Professor
X & Y
Many local town governments in New England still practice direct democracy where the population of the town votes to resolve issues. Critics of these town councils argue that well-funded special interest groups are able to influence these large open referenda.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthen the critics’ argument?
(A) Groups that oppose well-funded special interest groups do not have the budgets to mount major media campaigns in local markets.
(B) Direct elections are not effective because individual citizens do not have as much knowledge as professional legislators.
(C) Since individual voters make the decision, direct democracy provides insurance against the influence of wealthy special interest groups.
(D) Local newspapers and TV stations tend to be biased in favor of special interest groups and provide unbalanced reporting to local citizens.
(E) Decisions by local town governments usually are in line with the views of well-funded special interest.
very confusing... lets narro down to A and E and choose E.
if the decisions by local town governments usually are in line with the views of well-funded special interest, it can be concluded that well-funded special interest groups are able to influence these large open referenda by electing the people thay support/want.
Narrowed it down to A and E. But will choose A.
I have one problem with E. The author argues that where the population of the town votes to resolve issues not the local goverment. The critics argue that since some special interest groups are well funded they are able to influence the population. Since the public votes to resolve issue not the goverment, how would getting people elected would change the outocme of the open referenda ???