Chapter 6: Power & Politics

Pages 140-167
We are often not fully aware of the impact that power has on us, & sometimes we are not aware
of its operation at all.
Decade of 1960s is famous as a period of protest & turmoil all around the world
In U.S., protests against Vietnam War were reaching their peak & other kinds of social
movements (esp. on college campuses)
Dramatic set of protest took place at Columbia University in NYCstudent
rebels demanded changes in governance of tradition-bound Ivy League campus
Critical question for sociologists studying power & politics: Why is thatin most times
& placespeople accept injustice & learn to live w/ it?
Why dont vastly more numerous poor & middle classes do more to seize the
wealth of rich?
Power is a complex idea
We are often not fully aware of how power impacts us
Sometimes we can be mistaken about the causes of what afflicts us
o We might attribute our misfortunes to conspiracies of one sort or another
Task of sociologists studying power: bring to light what is involved when power is at
work
What are its typical mechanisms or modes of operation?
Why do we often go along w/ policies & relationships that work against our
interests?
o Is power at work in securing our compliance? And if so, how is our
compliance secured?
Where are we to locate power?
o Where does power lie?
o Who is the they that have power?
o Are we looking for individuals, groups, or impersonal institutions?
Power is most effective when it is least observable to participants & observers alike
1. What are the distinct forms of power?
Three dimensions of power
Power simply means capacity to bring about some outcome
Effect changes or prevent them from occurring
In social & political contexts, effects of power will be those that are significant to
peoples live
When the effects of power negatively affect peoples interests, we can speak of
power being held or exercised over them
Sociologists quest: reveal what power involves
Ways to identify social & political power:
Collective powerto achieve shared goals, ex: people cooperate to promote a
cause or pursue a campaign

Positive powerpower serves others interests (like as, ideally, parents, teachers,
philanthropists, & social workers do)
Useful to think of power as containing 3 distinct dimensions
One-dimensional viewsituations where we can see power at work when one
party prevails in a conflict
Second dimension of powerbecomes visible once we consider the ways in
which those w/ power prevent or deflect challenges to their authority from arising
in the first place
o Referred to a two-dimensional view of power
Three-dimensional viewreveals ways in which those w/ power convince those
w/o power that the current arrangement is good enough

One-dimensional view of power

Who has power in the one-dimensional view?
Most straightforward situation when you see power at work: conflict b/w 2 or more
individuals or groups & one of them prevails
More powerful individual or group: group A
Less powerful individual or group: group B
In any decision-making body (legislature), when vote is taken on issue over which A & B
take opposing sides, if A wins the voteA exercised power over B
Countless examples of power at work in this form
Involves conflict over issue or issues for which participants have interests that are
in contention
Conflict can be interpersonal (b/w lovers or w/n families) or can occur w/n or b/w
organizations
Can exist b/w countries
Sometimes, balance of power can shift & usually powerless agent can gain & sometimes
exercise power
Power of powerful can be illegitimate or legitimate
Illegitimatebully, mugger
Legitimatelandlords rent
What is right & wrong itself might be issuewar w/n or b/w countries
Power is often exercised just by following the rules of the game
When companies compete for market share in selling some good or service, it is
the economic game
When a group of legislators wins a vote, it is the political game
In other cases, those who win do so not by following rules of game but rather by
manipulating them in some way
o Using threats or bribes, cheatingexamples of how someone or some
group can gain power by breaking rules
o Ex: using coercion, threatening, offering special incentives or bribes
Exercising power by breaking rules of game is uncertain undertaking
When threats of violence escalate into actual use of force, it means that the mere
threat itself has failed

o Use of force often signifies weakness

o Ex: governments headed by dictators face social rebellions often use
military force to stop protests
Might stop or slow down protests
In many cases, government will eventually fall if protests continue
even in face of force
Too much force is rarely sustainable over the long haul
o If the more powerful A must use force against the less powerful B, A has
not succeeded in getting B to comply but only to temporarily give in
Power elite (ruling class) sometimes has power on first dimension
Small group of power holders is consistently able to get what it wants
Key political decisions must be over important issues that involve actual disagreement
in preferences among 2 or more groups
Approach used by Dahl to study city policies of New Haven in 1930s
Concluded that evidence showed that different groups prevailed over different key
issuesindicating that ruling elite hypothesis was refuted
Concluded that power in New Haven was distributed pluralistically & perhaps
this was so throughout US as a whole
Pluralism thesis: advanced by Dahl
Became one of most widely influential & debated theories in study of American
politics
Argued that as long as competing groups (or interest groups) have sufficient
power to participate, final outcome of any policy or political controversy will
reflect preferences of the majority of citizens
Critics maintain thatprovides too narrow a view of nature of power
o Applicable only where there is obvious, observable conflict
However, more subtle ways that power operates
Power can occur in domains that is much harder to argue that power is evenly
distributed

Two-dimensional view of power

Why is the agenda setting in politics important?
One problem w/ treating power as one-dimensional: focuses only on outcomes, ignores
question of why some important issues never come up for discussion or debate in
decision-making arenas
Second dimension of power in which power holder (A) prevents subordinate group or
individual (B) form raising issues that would challenge As power
Power in second dimension consists of ability of some actors to prevent others from ever
getting alternative ideas proposed or considered in the 1st place
Like one-dimensional power, is present at all levels of social life (interpersonal
relationships, international relations)
Power to decide what gets decided & consists of agenda setting (act of
consciously or unconsciously averting challenge of potential issues
o Potential issues: issues that threaten interests of dominant or powerful

Ability to control or set agenda is critical resource of power

When power is exercised trough agenda control, grievances of excluded or
marginal groups can be denied a hearing
Variety of different ways agenda control can be achieved
Most common is literal manipulation of agendas through control of procedures
affecting what gets discussed & decided
Second dimension of power requires us to stretch our understanding of what counts as
important issues
Not just those that are the subject of open conflict
Includes those that are prevented from becoming subject of political challenges
Researchers wonder: why do some issues become social problems while other equally
pressing issues dont?
Relative lack of attention to issues surrounding persistence of poverty, racism, rising
inequality vs. enormous amount of attention given to health, well-being of big business,
banks, Wall Street, corporate profits
Ex: every newspaper in America as section devoted to businesscovering
comings & goings of business executives & profitability (or lack thereof) of
various local & national companies
No comparable devoted coverage of daily grind of poverty, insecurity faced by
millions of American families, trials/tribulations of groups that try to represent
interests of poor
Study of agenda setting has paid special attention to mass media
When media gives large amount of attention to a particular issue, it becomes
much more likely to receive attention by politicians & policymakers
Coverage of big business is so pronounced indicates that most important media
outlets are owned by corporate entities or conglomerates themselves
Search for profit in news media also skews what we read about in other ways
Much of focus of media is driven by editors perceptions of what cells (what citizens are
most interested in reading)
Celebrities & celebrity gossip generate intense fascination
Media usually pays less attention to challenges to status quo, seldom providing
opportunities for challenges to reach other, like-minded people
Another important source of agenda control arises in many situations
Subordinate individuals or groups may desire some kind of change but believe
achieving that change isnt possible so they choose not to even try
Powerful individual or group is not threatened when subordinate
individuals/group dont try
o Inactivity is reason why challenges to power dont appear
Many reasons why achieving change (or challenging power holders) may appear
daunting
Power holder may possess superior resources
Adamant opposition to change makes change seem impossible
Institutions (like government or large organizations) may channel protests in
harmless directions or provide other obstacles

Sometimes power holder avoids challenges b/c they never get raised in the first place

Three-dimensional view of power

When is power least visible?
First & dimensions of power are important but dont exhaust possibilities
Seeing power third-dimensionally involves understanding various ways in which
its workings can be hidden from the view of those subject to it & those who
possess power
Power always involves behavior (some kind of action, conscious or unconscious)
Power signifies an ability or capacity, existence of which can be proven by
observing its action
If power over others consists of ability to affect others interests in a negative way,
it doesnt necessarily result from positive actions by powerful
o Can result from anticipation by those others of what they believe the
powerful would do if they dont comply w/ their interests
o Ex: censorship involves active interventioncan be rendered unnecessary
if journalists, writers, or others engage in self-censorship
People sometimes defer to or are even attracted toward those w/ power
Power of wealth, privilege, status (prestige accorded to individuals & those w/
important social or economic roles) is at work
o Status hierarchies & class distinctions are regularly sustained in this way
Many of us behave differently in presence of powerful or famous than w/ other
people
o Powerful dont need to assert authority to secure respect or obedience on
part of others
Third dimension becomes visible when we question the view that whenever conflict is
absent, people are content
Most effectiveand potentially most sneakyuse of power is to prevent such conflict
from arising in the first place
By persuading B that whatever A wants is in Bs best interests
o Power holders attempt to do this by shaping perceptions & beliefs of
powerless
Powerful are in business of preserving & protecting status quo and the effects of
power are to encourage people to accept their role in the existing order of things
o Powerless cant imagine any alternativesee it as natural, unchangeable
or divinely ordained & beneficial
o Reasons why people accept the rule of kings or dictators
Powerful may also be in business of preventing change by exploiting power in attempt to
shape perceptions & get people to accept as true all kinds of mythical, simplistic versions
of reality
Powerful do this by playing on followers fears, prejudices, limited info & how
people are susceptible to biased, faulty reasoning
o Power to frame issues can help shape peoples beliefs

o Power to mislead (convincing people to support leaders or favor policies

that work directly against their interests)
In most extreme cases, propaganda issued by dictators government is open, direct
attempt at persuasion
Sometimes efforts at persuasion come w/ both threat of punishment & offer of
reward
o Bosses may try to persuade workers to be more accepting of unpleasant
assignments by offering them a modest pay raise or some other benefit
Third-dimensional view allows us to see that power over others is not a simple matter of
prevailing when conflicts of interests occur or when setting the agenda of what conflicts
are about
Consists of being able to secure dependence, allegiance, or compliance of others
o Compliance may occur w/o powerful needing to act
o Can exist w/o conflict when powerful shape preferences of others in ways
that work against their interests
Reveals itself when powerless embrace interests of powerful as their own
Power may be revealed in open conflict or may reflect ability of power holder to keep
challenges from arising in first place or even capacity of power holder to convince
subordinate groups that it is in interests to support existing arrangement
Power compels use to examine the most visible ways in which power is expressed but
also its more subtle forms

Three dimensions of power chart

First Dimension
Power
A has superior
of
resources & wins
A over B
open conflicts

Powerlessness B has few

of
resources to win
B vs. A
open conflicts.

Second Dimension
A constructs or benefits from
barriers that prevent B from
challenging As position or even
raising a challenge in the first
place.

Third Dimension
A influences B to support or
think the way A does, even
when it is not in Bs interests to
do so.

B fails to get its challenge to A to

be taken seriously or B is so
frustrated by lack of power that B
fails to issue challenge to A.

B comes to believe in As ideas

even when it is not in Bs
interests to do so.

Sociological perspective: is power everywhere?

French philosopher & historian Michael Foucault held radical ideas on power that have
been hugely influential across social sciences
Famously suggested that we live in a disciplinary society
Argued that we are all subjected to a disciplining power that we cant see but that
is all around us
Many contemporary examples are consistent w/ Foucaults theory of power
Surveillance does seem to appear everywhere

Computers now record many of our daily activities, including things we purchase
& websites we browse
Businesses purchase databases of info that provides a remarkable level of detail
about us to better target ads
Dramatic increase in government surveillance of individual activity since the
terrorist attacks of 9/11
o Supercomputers housed at National Security Agency track every e-mail
we sendlook for clues of connections to foreign networks
Our everyday activities are also monitored more than ever beforew/
development of technologies like closed-circuit TV cameras & webcams linked
to live feeds
Foucaults theory of power was not limited to surveillance
Foucault was interested in how our minds & bodies are disciplined and shaped
by the powerful forces that are everywhere around us, ex: institutions like
schools, prisons, mental institutions, sports team
Some train or refrain individuals to conform in certain ways
Foucault saw power as operating through individuals rather than against them
Focus was never on individuals & groups who dominate & are dominated

2. How does the state distribute power in a society?

Institutions of power
Power is most consequential when it is expressed through the major political institutions
of any society
Complete array of these institutionsstate
Governments make laws, spend large sums of money on a huge number of areas,
tax individuals & companies & prepare for (and sometimes go to) war
Large government bureaucracies (which define policies & procedures &
issue/administer regulations that are to be adhered to by others)
Courts & legal institutions interpret and enforce laws/government policies (and
sometimes find those policies unconstitutional)
Study of power naturally turns to an examination of the institutions of the state
What is the state?
How do states regulate the economy?
Term the state refers to all of the formal political institutions of any society
In U.S., the 3 branches of government:
Executive
Legislative
Judicial
Other government institutions at lower levels of administration (like local governments or
intermediate regional governments) can be considered part of the state
Ex: state government in California or Texas, regional governments like provinces
in Canada
State is not simply just an elected government

State includes legal system (courts that enforce law), including Constitution,
permanent bureaucracies that remain in place regardless of who is the head of the
current government
In U.S., new president only appoints a few thousand new administrators & staff
upon taking office, but the entire federal government employs over 3 million
people
Bringing about change in national politics (regardless of which major party is in office) is
difficult to achieve
Most employees remain in office no matter who the president is
When president leaves office and new Congress & President are elected,
permanent bureaucracies tend to continue doing what they were before the change
in elected government
Policies & programs that states make alter the balance of power among individuals,
groups, & w/n society as a whole
Adam Smith (theorist of emerging social order of capitalism) described power as
economic system governed by invisible hand of free market
Successful entrepreneurs & efficient producers would be rewarded & those w/ bad
ideas/products competed out of business
Became powerful influence since Smiths famous work The Wealth of Nations
(published 1776)
In order for markets to function properly, state has to provide a wide range of legal
guarantees & rules and have capacity to enforce those rule when violated
Market exchanges rely on contracts
A contract exists when one person agrees to provide a certain good at a certain
price & the other person agrees to pay that price
As long as both parties do what they promise, the terms of the contract are
fulfilled
State institutions (sometimes courts, government agencies) provide necessary
assurance that if one party fails to live up to its contractual commitments, it will
be penalized
o Not true for illegal organizations like Mafiahave own methods of
enforcing rule violations
For most individuals & business organizations, critical backing provided by state makes
contractual exchange possible
Role of state in enforcing contracts has grown over time to include a wide range of other
supports to help make a market economy work
One of most important thing states do: regulate economy in ways that try to
provide a level playing field for all participants
Through regulation, state tries to prevent economic actors from harming innocent
third parties
Examples:
o Laws & policies preventing large corporations from taking advantage of
their size to cut special deals w/ suppliers or using their size to drive
competitors out of business & create uncompetitive monopolies

Ex: In 1990s when Microsoft corporation provided low-priced

operating software for new computers but made is difficult for
consumers to run non-Microsoft programs
o Laws preventing stock market traders from using insider knowledge to
unfairly profit
Ex: If employees at company knows of a new product that will
increase the value of firms stock, they are not entitled to use that
knowledge to buy up the companys stock in advance of the new
products release & later sell at a profit
o Laws & regulations preventing firms from marketing false advertising
claims about their products
Ex: Not allowing a food manufacturer to call a nonorganic food
products organic
o Laws & regulations requiring companies to meet minimal standards in
terms of safety for workers & consumers
Ex: Laws barring a childrens clothing manufacturer from making
clothes that might catch on fire
o Laws & regulations that make companies or individuals compensate
innocent 3rd parties when their actions cause harm
Ex: Companys factory creates pollution that impacts health of
families living near the factory
Modern states act to try to solve some of the problems & limitations of a market economy
Policies are in the general interests of broad publicmaking sure that there is
competition b/w firms & protecting consumers & innocent 3rd parties
Policies give individuals who want to start a business a reasonable expectation
that if the goods or services they provide are of high enough quality, they will be
able to compete against existing
For this reason, regulators arent always popular w/ businesses
Most of the policies sound straightforward
Are (to some large extent) straightforward in the general interests of all of us
Includes most legal businesses which dont want to be undermined by competitors
who cheat in one way or another
Details of any of policies have enormous consequences for the distribution of power
Businesses typically resist attempts to pass regulations that might lower profit margins
but protect citizens
Ex: GM resisted efforts in 1960s to require its cars to be safer
o Until consumer advocate Ralph Nader showed that one GM car (Corvair)
was unsafe in crashes & caused unnecessary deaths of some of its owners
Ex: Aftermath of banking & financial crisis in 2008
o Collapse or near collapse of many American & international banks
required mammoth government bailout & triggered long period of
economic hardship & insecurity for years to come
o Following crisis, many government leaders called for limits on financial
speculation to reduce likelihood of another financial calamity

o Restrictions make it harder for banks & investment firms to make

extremely high profits but would make it less likely that they would
declare bankruptcy (and thereby threaten other banks & economy as a
whole)
o Financial sector as a whole has resisted many of proposed changes
Many observers of banking industry note that the big banks are
bigger than everrisk of another financial collapse remains nearly
as great as before the crisis
Why state matters in distribution of power
How do states impact who gets what in a society?
Policies & programs adopted & maintained by state are hugely important in many
different ways
Policies can be designed to ensure that poor families receive a greater share of the
economic pie than they would if the market was left completely untouched
Policies can be designed to ensure that rich are allowed to maintain/increase their
share of wealth
Tax & transfer policies are important for distribution of income & wealth
All governments must tax their citizens to pay for government services
o Whether rich will pay a higher share than poor varies widely across
countries
All governments provide some benefits for some categories of people who might
otherwise be destitute
o Countries vary widely in how much of these benefits they provide
Who gets what is a function of government policy
Specific examples of how states impact who gets what in a society:
States set/alter rules of game w/n which individuals & groups contest each other
for power
o Policies favor big business, small business, farmers, or workers & unions
but not all at the same time
States allocate huge amount of resources through various kinds of spending
programswelfare state
o Programs include old-age pensions (primarily known as Social Security in
US), health insurance (for many people who might not be able to acquire it
on their own), unemployment insurance, welfare for poor families, etc.
States decide who bears burdens of public spending programs, primarily through
tax policies
States have power to decide life-and-death matters
o Ex: whether country goes to war, whether death penalty is legal
o Other life-defining public policies include whether or not food & health
care shall be provided to those who cant afford to pay for it themselves
States make choices that impact distribution of power across entire society
State provides institutional backdrop for market economies to function and
directly or indirectly ensure that investments can be made profitably

Sometimes states will directly intervene on behalf of the powerfulesp in periods

of political conflict & stress
States also make some policy decisions
Might empower power & help disadvantaged obtain greater share of benefits of
economic growth
Legislatures, courts, bureaucracies that make up state are places where all 3 forms of
power can be found
Most visible in terms of direct, overt conflict over state policy (first dimension of
power) or in terms of what issues are made the subject of public discussion &
debate (second dimension of power)
Role of state in persuading less powerful individuals & groups that their interests are
served by policies that protect & promote interests of powerful (third dimension) is subtle
but important aspect of overall operation of state
Important to convince people that existing world in which they live in is just &
fair

Promoting interests of powerful

Why do states tend to promote the interests of the powerful?
States more often than not adopt policies in interests of powerful
Pattern is found throughout world
Arguments for why states adopt policies in interest of powerful
Business confidence theory of state
o Holds that whatever preferences of government officials, state has
powerful incentive to make sure that big business interests have
confidence & security they need to want to make investments that will
create jobs & produce economic growth
o When entrepreneurs & business executives think that business conditions
arent favorable, their incentives to make investments decline
o Overall health of economy is important
States are driven to adopt policies that will convince business
leaders that economy will remain healthy in near future
o In era of economic globalization, maintaining healthy business
environment at home is important for discouraging companies from
moving abroad or for encouraging foreign companies to invest in your
country
Newly elected government has to take these issues into
consideration
Focuses on relative political power of different groups
o Large corporations & rich individuals have more resources to influence
political life than do other groups representing working-class & middleclass people
o Corporations will try to influence elections & election outcomes by
donating large amounts of money to candidates they favor
o Corporate executives & rich individuals are far more likely to have access
to politicians than poor people

Tend to travel in some of the same circles & clubs

Donations will open doors when something of importance is being
debated & discussed
Upshot of disproportionate influence is that policies will often tend
to favor interests & preferences of powerful & well organized
Exceptions do occur when powerless get what they want
In 1930swide range of new government programs were adopted that included
Social Security system (eventually creating pensions for all Americans over 65),
unemployment insurance, mammoth job creation programs, increased regulation
of business, increased taxes on rich
o New Deal programs adopted under Franklin D. Roosevelt
o Bitterly resisted by most wealthy Americans & many business interests
In 1960sfederal government created Medicare (health insurance for everyone
over 65) & Medicaid (health insurance for poor), adopted civil rights legislation
giving women & minorities new rights and opportunities to compete on a more
equal footing w/ white men
o Significant increases in welfare spending programs
When poor are well organized into social movements, they can sometimes exert influence
over the direction of policy
Both 1930s and 1960shad large social movements of poor people that changed
the context of political power
o Mostly unions & unemployed in 1930s
o Mostly civil rights movement in 1960s
Large social movements of poor are relatively rare

3. Who has power in the U.S. today?

Power in America
Most of what we read about national politics (Congress, presidency, Supreme Court)
involves openly contested conflicts over public policy decisions
Democracy: political system in which all citizens have equal rights to participate in
political life
Who Wins? Policy & politics in first dimension
First dimension of power in American politics concerns the question of who wins (or
more specificallywho can achieve their goals) when theres open conflict
In recent years & most cases, conflicts put most or all Republicans on one side &
most Democrats on other side of conflict
Other issues are more complicated & dont always cleanly break along party lines
When issues under discussion become heated, debates that follow can hold everyones
attention
Most of the time, issues being discussed & debated in Washington D.C. are obscure to
most Americans

On most issues, only professional policy analysts & congressional insiders fully
understand all of the details of policy proposals & fully understand what it is at
stake
Most important decisions are made largely outside of publics view
When it comes to national politics of first dimension, sociological perspective on power
& politics urges us to ask: what are the broad patterns buried in these outcomes?
We must focus on one set of policies that are among the most important: policies that
impact distributions of wealth & inequality
Tax policies: esp. some of political changes in ways taxes are paid that have
enabled superwealthy to take home much greater share of economic pie than they
do in all other rich, democratic countries most like U.S.
Antipoverty programs: why it is that policies of American government do least to
reduce poverty & help families living in minimally acceptable way

Taxation & economic inequality

What do tax policies tell us about how power is distributed in U.S.?
U.S. has extraordinarily high concentration of income & wealth at very top
Top 1% of households receive nearly 24% of all income in 2007
Top 10% received about half of income
Remaining 90% of families received only about 50% of all income
Democratic countries can be prosperous & organize economies so that rich dont gobble
so much of benefits of economic growth
Better to be really rich in America now than say 40 years ago
Important policy changes altered way incomes & wealth are distributed & consumed
Political organizations of upper class have convinced Congress & various
presidents to make it easier for them to retain most of their income & wealth and
pass it on to nearly all of their children or favorite charity
Most obvious waytax system (how much taxes citizens in different income
brackets are required to pay)
o Tax rate on earnings above a certain amount of income becomes crucial
factor in whether or not rich will have more than everyone else or a lot
more than everyone else
U.S. & rich countries long had progressive income tax system
Rich are expected to pay greater share of their income than the middle class
o Those w/ higher incomes can better afford to contribute a somewhat
higher share of their income to pay for government programs that benefit
everyone
Logic is common to all democratic societies
o Public opinion polls show that Americans support requiring rich to pay
higher tax rates than everyone else
Tax burdens on high earners have declined dramatically in past 30 years
At end of World War II (when high taxes were adopted to help pay for war effort),
highest earners were paying over 90% of earnings above the top threshold

In early 1960s, top rate was reduced to around 70% of earnings above highest
bracket
In early 1980s, 2 dramatic waves of tax cuts on high earnings
o During presidency of Ronald Reaganrich saw their tax rates fall below
30%
o Early 1990s, Presidents George H.W. Bush & Bill Clinton bumped up tax
rate a bit35%
Tax rate on high earners in U.S. is significantly lower than in other rich democratic
countries
Other changes to tax code in U.S. have benefited super-rich & typically enabled them to
pay much less than the official tax rate would suggest
Rich often not only have high earnings but typically receive considerable income
from their investments
o Much of this investment income is treated differently than other kinds of
income
o May be taxed at rate as low as 15% (capital gains tax rate)
Wealthy can shelter other earnings from taxationreducing overall tax rate paid
by rich families
o Known as loopholestax breaks, useful for vast majority of American
families but extremely valuable for very rich
Wealthy individuals & families can afford to employ lawyers & tax accountants skilled in
manipulation of these rules to seek every possible vehicle to reduce their tax rate
something that ordinary Americans wouldnt be able to do
Very wealthiest Americans often make liberal use of off-shore tax shelters
o Create investment schemes in little countries that have no income tax
o Way to avoid or radically reduce taxes that would otherwise pay American
government
Corporationslike wealthy individuals & familieshave benefited from many changes
in tax laws over past
Private companies pay much less in taxes than they used to
Decline in corporate income tax as percentage of total federal tax revenue
Average taxes paid by corporations are far lower than official tax rate would
suggest
Many industries enjoy special tax deals allowing them to pay even lower rates
o Ex: oil industry regularly receive special tax breaks & loopholes
encouraging companies to drill for more oil even as oil prices have soared
& oil company profits reach record highs
More loopholes allow corporations to reduce their taxable income down to nothing
General Electric (GE): known for household appliances like refrigerators, light
bulbs, green-power producing products
o Successfully avoided paying taxes in 1980s even as Ronal Regan ordered
his staff to try to close some of the loopholes GE was using
Company is powerhouse in Washington D.C.

o Managed to pay no corporate income taxes at all (according to New York

Times)
Successful in eliminating its taxes that the federal government
actually owed GE $3.2 billion
o GEs tax lawyers & accountants aggressively used variety of tax shelters
to write down profits
o Company further lobbies Congress each year for special tax breaks often
buried in legislation & goes unnoticed by media or public
Reduced tax burdens allow corporations to retain more of their earnings
Compensation of chief executive officers (CEOs) of companies are required to report the
annual income of their CEOs
Compared to 1970s, todays average full-time salary at same firm is 243 times
more
Dramatic changes in individual & corporate tax rates indicate that in recent decades, rich
individuals & families as well as large corporations & their top executives are winning
Struggle over who should pay what taxes will continue
Possible that tax rates on high earners will once again increase

Antipoverty policy: why are so many Americans poor?

Public policy: policies adopted or implemented by government
Another distinctive feature of U.S. public policy: inability to reduce levels of poverty to
same degree as other rich countries around the world
Every government in modern age has established programs to try to make sure
poor families have access to some basic necessities of lifefood, shelter
Programs & policies (welfare state) designed to help address number of important
social problems
o Social problems: wide range of issues that are thought to have harmful
consequences like poverty, crime, drug abuse, homelessness, inequality,
racism, sexism, discrimination
Antipoverty programs operate as kind of insurance program for misfortune
Attempt to give poor children the same opportunity as middle-class children to
succeed in life (or at least seek to improve their chances)
Idea is that poor children who are poor through no fault of their own & should not
be held back
Adults & children may fall into poverty for any number of physical reasons
Unable to work b/c of physical or mental disability
Extended illness or accident
Plain bad luck
Every country has welfare-state programs designed to reduce poverty, but some do it a lot
better than others
Possible in rich countries to dramatically reduce number of children & families
living in poverty
Measure: count all poor families who have <50% income of median family of the same
size (same-sized family at 50th percentile of all families)

Measuring Poverty has advantage of taking into account relative standards of

living in different countries
Poor person in rich country like U.S. will have higher income than poor person in
Chad (one of poorest countries in world)
o Basic living standards are higher in U.S. as well
Rates of poverty in U.S. are higher than in any of the comparison group of similar nations
Using comparable data about family income across countries
Can estimate (hypothetical) poverty rate in country if there was no government
policy to correct it (x-axis)
Y-axis estimates actual poverty rate once government intervention is taken into
account (programs that provide welfare benefits to poor families)
2 results are of special importance:
Number of countries have high hypothetical poverty rates based just on market
incomes before government action is taken into account
o Can be as large as in U.S. in some cases
No country does as little as U.S. to reduce poverty
o U.K. dramatically reduces it poverty (by over 50%) through its antipoverty
programs
Ineffectiveness of American welfare state in reducing poverty has many consequences
Impact on children
o When children grow up in poverty in any country, likelihood is that many
will have problems as adults

Limited welfare state highlights some of unique features of American political system
that systematically disadvantages poor & middle class politically
Social welfare programs tend to be most generous in countries that are
characterized by strong unions, ex: countries w/ socialist or social democratic
party that has regularly won elections & countries w/ political system dominated
by strong central government
America has 2-party system (consisting of Republican & Democratic parties)
o Means that no left political party that consistently promotes policies that
would reduce poverty & inequality
Powerful actors appear to prevail more often & receive far more rewards in U.S. than in
other countries
Better to be rich in U.S. than in any other similar country
Worse to be poor in U.S. than in any other similar county
Some political issues when outcomes are more mixed or when entrenched power holders
lost ground
Ex: issues involving social & cultural equality (rights for minorities, women,
gays, lesbians)
America was once a country that denied equal rights & opportunities to members of
various different groups
It wasnt until 1965 when African Americans had full legal rights to vote in all
Southern states

Today America is supportive of equal rights & equal opportunity for minority groups as
most other countries

Who sets the agenda? Politics in the second dimension

Why are there only 2 political parties in America, & why does it matter?
American political system produces outcomes that reward powerful
Second dimension of power calls attention to ways in which powerful actors sometimes
maintain power (or status quo) by preventing issues from coming up in first place
Several features of Americas political institutions & economic system combine to
prevent issues from coming up
Two-party political system
Highly unusual amount of money donated to candidates for political office in
American politics
A two-party political system
Most democratic countries around the world have at least 3 parties who wins seats in
national legislature
Have much wider range of options & opinions are presented to voters at every
election
Wider range of opinions & parties are represented in national legislatures
Ex: in most countries, there is a party that is more liberal social democratic than
the Democratic Party in the U.S.
o Most countries also have a political party that occupies the political center
standing b/w left-wing & right-wing parties
o Many countries also have a Green Party that wins seats in legislature
America is unusual in just having 2 major parties contending for office:
Democratic
Republican

Only 2 parties in America

Congress established electoral system: first-past-the-post electoral system
Candidate (and party) winning most votes in single district wins seatmakes it
virtually impossible for 3rd parties to gain traction
o Only the candidate winning most votes in congressional district or state
wins a seat in the House or Senate
New political party seeking to build support cannot do so gradually by electing a
few representatives & building a representation w/ voters
o Regional third-party efforts (notably Populists of late 19th century in parts
of American South & Midwestern Progressives in 20th century) have
occasionally been viable for a period of timewinning seats in Congress
Efforts are relatively easily turned aside by major parties
Their voters co-opted into 1 or the other of the major parties
Two-party system became firmly established by 1840

o Only one successful example of 3rd party entering political system &
displacing one of the dominant parties since then
Republican Party breakthrough in intense conflicts of pre-Civil
War era in 1850s and 1860
In all other cases, 3rd parties have failed
Systems of proportional representation (PR)
Found in most other countries other than U.S.
Allow minority parties to gain representation based on share of vote they win
o Voters select a party, not a candidate
Proportion of votes received by each party translates into seats in the national
parliament
o In many cases, a party receiving as little as 5% of vote will receive seats in
legislature & gain a foothold in the political system
Range of viable political parties in other democratic countries has important
consequences for how agendas are set & what kinds of political issues are discussed in
media & in their national legislatures
More political positions under discussion
o Likely that no party would have a majority of seats & winners would have
to form a coalition of parties in order to govern
o Encourages wider range of discussion & compromise than a 2-party
system requires
Multiparty system changes nature of electoral campaigns
o Citizens have wider menu of options to consider & wider range of
opinions being expressed
Daily coverage of political life in media is very different
o Ex: political talk shows on television

Money & American politics

American politics are exceptional in amount of money that is available or must be raised
by candidates for political office
Most of money given to support candidates running for office comes from wealthy
individuals & large corporations & business groups
In recent decades, incentives for political candidates to seek funding have increased
dramatically
Political strategists & campaign managers have reached a consensus that highspending media campaigns are the most efficient way to reach voters
Serious candidates for office need to raise funds
Changes on supply side influence trends
Vast increase in wealth at the top has expanded the resources for rich to invest in
political system
Rising household affluence creates similar dynamic
o Giving among the wealthy for all purposes (civic, charitable, religious,
political) increased in era of rising inequality
Contributions come from individual donors and political action committees (PACs)

PACs are organized by wide range of individual businesses & business associations,
unions, professional associations, ideological groups, ex: National Rifle Association,
Emilys List (group that works to elect prochoice Democratic women)
PAC contributions can be reasonably divided into 3 broad categories:
o Business-related
o Labor
o Ideologicalrunning gamut from far left to far right
Individuals account for large proportion of total donations
Vast majority of the largest of these contributions continue to be made by wealthy
individuals or wealthy families
Political money has impact on funding agenda-setting organizations
Organizations play significant role in setting policy agenda
Policy organizations w/ greatest resources contribute to a larger environment in
which many egalitarian policy ideas are simply not the agenda for discussion
W/ 3 decades of research on political money, a serious candidate for elected office (esp.
Congress) has to be able to reach money from either corporations or rich individuals or
both
Weeds out possible candidates who dont appeal to donors
Limits who can run for office
Large donors arent guaranteed any particular outcome, but they get access to elected
officials that ordinary citizens dont typically have
Access can translate into smallbut often significantbenefits like tax breaks
hidden in legislation & rarely subjected to public scrutiny

Money & politics

Role of money in American elections highlights how social inequalities shape political
process
Contributions made by individuals during federal elections are increasingly important
way for Americans to get involved in supporting their candidates of choice
Contributions reflect deep socioeconomic fault lines
Majority of campaign contributions from individuals originate form handful of
large & disproportionately wealthy metropolitan areas
Third dimension: do Americans believe in politics benefiting the powerful?
What contradictory views do Americans hold on policies involving the unequal distribution of
income?
Policies that allow the very rich to earn & keep most of their exceptionally high &
growing incomes while poor & working- and middle-class families see few of the
benefits of the economic growth
Hardly constitutes policies that are in the interests of everyone
Some argue that failure to tax rich & large corporations more extensively means doing
less to lift children & families above poverty line

Causes schools not to be as good, having fewer police officers & fire fights, not
repairing/maintaining streets & bridges & public parks as much as we might have
Very richest Americans need not worry about these things
o Can send children to top private schools, afford to live in gated
communities that provide high level of security far from sources of
pollution & crime
Challenge of studying power on third dimension involves knowing things that are
impossible to know (ex: what someone might think if they had full knowledge & info
about the impact of government policies)
Some research on what public thinks about government & public policies:
Surveys: polls of a representative sample (small group of people selected at
random)
Public opinion: characterizes results of opinion surveys
Methods arent perfect for examining third dimension of power but provide at
least a first look at the issueway of thinking about empirical problem of
consciousness
Important findings about what Americans believe when it comes to public policies
involving unequal distribution of income, welfare state, national security policy:
Most Americans believe that the political system favors the preferences of the
powerful
Americans are in principle egalitarians (prefer more equality than we have today)
o Believe that rich should pay more taxes than the poor
o Government should spend more on specific social programs in the abstract
& more to help those who cant provide for themselves through their job
Most Americans have come to accept the view that government is too big
o Think market is better at solving social problems than government
o Taxes are too high
o Americans favor individual initiative & free markets and oppose big
government
Not willing to support expanding government programs that have
been shown to reduce poverty & inequality like in other countries
Americans are in general conservative egalitarians
Americans dont consistently connect their beliefs about equality into support for
government programs that might actively alter the balance of power in favor of
the powerless
Compared to other nations, Americans are much less supportive of helping the
unemployed, reducing income equality, & helping senior citizens
o Citizens in comparable countries (France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden,
Great Britain) exhibit much higher levels of support for each proposition
Americans are always less convinced that government-based programs are the best way
to go
Deep hostility to big government is one of hallmarks of American public opinion
in last 3 decades

When asked about how much confidence they have in their government, <20% of
Americans in recent polls have indicated that they have confidence in government
doing the right thing all or even most of the time
o Peoples confidence in government has declined dramatically over past 35
years
Americans want more equality than they have, but they are often not willing to have the
government (one institution fully capable of having an impact) do the job
Ex: debate over whether or not federal government should adopt national health
insurance plan that would cover all Americans
o Government of every rich country around world takes steps to ensure that
all citizens have health coverage
o Sole exception is U.S.approximately 50 million people (almost
1/6Americans) is uninsured or has very limited health insurance)
Increasing proportions of Americans have supported increased government spending on
health care for all citizens
Support for increased spending has reached 70% in recent years
Over past century, there has been repeated efforts to pass national health insurance
measure
Until 2010Obama administration narrowly succeeded in getting measure
through Congress that would cover almost all Americans
Remains uncertain what ultimate fate of Obama administrations health care
reforms will be
Hostility toward big government is important
History suggests that only way a country can have more equality & less poverty is by
expanding role of state in society
Charitable organizations (well-meaning, able to help) are never large enough to
lift significant numbers of people out of poverty
Free markets are good but w/o significant regulation & appropriate types of
taxation, will produce high levels of economic inequality
Only government has resources & ability to produce more equality & less poverty
Public attitudes about elimination of estate tax (inheritance taxdeath tax)
Tax that is paid when someone dies & leaves money to someone other than
spouse
By 1990s, estate tax has been eliminated on all but very large estates
Campaign to repeal estate tax culminated in 2003eliminating last remaining
inheritance taxes
Significant majority of Americans favored elimination of all estate taxesno matter how
question was posed
Even in middle of Great Depressionmajorities of Americans favored setting no
limits on how much someone could inherit
Puzzling that inheritance taxes were eliminated
Almost everyone except very rich were paying little or no inheritance taxes at the
time it was repealed
Might be due to wishful thinking optimism bias

o Americans may simply be unrealistically optimistic about their chances of

someday becoming wealthy
Might be due to ignorance of facts of estate tax
o Some conflicting evidence as to whether people w/ better info were more
likely to oppose tax
America is the only rich, democratic country in the world that imposes no inheritance
taxes at all
On the third dimension of power, ordinary Americans do not believe all the things that
the powerful might desire them to
In many cases, they have come to believe in conservative principles about how
bad big government is that have allowed inequality to grow unchecked in recent
decades
Rejection of a greater government role in American society is consequential
Inequality can only be realistically reduced w/ increased taxes & more social
spending by federal government
When politicians & political activists propose to do something that would reduce
inequality or provide more social benefits for the poor, defenders of privilege have been
able to mobilize a powerful, principled opposition among a majority of Americans

Conclusion: thoughts & questions for further investigation

Sociological study of power & politics analyzes various ways in which power is exerted
& maintained
Concerned w/ votes, elections, public policy as well as underlying sources of
political outcomes
Three dimensions of power are central but media ordinarily focuses solely on most
visible dimension (where there is open conflict)
Once we learn to think about power & politics on 3 dimensions, we have learned a
different way of thinking about political life
Application of sociological imagination to study of power
Power & power relations are pervasive aspect of social life
Study of power has been considered central task for all of sociology & for all
citizens
Opinion polls & surveys reveal that vast majority of Americans are unhappy w/
their government & system of democracy
In our towns, cities, workplaces, familiespower can be analyzed in terms of 3
dimensions & how they reinforce one another
Analysis is always precursor to effective change