, county, and even local governments. Lobbyists are intermediaries between client organizations and lawmakers: They to legislators what their organizations want, and they explain to their clients what obstacles elect officials face. Many lobbyists work in firms or law firms, some of which retain clients outside of lobbying. Others work advocacy groups, trade associations, companies, and state and local governments. Lobbyists can also be one type of government official, such as governor of state, who presses officials in Washington for specific legislation. While bulk of lobbying happens by business and professional interests who hire pay professionals, some lobbyists represent non-profits and work pro bono for issues in which they are personally interested. Pro bono clients offer activities like fundraisers and awards ceremonies on neutral territory to meet socialize with local legislators. Corporations which lobby actively tend to be large corporations, few in number, and often they sell to government. Most corporations do hire lobbyists. One study found that actual number of firms which do lobbying regularly is fewer than 300, and that percent of firms engage in lobbying was 10 percent from 1998-2006. Corporations considering lobbying run into substantial barriers to entry: Corporations have to research relevant laws about hire lobbying firms, and cultivate influential people and make connections. For example, when issues regarding change in immigration policy arose, large corporations that were currently lobbying switched focus somewhat to take account of new regulatory world, but new corporationseven ones likely to be affected by any possible rulings on immigrationstayed out of lobbying fray, according to study.

* Please keep in mind that all text is machine-generated, we do not bear any responsibility, and you should always get advice from professionals before taking any actions.

* Please keep in mind that all text is machine-generated, we do not bear any responsibility, and you should always get advice from professionals before taking any actions

Endnotes

Thanks to highly detailed post-election book that Nader wrote to chronicle and justify his 2000 presidential campaign as candidate of Green Party, it is possible to show how critique in this document apply to this most recent incarnation of Egalitarians' quest for their own Third Party. Although Nader is now irrelevant as far as future elections, his mentality and rationalizations live on in all those leftists who insist on building Third Party despite what Nader wrought in 2000 elections. Nader's main claim is that two parties are increasingly same, and thus there is need for new third party that offers voters real choice. This claim has two to it. First, Democrats are far worse than liberal supporters imagine. They have been collapsing on major issues since 1970s, forsaking their Progressive past, and matters only got worse in Clinton-Gore years. Nader delivers detailed indictment of these Democratic failures, including all rejections of his own efforts by Gore and even Progressive Caucus in House. Second, and even more importantly in terms of justifying Third Party, Nader argues that Republicans are not as dangerous as liberal Democrats claim. Bush is not exactly Genghis Khan, he notes at one point, and then lists various ways Bush moved to Center in his first year in office. This point was, of course, laughable by which is another reason why it is worth reminding everyone of how Nader justified his campaign. Nader's lack of concern when contemplating Republican presidency is very different from usual egalitarian view of Republicans as their main opponents. It can be appreciated more when it is contrasted with right-wing views of Democrats. Due to their abhorrence of big government, Labor unions, and / or liberal social values, right wingers generally avoid Third Parties at all costs because they genuinely fear Democrats as worst of all out-groups. Clinton or Gore looks tame to left-wing Third-Party advocates, but not to right wingers, who believe that Democratic coalition, with Clinton and Gore representing its wing, spells trouble for their worldview. Gore is Genghis Khan to conservatives, but Bush is not Genghis Khan to most left activists, including Nader, and therein important part of political equation in America. Energy Of Zealous Right-wing Activists Is Used On Behalf Of Republicans, Thereby Uniting All Those Who Are Right Of Center When They Step Into Political Arena, But Great Energies And Moral Fervor Of Egalitarians Are Often Used In Attacking Democrats As Sell-outs, Leaving Those Who Are Left Of Center Divided Among Themselves And Often Demoralize. But it is not only that two parties are about same according to Nader. He also claims it is useful for Democrats to lose if activist groups are energized enough to realize their goals through nonviolent direct action and lobbying pressure.

* Please keep in mind that all text is machine-generated, we do not bear any responsibility, and you should always get advice from professionals before taking any actions.

* Please keep in mind that all text is machine-generated, we do not bear any responsibility, and you should always get advice from professionals before taking any actions

Sources

* Please keep in mind that all text is machine-generated, we do not bear any responsibility, and you should always get advice from professionals before taking any actions.

* Please keep in mind that all text is machine-generated, we do not bear any responsibility, and you should always get advice from professionals before taking any actions

logo

Plex.page is an Online Knowledge, where all the summaries are written by a machine. We aim to collect all the knowledge the World Wide Web has to offer.

Partners:
Nvidia inception logo

© All rights reserved
2022 made by Algoritmi Vision Inc.

If you believe that any of the summaries on our website lead to misinformation, don't hesitate to contact us. We will immediately review it and remove the summaries if necessary.

If your domain is listed as one of the sources on any summary, you can consider participating in the "Online Knowledge" program, if you want to proceed, please follow these instructions to apply.
However, if you still want us to remove all links leading to your domain from Plex.page and never use your website as a source, please follow these instructions.