Whose interests are served in the law?

This issue is raised in the book.

In it, I argue that the law tends to represent the powerful but also suggest that normal, ordinary people can also have their will impact the law, consistent with the pluralist view of the law. Yet, there is no doubt that the powerful tend to win when it comes to making the law.

This is not, and should not be, a controversial statement. After all, lawmakers tend to be very wealthy. So, they make the law. Also, it is the powerful who tend to fund the law as well, in the form of campaign contributions.

Thus, studies like this one should not surprise you. Here is a summary from Think Progress:

When organized interest groups or economic elites want a particular policy passed, there’s a strongly likelihood their wishes will come true. But when average citizens support something, they have next to no influence.

That’s according to a forthcoming article in Perspectives on Politics by Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin I. Page of Northwestern University. The two looked at a data set of 1,779 policy issues between 1981 and 2002 and matched them up against surveys of public opinion broken down by income as well as support from interest groups.

They estimate that the impact of what an average citizen prefers put up against what the elites and interest groups want is next to nothing, or “a non-significant, near-zero level.” They note that their findings show “ordinary citizens…have little or no independent influence on policy at all.” The affluent, on the other hand, have “a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy,” they find, “more so than any other set of actors” that they studied. Organized interest groups similarly fare well, with “a large, positive, highly significant impact on public policy.”

When they hold constant the preferences of interest groups and the rich, “it makes very little difference what the general public thinks,” they note. The probability that policy change occurs is basically the same whether a small group or a large majority of average citizens are in favor. On the other hand, all else being the same, opposition from the wealthy means that a particular policy is only adopted about 18 percent of the time, but when they support it it gets adopted 45 percent of the time. Similar patterns are true for interest groups. The impact could also be even higher than their findings, as there may be policy differences among those they count as wealthy, which means that the imprecision in their measure “is likely to produce underestimates of the impact of economic elites on policy making,” they write.

Stories you WON'T see in the mainstream press today

One the main points of the book is that you cannot (and should not) rely on the mainstream media exclusively for your information. Why not? Because it is owned and operated by corporations, which clearly have a bias in terms of keeping some things out of the news.

So, you can check out alternative sources on the left or right of the political spectrum, as well as objective advocacy journalism organizations for stories about powerful people that do not tend to appear in the mainstream news.

Here are some examples from today...now why would the corporate owned media NOT be interested in such stories?

• 

  New Monetary Systems for a Sustainable Democracy and "The Great Turning"

  By Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese, Truthout | News Analysis
• 

  There Is No Good Drug War

  By Maya Schenwar, Truthout | Interview

• On the News With Thom Hartmann: The Third Circuit Court of Appeals Has Ruled on a New Aspect of Corporate Personhood, and More

  By Thom Hartmann, The Thom Hartmann Program | News Report 
   
  

  Internal EPA Presentation Reveals Dispute Over Fracking Contamination in Dimock Wells

  By Mike Ludwig, Truthout | News

  

  In Oakland, Airport Workers Cite Unfair Practices

  By David Bacon, Truthout | Photo Essay 

   

  

  The Business of Mass Incarceration

  By Chris Hedges, TruthDig | Report 

   

  

  Worldwide Support Grows for Iraq Human Rights Hearing

  By Laura Raymond and Leah Todd, Truthout | News 

   

   

   

   

   
   
   
   

Right here is why need independent media

Every day, while checking on and reading from the mainstream news, I do my best to see what non-profit, consumer driven news organizations are talking about.

Here is a great example of why these organizations are so important. In the book, the issues of who writes the law and who the law serves are examined. The main argument is that the mainstream media rarely raise these issues because they are vested in the same status quo as lawmakers.

In the article, the authors show how one area of big business controls the law to its own advantage. This is not a controversial claim that powerful interests impact the law through their donations. After all, we as humans are not into throwing away our money for nothing.
So consider this, from the article:
How much is democracy worth to you?
If you’re like most people, it’s priceless. But for the hedge funds and insurance companies on Wall Street, it does have a price tag. And now, thanks to a new report by Global Exchange, we know the number on it: approximately $4.2 billion. That’s how much the Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (F.I.R.E.) sector has invested in political influence through campaign contributions and lobbying since 2006. That comes to $1,331 a minute spent on political power.

The new report is called “Meet the F.I.R.E. Sector: How Wall Street Is Burning Democracy.” It was developed by Elect Democracy, a nonpartisan effort by Global Exchange to expose and challenge the impact of corporate money in U.S. politics. The report contains extensive research tracking Wall Street’s investment in political power, and analyzes exactly how Wall Street has secured what Global Exchange calls “industry-loyal voting practices” in Congress: by shoveling stacks of campaign cash in the direction of Congressional hopefuls from both major political parties.
That money lets these industries get what they want in Washington. The F.I.R.E. sector contributed $879 million to members of Congress since 2006, and took positions on 383 bills during the 112th Congress. For instance, they supported Free Trade Agreements with Korea, Panama, and Colombia in 2007, and backed the bailout in 2008. Bills they opposed include the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, the Limited Homeowner and Investor Loss in Foreclosure Act of 2010, and the Stop Student Loan Interest Rate Hike Act of 2011.

Got it? They give lots of money. They get laws that benefit them.
And you can make a call, send an email or fax, sign a petition, and vote. Of course you can also give a sizeable amount of money to political parties or candidates, but if you're like moer than 99% of Americans, you don't.