1. Political Inequality and the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election

2. Let’s start by defining power and power inequality
Power is a relational concept, meaning that it characterizes the relationship between two or more entities.
Power is the capacity one has to realize one’s will despite the resistance of others (Weber), or A gets B to do something that B did not want to do (Dahl).

3. How is power inequality defined?
There are two schools of thought:
Power Resource Distribution Approach:
Power inequality refers to structured differences in the distribution and acquisition of power resources.
-- “Power resources” is used to describe any resources used in the exercise of power. Potentially anything can be used as a power resource.
-- Resources are distributed unequally.
-- Assumes power is an attribute of people; it is something one person/group has.

4. Interdependency Approach:
Power inequality is when one person or group realizes their will despite the resistance of others more often than others, and more often than not.
-- Power is an attribute only of relationships, not people themselves.
-- There is no set of “power resources” that are fixed across all interactions.
-- Resources can take the form of anything actors can do within an interaction.
-- The nature of the interdependent relationship reveals the types of actions (resources) available to each participant.
-- Power inequality occurs when one group does not use the resources at their disposal.

5. What is POLITICAL inequality?
In the distributional approach, political inequality refers to structured differences in the distribution and acquisition of political resources.
In the interdependence approach, political inequality is when one person or group influences government legislation and policy more often than others, and more often than not.
Let us define political inequality this way: political inequality is the extent to which within-society groups differ in influencing decisions of decision-making bodies.

6. APSA Task Force Committee
American Political Science Association Task Force on Inequality and American Democracy (2004):
Ideals of democracy “may be under growing threat in an era of persistent and rising inequalities.”
APSA Task Force Committee
Benjamin R. Barber, University of Maryland-College Park Larry M. Bartels, Princeton University Michael C. Dawson, Harvard University Morris Fiorina, Stanford University Jacob S. Hacker, Yale University Hugh Heclo, George Mason University Rodney E. Hero, University of Notre Dame Lawrence R. Jacobs, University of Minnesota, Chair Claire Jean Kim, University of California-Irvine Suzanne B. Mettler, Syracuse University Benjamin I. Page, Northwestern University Dianne M. Pinderhughes, University of Notre Dame Kay Lehman Schlozman, Boston College Theda Skocpol, Harvard University

7. The APSA Task Force said that political inequality exists in three forms: citizen voice, government responsiveness, and patterns of public policymaking.
-- Citizen voice refers to the representation of social groups in governance bodies and their political participation;
-- government responsiveness includes the extent to which governance bodies listen and react to citizen voice;
-- public policymaking is manifested in the thought and deeds (e.g., legislation) of the government.

8. Political Inequality and the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election