The aim of this paper is to examine the elite, pluralism, and hyperpluralism hypotheses of American democracy. It also examines the bankruptcy bill in light of the three values controversy. Furthermore, the article summarizes bankruptcy law by describing how it benefits and what it does.
This viewpoint is based on the concept of power-sharing. According to pluralists, influence is divided fairly among several parties, which can include coalitions of like-minded people, professional partners, corporate lobbyists, and unions. Pluralism in politics holds that decision-making comes under the purview of the executive. However, several non-governmental groups tend to use resources to influence and maximize their interests (Thaler 27). There are many lines of conflict and shifting because power is a continuous bargaining process among competing groups. Hence power is held equally by the few or one group that uses resources to influence the government.
Pluralism hugely affects both the process and decision making in legislative proposals. Different parties may have a chance to involve themselves in the decision making, but the one with more power has more influence and opportunity. In fact, it has higher possibility to get whatever it wants in the decision making. Therefore it is clear that the interest of the most influential groups, who are also the most powerful, are the ones represented by the policies.
Elite theory
This approach illuminates and describes the power relationship in a modern society. The elite theory posits that most power is held by a small minority that consists of policy-planning networks and members of the economic elite. Moreover, it defines that the power is independent of a country's democratic election process. Pointedly, the elites can exert substantial control over the policy decisions of corporations and government through their positions in organizations or on the boards of the same (Thaler 39). Besides, their influence over the policy-planning networks through financial support of foundations or the think tanks positions or the groups that are involved in policy discussions, give them the power to influence.
The key metaphor of this theory is that the elites, who are unified due to their common interests and backgrounds and positions have the power concentrated to themselves. On the other hand, the non-elites are assorted and powerless. Hence, power is defined by institutional position. This theory opposes pluralism, a view that all persons, or the mass of social groups, have the same level of power and balance each other out in contributing to the summative will of the society. The elite theory posits either that democracy is a utopian folly or that democracy cannot be realized within capitalism.
Therefore, the policies, as per this theory, tends to represent the interests of the elites. Notably, power lies in the position of the authority in the central economic and political institutions. Also, the psychological difference that gives a significant advantage to the elites is that they have personal resources and a vested interest in the government. On the other hand, the rest are incompetent and lack the capability to govern themselves. The elites use their resources to make the government work because otherwise, they would lose more if the government fails.
Hyperpluralist theory
This theory postulates that the special-interest groups are so influential that the centralized government is weakened because of it (Thaler 56). The competing faction tends to pull the state in different directions hence reducing its ability to negotiate and compromise. Therefore, there is that lack of action, gridlock and minimal progress on any issue of substance. Markedly, this theory says that the rights of a particular group of individuals are more important than other people and lobbies without the urge of compromise to expand those rights.
Hyperpluralism creates an uneven distribution of socioeconomic power and allows certain groups to receive more possibilities or choices than other groups. Besides, it promotes a growing gap between the wealthy and those with less wealth and less influence. Pluralism differs with hyperpluralism. Pluralism points that the competing factions negotiate and compromise, finally reaching an agreement. On the flip side, hyperpluralism contends that the competing parties pull the government in different directions, leading to hold-up and lack of progress on substantive issues.
Summary of the Bankruptcy Bill and Analysis
The bill is revealed to have been crafted as a Republican paean to the largest contributor to the Republican Party. It was neither an effort to stem Bankruptcy Abuse nor Consumer Protection. The Bill is rather changed so that it does not accommodate the gross lending by the consumers. The corporations are further allowed to collect from the users who already suffer extreme poverty.The assets that are owned by the debtor are all sold out as postulated in the amended Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Bill. The money received is then used to pay off the debts, and the dischargeable debts are discharged in case the proceeds are not enough to pay all the debts. Before the amendment, debtors of all income could file for bankruptcy under this chapter. On the flip side, Chapter 13 Bankruptcy only appeals to those who want to pay off the debts over the period of 3-5years. Also, it only helps those who have predictable income and whose income is adequate to pay their expenses and have some amount left for paying off the debts (Francis and Bill 120).
The amendment also brought an extension of the time between multiple bankruptcy filings (within eight years). Furthermore, the debtors are required to complete an instructional course concerning personal financial management otherwise the debtor is denied discharge of the debts. Additionally, the amendments limited the applicability of the automatic stay in eviction proceedings (Francis and Bill 127). The change gives provision to protect the creditors because it expanded the exceptions to discharge.
Evidenced by the summary and analysis of the Bill, it is clear that it intends to make it tough for people to file for bankruptcy. It is also precise that the legislation favors the creditor, corporations and the wealthy. The bill best embodies hyperpluralism theory of democracy where the government has nothing to do due to pressure from the influential organizations. When people disagree with the law, it is taken to the Senate and voted for the majority.
Works cited
Francis and Bill. "Personal Bankruptcy Law and New Business Formation". Financial Review, vol 44, no. 4, 2009, pp. 647-663. Wiley-Blackwell, doi:10.1111/j.1540-6288.2009.00234.x.
Frauds under the Bankruptcy Laws. 1st ed., [Place Of Publication Not Identified], Gale, Making Of Modern La, 2011.
Thaler, M. "Book Review: The Democratic Horizon: Hyperpluralism and The Renewal Of Political Liberalism, By Alessandro Ferrara". Political Theory, vol 44, no. 3, 2015, pp. 431-437. SAGE Publications, doi: 10.1177/0090591715621506.
We will email this sample to you with pleasure!
Type your email