romise, we could not have benefited from the positive effects of had it not been possible to compromise with others. Compromise does have it’s pitfalls, and it is restrained for two basic reasons. First, the indecisiveness of each voter’s vote in democratic elections causes voters to vote too ideologically, and voters reward politicians for supporting policies consistent with ideological beliefs, whether or not such policies pass any reasonable cost-benefit tests (Sinclair 1996). Fear of punishment from voters keeps politicians from compromising as openly and fully as they otherwise would. Second, political decision making is too sensitive to special interest groups, and too insensitive to unorganized groups. That is not everyone who is being affected by policy decisions is having a say in what is being considered. Thus, although compromise does weigh in heavily in support of the processes of a democratic society, it is not without fault, and does neglect a large part of the public’s interests by not allowing them the representation they deserve to have a voice about all policy making which goes on behind closed doors, and away from public view. However, compromise should be more open and accepted by the public, criticized and debated upon, in order for our society to be considered a true democracy. ...
