Generally, politicians make decisions in their own interest by pandering to their consitutents. Republicans in moderate or liberal districts are prone to voting against pro-war causes, as they know this will get them voted out of office quickly. Democrats in more conservative districts will generally support the war unless their home district starts to oppose.
In issues that are not so politically charged, politicans make decisions that benefit themselves, their friends, and at the same time, push the country towards what they feel is the better path.
Congressman Ron Paul of Texas is an exception. He is a Libertarian, and regardless of agreement with him, he is committed to Libertarian values. His decisions are based almost entirely upon what he believes is best for the public by way of Libertarianism. As well, a number of politicians in very safe districts will decide many decisions based on political ideology when there is no self-interest to be had.
Basically, if a politican doesn't have to protect himself, and he can't line his pockets, he'll default to public interest.
2007-02-26 21:06:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by BDOLE 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Obviously, no politician, in spite of being "outed" and then apologizing after the fact, would ever own up to serving their own interest rather than the public interest.
Unfortunately, there are clear personal ties that show up in many politician's histories that create conflicts of interest. Take, for example, Dick Cheney's relationship with Halliburton.
However, the most dangerous thing in politics today is probably the power that lobbyists have over some politicians. While some politicians may not exactly be "self-serving," the fact that lobbyists can throw money at politicians and then hold the promise of future money and support over their heads in return for political favors endangers politicians' objectivity and duty to the public. This is especially true in the case of the media, who directly control politician's "face time" on the air, thus by extension, their level of exposure, recognition, and popularity.
2007-02-26 21:13:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sean 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
in the beginning to serve the state public interest, but when they find out the can eat and give to who they wish a piece of cake, things change very much. do you know anybody that has no price? watch the movie all the kings men, originally The Politician,
2007-02-26 21:06:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
occasion: John F. Kennedy. had to tug out of Vietnam, and had to repeal the Federal Reserve Act. This have been given him shot via the protection tension commercial complicated, and the ecu Banking community. you're able to understand that a lot of our modern political gamers have fallen out of the suggestions on distant places kin. This team has publicly introduced their opt to create a tyrannical international government. So no longer all judgements are very own, or basically political, yet a great team of them have an schedule that has been handed from era to era, to regulate the worlds international locations. The CFR has been putting human beings in American government because of the fact the 1800's, hoping to anticipate entire administration over the Americas wealth, and human components. circulate forward and spot what share presidents, senators and congressmen are CFR. those are the persons writing rules that take your rights away, and get them handed as "RIDERS", so as that they do no longer even have the possibility to a legislative debate, or get a raffle to stand on their very own advantages. they're created with great malice for the liberty, and privateness of the yankee human beings. the hot national identity card is a suited occasion of what i'm speaking approximately. It replaced into linked as a rider, to a protection spending bill that no person would deny, so it replaced into handed unethically
2016-12-14 06:48:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by bustamante 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ronald Reagan was once the democratic governor of california,
he even did the keynote adress for John F. Kennedy, He then one a certain set of his own principals switche sides, so I guess that's self interest over commomn interest.
2007-02-26 21:04:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that when they start out they have good intentions, but when anybody gets power, they want to keep it. Then things turn nasty.
2007-02-26 22:19:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋