*This article is part of a special issue on “Winner-Take-All Politics” that .. ( ): –33, scretch.info~aleigh/pdf/scretch.info Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson argue here and elsewhere that political science needs *This article is part of a special issue on “Winner-Take-All Politics” that. Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer—and Turned Its Back on the .. Income, Poverty, Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: " (PDF). Retrieved ^ comparing the population divided up into.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Arabic|
|ePub File Size:||29.76 MB|
|PDF File Size:||16.34 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Sign up for free]|
Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer--and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class [Jacob S. Hacker, Paul Pierson] on scretch.info Find out more about Winner-Take-All Politics by Jacob S. Hacker, Paul Pierson at Simon & Schuster. Read book reviews & excerpts, watch author videos. WINNER-TAKE-ALL POLITICS. How Washington Made the Rich Richer –. And Turned Its Back on the Middle Class. Authors: Jacob S. Hacker.
In fact, the exorbitantly paid have continued to thrive during the current economic crisis, even as the rest of Americans have continued to fall behind. Lots of so-called experts claim to have solved this great mystery, but no one has really gotten to the bottom of it—until now. Hacker and Paul Pierson demonstrate convincingly that the usual suspects—foreign trade and financial globalization, technological changes in the workplace, increased education at the top—are largely innocent of the charges against them. Instead, they indict an unlikely suspect and take us on an entertaining tour of the mountain of evidence against the culprit. The guilty party is American politics. Runaway inequality and the present economic crisis reflect what government has done to aid the rich and what it has not done to safeguard the interests of the middle class.
Sign up and get a free eBook! Hacker and Paul Pierson. Trade Paperback. Price may vary by retailer.
Add to Cart Add to Cart. About The Book. About The Authors. Harold Shapiro. Photograph by Tracey Goldberg. Paul Pierson.
Product Details. Raves and Reviews. Resources and Downloads. Get a FREE e-book by joining our mailing list today! Thank you for signing up, fellow book lover!
See More Categories. Your First Name.
Zip Code. In other words, a simple majority of votes is what is important as there is no requirement that the winner gain an absolute majority of votes ibid. The slight difference between the Majoritarian System and the traditional WTA is that the winning candidate in the Majoritarian System is required to earn a majority of votes at least fifty percent plus one in order to be declared a winner Nicholson, The Majoritarian System employs one of three means for producing a winner.
First, it may require a second election run-off between the two leading parties in the event that no candidate earns a majority of votes in the first election as the Ghanaian example in a Presidential Election shows.
Alternatively, a second election may be held for all the parties that contested the first round. The winner in the run-off election would be the candidate or party that obtains a plurality of votes — that is, more votes than any other candidate. The third mechanism, the Alternative Vote AV is a preferential system where the voter has the chance to rank the candidates in order of preference.
The voter puts a '1' by their first choice a '2' by their second choice, and so on, until they no longer wish to express any further preferences or run out of candidates.
Candidates are elected outright if they gain more than half of the first preference votes. If not, the candidate who lost the one with least first preferences is eliminated and their votes are redistributed according to the second or next available preference marked on the ballot paper. This process continues until one candidate has half of the votes and is elected Dyck, This mechanism could be described as a way of conducting a run-off election in advance.
The referendum produced a definitive NO vote against AV. For instance in the and elections, rejected ballots constituted 2. In particular, article 50 clause 1 a prescribes the selection of parliamentary candidates through a simple First-Past-The Post or Plurality voting system. And in Presidential elections, article 63 clause 3 prescribes the Majoritarian System as a formula for selecting the President of the Republic Ayelazuno, However, one paramount factor that cannot be glossed over is that generally, it is a very simple, less complicated formula for selecting leaders and very much suitable for homogenous and developing countries where literacy rates are low and complex issues regarding electoral formulae could be recipe for electoral fraud and chaos Ball and Peters, First, the First-Past-the Post system, could likely result in minority rule, particularly when more than two political parties or candidates contest an election.
Secondly, the majoritarian system has some major flaws which can, potentially, jeopardize the fragile electoral peace that has endured since It gives extra and strong incentive to the two dominant parties, the New Patriotic Party NPP and the National Democratic Congress NDC to engage in crude ethnic politics to win even when they have lost in the majority of the ten regions.
Again, by turning the whole country into a single-member constituency, regardless of its ethno-regional divisions, the votes of minority regions could become insignificant in electing the president, a dynamic that can lead to political exclusion and, subsequently, conflict Ayelazuno, Defining Winner-Takes-All Politics Winner-Takes All in Ghana is not merely an electoral formula for determining winners in elections but also a political mechanism for facilitating the evaluative inclusion and exclusion of individuals, groups and classes of persons.
It entails "state capture"8 or the partisan monopolization of state resources, facilities and opportunities, as well as the exclusion of political opponents from national governance.
Since the inception of the Fourth Republic in , WTA politics has been a divisive syndrome that confers certain exclusive rights to top party echelon and apparatchiks after elections to the neglect of the rest of the citizenry Gyampo, Generally, post-electoral political transitions are the most stressful moments for many developing nations.
Victorious political parties after elections quickly "sweep the political and economic stakes" of the state as they consolidate themselves in power Abotsi, The key effects of this anti-democratic and inhumane system of political transition include compulsory retirements; dismissals; termination of appointments; cancellations and withholding of entitlements; forcible ejections from duty-post accommodation; wanton seizure of state vehicles and property in the care of political opponents by party apparatchiks without recourse to due process of law; reckless abrogation of contracts; and wanton persecution of certain real and perceived political opponents.
These negative tendencies are what many Ghanaians perceive as symptoms of the Winner-Takes-All Politics. It is also a political sub-culture that excludes all other Ghanaians who are not part of the ruling party from national governance and decision making in a manner that polarizes the nation and dissipates the much needed talents and brains for national development. Nonetheless, the visible and palpable feeling of exclusion from the governance process by those who are not members of the party in power often associated with WTA politics cannot also be part of good governance.
As has oftentimes been the case under all regimes in the Fourth Republic, the assumption of political authority has been used as means of demonstrating control and the consequent marginalization of perceived political opponents from access to key resources and occupation of certain offices Abotsi, However in this paper, we argue that the Constitution of Ghana cannot be fully culpable for the Winner-Takes-All politics.
At least in the US, UK, Canada and France, where the WTA electoral formula is used, there is no serious evidence of public complaint about the WTA politics and the feeling of exclusion by those who are not part of the ruling party Dyck, For instance, the legislature is expected to play an oversight role over the exercise of power by the executive.
Whether these checks are being rendered ineffective or not would be a subject for another discussion. However, it is a truism that these checks have been provided for by the Constitution and the selection of WTA as an electoral formula was never meant to be translated into a divisive political problem after elections.
What ought to be pointed out is that in a fledgling democracy like Ghana, politics tend to be a zero-sum game. This is the crux of the matter. Many Ghanaians have called for the adoption of the Proportional Representation PR as a solution to the feeling of exclusion and marginalization associated with WTA politics by those political actors, ethnic groups, etc who are often defeated in elections.
It is feared that, if not checked, the feeling of exclusion and marginalization could be a recipe for political conflict and undermine national cohesion which is a necessary condition for development Dyck, What then, is PR?
It is sometimes referred to as full representation, and, as an electoral formula, it aims at securing a close match between the percentage of votes that groups of candidates obtain in elections and the percentage of seats they receive usually in the legislature Douglas, ; Linton and Southcott, ; Nicholson, Under the Party List formula, the parties each list their candidates according to their priorities.
In a closed list, voters vote for a list, not a candidate.
Each party is allocated seats in proportion to the number of votes, using the ranking order on its list. In an open list, voters may vote, depending on the model, for one person, or for two, or indicate their order of preference within the list Dyck, On the other hand, the Single Transferable Vote formula uses a system of preferential voting to determine the results of elections.
A constituency elects two or more representatives per electorate. Parties tend to offer as many candidates as they most optimistically could expect to win. Voters mark their ballot, allocating preferences to their preferred ranking for some or all candidates. Their case is convincing, and it builds to a recommendation of how Americans could organize to save their country's promise.
I hope people read the book and follow its advice. If it has the impact it deserves, it will transform American public arguments about politics and policymaking. It explains why the and elections only began a reform process that still has a ways to go. Hacker and Pierson have always stayed ahead of the conventional arguments and Winner-Take-All Politics keeps them in the lead. Dionne, Jr. Clue: take a close look at the elite capture of the Democratic Party.
Winner-Take-All Politics—stylishly written and well documented with evidence—is a must-read for understanding the great political puzzle of our time.