American Government in Theoretical Discussions on Representation,

American Government In theoretical discussions on representation, frequently a distinction is made between two roles of a representative i.e. between a role of a delegate or a trustee. The first refers to the representative role primarily being to transfer the desires of the constituents into the decision-making system. The idea is to some extent instrumentalist in the sense that the representative is in the first place a mean for the represented and the better the representation reflects the variety of preferences among the constituents the better the representative quality.

Among the advantages with this conceptualisation is its invitation to continuous public participation. As the delegate holds the duty to vote for, and in other ways reflect the will of the constituents, this obligation is most likely to be best fulfilled when the constituency actively expresses its preferences. Actually in its extreme form, the representative in this conception is unable of acting in her representative role without being fed with articulated wishes from the constituents.

In theory this role-definition minimises the probability of a gap between the representatives and the represented, as well as it opens up for an extended representative process, not limited to formal procedures such as getting informed of campaign messages and casting votes at elections, but rather inviting the citizens to a continuous communication with their representatives. Obviously, though, this idea of a representative role is combined with rather serious problems. Firstly it raises the question about whom the representative should listen to.

Is the responsibility limited to those who voted for her or him, or are all those included that may be affected by decisions taken where the representative's executes power? Secondly this notion of representation tends to underestimate activity on own judgements by the representative such as initiatives to aggregate new combinations of opinions groups, and to initiate new issues on the political agenda, which is in many cases believed to be an important part of the representative role.

The other conception of the representative is that of a trustee acting on basis of own best judgements.(. Dennis F. Tompson (1987) Political Ethics and Public Office, Cambridge University Press: 99-102.) In this notion the constituents rely on the person they vote for and trust that the representative will act for their best as far as possible. Obvious consequences of this conceptualisation are among other things that the representative is given grater freedom to act and that the constituents are given less possibility to continuous communication with the representative.

An advantage may seem to be that the role of the represented can be focused more transparently, as the representative cannot blame action or inaction on the constituency but must take the responsibility oneself. The trustee theory (presented by Pitkin as "independence" theory) suggests that the role of a representative is to act in the interest of his or her constituents (Rosenthal, 1998, p. 9). This theory presents a solution to the problem of uninformed constituents that do not have the necessary knowledge on issues to take an educated position on issues.

The representative is "entrusted" with the position to make decisions that will benefit the district he or she represents. This position also allows for the representative to take into consideration.