Consider this statement:

Politicians too often base their decisions on what will please the voters, not on what is best for
the country.
Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above
statement means. Describe a specific situation in which a politician might make an unpopular
decision for the good of the country. Discuss the principles you think should determine whether
political decisions should be made to please the voters or to serve the nation.
Sample Essay: Politicians
In a representative democracy, representatives are selected by the voters to convey
their ideas and values in the government. These representatives are voted for by
citizens according to their degree to which they will uphold these ides and values.
Citizens would obviously not vote someone into office who believes in the opposite of
the citizens on several issue. The representatives will be re-elected in the same
manner; the degree to which the citizens ideas and values were upheld. It is not
surprising that politicians will base their decisions on what will please the voters and
not on what is best for the country. The politicians must maintain the popularity of the
voters and the best method to achieve that is to please them with the actions made in
governmental circles.
The politicians however are not merely carbon copies of the citizen's consensus
opinions. The politicians will have opinions of their own and occasionally this may conflict
with those of the voters. At this time the politicians may make an unpopular decision
for what they feel is for the good of the country. One example is often seen with the
petition of Nazi groups to march. While an exceptionally high majority of citizens would
never want to see this march occur, many politicians would have no choice but to let the
march preceede for the greater good, in this instance it is the right to free speech
guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the constitution. From this ideal, much of this
country was founded and it would by hypocritical to deny it to another group regardless
of how unpopular this group was to the voters.
While this is an extreme case of politicians displeasing the voters for the good of the
country, there exists a great range of "grey" area where politicians and voters do not
meet eye to eye. So what should be considered when making a decision to please the
voters or serve the nation? Fortunately, for the most part, the voters will also have the
best interest of the nation at heart but trouble can still arise. One major problem is
the building of new prisons or landfills. For most voters, there is no question that they

are needed, but none of the voters wants to see the prison or landfill wind up in their
backyards. To deal with such problems and still remain in good standing with the voters,
the politicians must learn to make concessions. For instance, the same district where a
new prison is built, a new High School and Industrial Park is set up to better education
and increase jobs and the local economy.
A politicians must weigh the potential degrees of disfavor that they may incur when
determining whether to serve the nation at the risk of the voters. Politicians are unable
to please all of the voters all of the times, but by ensuring that unfavorable decision
are accompanied by many favorable ones, the politicians can balance on the treacherous
tightrope between serving their country and serving their voters.
SCORE POINT: 5
ANNOTATIONS:
This paper clearly addresses the three elements of the rhetorical assignment, examining the issue of
political decision making in a democracy as it pertains to voter input and perceptions about politically
sensitive issues. The presentation is coherent, focused, well developed and unified thematically as the
writer presents specific examples to illustrate the complexity of the issue. The explanation and
commentary on the examples, especially the discussion of the prison/landfill dilemma in the next-tolast paragraph, engage the reader and provides ample evidence to support the writer's position.
There are weaknesses in the presentation of the paper, especially minor lapses in diction and
mechanics, but there is good syntactic variety and little repetition or redundancy. Sentences are well
formed and purposeful. Effective work choice and imagery are used (politicians not being "carbon
copies" of citizens' views, politicians keeping their footing on the treacherous tightrope"). Overall,
there is a strong command of language.
The first two paragraphs address one of the inherent problems in representative democracy: what
should politicians do when their opinions, conscience, and sense of what is awful happen to differ
from the views of the people who elect and reelect the politicians to promote their viewpoints? The
writer explains the elements of representative democracy in the first paragraph. In the second
paragraph, the writer illustrates the dilemma by offering an example: Nazi groups desiring to
demonstrate in a community where the vast majority of citizens oppose Nazi marches.
The writer admits, in the next paragraph, that the example is an extreme one. This declaration works
as a transitional device, allowing the writer to proceed to a more common and ambiguous example. By
noting that the construction of landfills is favored by voters but that they seldom want them in their
own communities, the writer explores the predicament facing elected offices. The writer says
politicians "must weigh the potential degrees of disfavor" and acknowledges that politicians may not
be able "to please all the voters all of the time." Thus, compromise is required, and the writer offers a
creative solution to the hypothetical situation" build a prison and "a new High School and Industrial
Park."

The strength of the paper is demonstrated by the complex level at which the issues are discussed. Ideas
are developed by comparing examples and reflecting on the situations and solutions presented. The
lapses in language control are minor, especially considering the time constraints of the test. The
writer's success in language control are minor, especially considering the time constrains of the test.
The writer's success in expressing ideas and exploring issues is apparent in the attention to an
execution of the rhetorical assignment.

Save

Copy

Cut

Paste