IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v12y1972i1p35-41.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The politician's dilemma: What to represent

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Ireland

Abstract

It is clear that the survival rate of officials who choose “popular” courses of action is greater than that of officials who choose “best” courses of action. Still, there are few officials who would vote forany course of action merely because it was popular. There are also several factors which limit the proposition that politicians to survive must be mercurial barometers of public opinion. First, a large number of politicians represent constituencies in which they are “safe” in following their own judgments within a wide range of latitude. Thus, as long as William Fulbright does not offend the voters of Arkansas on the civil rights issue, he can take a position contrary to the views of the largest part of his constituency on foreign policy and still be re-elected. Secondly, there seems to be some tendency for the politician to resolve the dilemma of what to represent by allowing himself to actually believe the popular position. In other words, in his own mind, the divergence between his judgment and the popular position merges as he pays more attention to reasons in defense of the popular position than the reasons opposed to it. The author experienced this phenomenon in his own campaign. The politician, as a politician, is primarily interested in election, no objective social analysis, and his judgment can become quite biased by his political interest. Copyright Center for Study of Public Choice Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 1972

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Ireland, 1972. "The politician's dilemma: What to represent," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 35-41, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:12:y:1972:i:1:p:35-41
    DOI: 10.1007/BF01718468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF01718468
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF01718468?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:12:y:1972:i:1:p:35-41. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.