G. William Domhoff's theory of American power concentration

¶ … Rules America?

G. William Domhoff's sociological analysis Who Rules America? argues that the reins of power within America are tightly controlled by the interests of corporations, the financial industry, and members of America's elite 'upper class.' While officially America is supposed to be a classless society, Domhoff argues that the nation is actually polarized in a classic 'haves' versus 'have-nots' conflict. The representatives of labor and other disenfranchised groups (such as women and ethnic and racial minorities) attempt to gain power by pressuring the political system to raise taxes on the wealthy and elite institutions and distribute benefits and opportunities more fairly throughout society. However, conservative and corporate interests (including so-called 'agri-business') attempt to retain their stronghold upon power through deregulation and limiting access to elected and unelected positions within government institutions.

Empirical evidence that Domhoff provides to support his general argument

Argument 1: Wealth distribution

1% of households (the upper class) own one-half of all stocks, financial securities, trust equities, two-thirds of existing business equity, and 36% of all real estate in America (Domhoff 66).

Argument 2: Stability of wealth

1.6% of Americans receive $100,000 or more in inheritance money. Passing on the benefits of being members of an elite from generation to generation is thus a critical part of American economic life. Another 1.1% of the population receives $50,000 to $100,000 in inheritance. Yet the vast majority of Americans, 91.9%, receive nothing (Domhoff 66). These statistics fly in the face of the notion that it is common to be a self-made person in America: most entrepreneurs have the benefit of at least some inherited wealth.

Argument 3: Dominance of elite institutions

1/3 of the individuals who oversee the largest corporate firms in America attended Yale, Harvard, or Princeton, and the rest attended other elite schools (Domhoff 64). Attending an elite institution gives an individual access to social networking opportunities as well as teaches him or her how to behave in elite society.

Argument 4: Concentration of corporate power

15-20% of all corporate directors sit on one or more corporate boards. This also illustrates how economic power held by only a small number of individuals in America: the idea that a small businessperson can 'make it big' is unlikely, given the concentration of corporate wealth and power in the nation (Domhoff 15).

Argument 5: The myth of immigration

While the common ideal of an immigrant may be someone who came over the Atlantic with 'nothing,' contrary to the stereotype, most immigrants came over with at least some inherited wealth (Domhoff 58).

President Obama, his cabinet and Supreme Court appointments (Sotomayor)

President Obama is an African-American who has faced prejudice and discrimination in his life. However, his father pursued PhD studies at Harvard and his mother was an academic. While not of a classically privileged background, Obama has had more advantages than the 'average' person, as well as possesses undergraduate and graduate degrees from two Ivy League institutions (Obama, Biography, 2010). Hillary Clinton, Obama's Secretary of State, is a graduate of Wellesley College, another elite institution, and Yale Law school. Obama's Secretary of Defense is a hold-over from George Bush's administration. Eric Holder, the Attorney General is a graduate of Columbia University undergraduate and law school. Rahm Emmanuel, the son of an Israeli immigrant, fits the elite 'profile' less well but was highly prominent in the Clinton Administration, thus reflecting a 'hold over' of power rather than a radical break with the previous Republican administration. Emmanuel also has an MA from Northwestern University. Obama senior advisor David Axelrod was a prominent member of the Chicago media and has a degree from the University of Chicago. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is a career civil servant. Geithner is also the former President of the Fed of New York State, where the financial industry of the nation is based (Pijanowski 2010).

While members of the current Democratic-lead cabinet may have more public policy and legal expertise than corporate experience, overall Domhoff's thesis seems to receive at least some support, given their biographies. Additionally, while recent Latina Supreme Court appointee Sonya Sotomayor might seem to be a deviation from an elitist trend because of her gender and ethnicity, she is a graduate of Princeton and Harvard. Supreme Court justices are disproportionately from Ivy League law institutions.

Healthcare reform

The fact that recent healthcare reform passed is less impressive when one considers that the U.S. is one of the few major industrialized countries that does not provide universal coverage for all of its citizens under the law.

Additional data or research studies that would be useful

Given that so much of Domhoff's argument is rooted in the argument that there is an unholy, close relationship between corporate America and politics, a breakdown of what specific corporations gave money to which politicians would be valuable. Additionally, an analysis of how many prominent leaders of the wealthiest corporate interests have genuinely been self-made people would be valuable, to see if they are as few in number as the author claims. Many entertainers (Oprah and Martha Stewart, for example) have poor or working-class backgrounds that seem to refute Domhoff's argument about how only members of the elite can succeed. An analysis of what industries from which the wealthiest derive their money, and the extent to which they had financial support in their first endeavors would give a more subtle picture of the degree to which having power and money generates more power and money for one's offspring.