read the article form the link
and then follow the example format to you to respond to the question.
Please select a reading from the section on “Inequality” and complete each of the sections below. When citing the source,
you should consult the links to the APSA style provided under the class website under the Assignment link.
Article/Book Chapter Citation (APSA):
Bartels, Larry. 2006. “Is the Water Rising? Reflections on Inequality and American Democracy.” PS: Political Science and
Politics 39, 1: 39-42.
“What a shocked world saw in New Orleans,” argues Larry Bartels, “was the reality of race and class in
contemporary America.” It was not, as Robert Weisberg asserted, simply the unfortunate result of a natural disaster. It
was the result of the forces of free market capitalism. This was also the finding of the APSA’s Report on Inequality and
Democracy. “Weisberg criticized the APSA Report for its alarmist tone.” But, there is cause for alarm,” in Bartel’s
opinion, “and it is not coming from a secret cabal to overthrow the government, but from the forces of market
Literature Review (Identify the major works, and the arguments of each cited by the author(s)):
At the center of Weissberg’s critique of the APSA Report is his assertion that the report did not properly define
democracy. In response, Bartels proposes a two -part definition that draws on some of the leading minds on the topic of
democratic governance. Representative democracy, Bartels explains, “implies a systematic correspondence between the
preferences of citizens and the policies adopted by elected representatives.” It entails, in other words, as Robert Dahl
famously argued, a certain level of “responsiveness of the government to the preferences of its citizens, considered as
Research Design: (What method or research design does the author(s) develop as a way of testing their argument?)
Given this definition, Bartels then asks: How well is the US doing as a Democracy? To answer this question he analyzes
the degree to which the votes in the US Congress (specifically the US Senate) match the policy preferences of the public
based on class. Additionally, in order to test the effect different party’s policies have had on rates of poverty, he
looks at rates of income growth under Democratic versus Republican presidents. …
Data: (What data and from which sources do the author(s) analyze?)
What he finds is that Senate completely ignored the preferences of the working class (measured by support, by class, for
certain policies) in three successive Congresses (101-103rd, 1989-1994). Secondly, he also discovered, citing the work of
John Hibbs that middle and upper class Americans have done well under Democrats and Republicans, but “Republican
presidents have been consistently bad for economic health of…poor people.” To illustrate his point, he provides a bar
graph showing Senate votes by session and by the class interests of the public and a line graphs showing levels of
comparative income growth during Republican and Democratic presidents between 1948 and 2001. …
Conclusion: (How does the author(s) structure their conclusion?)
In conclusion, Bartels explains that he thinks Weisberg missed the point of the APSA report. “Weissberg attacked
the Great Society, saying government programs don’t help the poor. But Hibbs research shows that it does help the poor.
Indeed, of anything, the APSA Report was too timid. Specifically, it neglected to blame Republicans. They failure to
mention what Bartels thinks is most important: the implications of differing policies between Democrats and Republicans.
In this way, he thinks the Task Force took its non-partisan mandate too far.”
Place this order with us and get 18% discount now! to earn your discount enter this code: summer17 If you need assistance chat with us now by clicking the live chat button.