This document discusses political inequality in the United States, defining it as differences in influence over decisions made by government bodies. It outlines two approaches to defining power and power inequality, and examines how democracy and political inequality relate. The American Political Science Association identified three dimensions of political inequality: citizen voice, government responsiveness, and patterns of public policy making.

1. Political Inequality
and the U.S. Presidential Elections of
2012

2. Let’s start by defining power and power inequality
Power is a relational concept, meaning that it
characterizes the relationship between two or more
entities.
Power is the capacity one has to realize one’s will
despite the resistance of others (Weber), or A gets
B to do something that B did not want to do (Dahl).

3. How is power inequality defined?
There are two schools of thought:
Power Resource Distribution Approach:
Power inequality refers to structured differences in the
distribution and acquisition of power resources.
-- “Power resources” is used to describe any resources
used in the exercise of power. Potentially anything can be
used as a power resource.
-- Resources are distributed unequally.
-- Assumes power is an attribute of people; it is something
one person/group has.

4. Interdependency Approach:
Power inequality is when one person or group realizes their
will despite the resistance of others more often than
others, and more often than not.
-- Power is an attribute only of relationships, not people.
-- There is no set of “power resources” that are fixed across all
interactions.
-- Resources can take the form of anything actors can do within
an interaction.
-- The nature of the interdependent relationship reveals the
types of actions (resources) available to each participant.
-- Power inequality occurs when one group does not use the
resources at their disposal.

5. What is POLITICAL inequality?
In the distributional approach, political inequality refers to
structured differences in the distribution and acquisition of
political resources.
In the interdependence approach, political inequality is when
one person or group influences government legislation and
policy more often than others, and more often than not.
Let us define political inequality this way:
Political inequality is the extent to which groups differ
in influence over decisions made by decision-making
bodies.

6. Democracy and Political Inequality
„Ninety-five (95) projects are listed, each of which establish, or heavily rely on, a
particular index of governance across [ten]categories.” They list 52 publications on
„democracy.”
1 democracy
Peter Nardulli: „I think I am on the polar opposite of most
2 elections
here about where we should go in the future...”
3 press freedom
4 human rights Dani Kaufmann: „Let’s be realistic. Tomorrow there will be
5 state fragility consensus on what democracy really is?”
6 corruption
Tom Melia: I certainly understand better why some of you are
7 rule of law
disappointed with some aspects of the [Freedom House]
8 delivery of services surveys...
9 business and labor climate
Melissa Thomas: „These indicators have a really [big]
10 economic freedom impact. Hundreds of millions of $ spent in aid based on
them.”

7. American Political Science Association Task Force on Inequality and
American Democracy (2004): Ideals of democracy “may be under
growing threat in an era of persistent and rising inequalities.” APSA
Task Force identified three main dimensions of political inequality:
(1) citizen voice, (2) government responsiveness in terms of decision-
making, and (3) patterns of public policy making.
APSA Task Force Committee
Benjamin R. Barber, University of Lawrence R. Jacobs, University of Minnesota,
Maryland-College Park Chair
Larry M. Bartels, Princeton Claire Jean Kim, University of California-
University Irvine
Michael C. Dawson, Harvard Suzanne B. Mettler, Syracuse University
University Benjamin I. Page, Northwestern University
Morris Fiorina, Stanford University Dianne M. Pinderhughes, University of Notre
Dame
Jacob S. Hacker, Yale University Kay Lehman Schlozman, Boston College
Hugh Heclo, George Mason Theda Skocpol, Harvard University
University
Rodney E. Hero, University of
Notre Dame

8. POLITICAL INEQUALITY
VOICE RESPONSE
Participation Representation Symbolic Policy
Electoral Non- Government Non- Formal Informal
Electoral Governmental

10. OCCUPY
TEA
WALL
PARTY
STREET
est. 2009
est. 2011