How do Individuals and Groups of People Influence the Political Process?

I would have and have said that individuals and groups of people have a great deal of influence in the political process.  After reading chapter 5, "Political Participation: Parties, Elections, and Movements", in the book, The Politics of Power, the authors write about how the Parties came about and how the elections work.  Also, they write about the amount of money that goes into the elections and how really, it is the people who contribute money to campaigns and candidates that really have the say.  The authors write, "[C]andidates are more responsive to wealthy donors and current voters than they are to non-voters.  They receive a better return on their scarce resources by investing in voters who tend to have strong partisan feelings and are likely to vote than those who are not.  I do understand why this would happen.  It would be a "waste" of "their" time to spend time and focus on low income and non voters. They do not have anything to contribute, as far as the politicians are concerned.  So unfortunate that, that is the way the world works.  I think that it is also interesting and sad that greed can get you so much in America.
After reading this chapter it was clear that we have a say if we have money and can buy our way in. 

In What Ways Does Public Opinion Influence the Formation of a Democratic Society?

I believe that public opinion influences the formation of a democratic society almost completely.  We vote, we can talk to our state representatives if we do not agree with what they are doing, have protests, strikes, all kinds of things to influence what the government is doing.  It takes the people to make the democratic society and the book, The Politics of Power by authors, Katznelson, Kesselman, and Draper express that in chapter 4 of their book.  In this chapter they discuss the many ways that the public influences the formation of a democratic society. When speaking about polls, the authors state, "[A] great deal of evidence shows that the views Americans hold about particular sets of issues come in coherent bundles.  Issues about which individuals have preferences-taxes, social welfare, fiscal policy, and the environment-tend to line up together as choices about weather the federal government should do more, or less"(Katzneslon, Kesselman, Draper, 81).  They talk about the polls that are done and how most Americans make informed choices, about how race and religion play a factor, about capitalism, and about the differing views of liberals and conservatives.  When the authors write about the differing vies of liberals and conservatives, they write, "Americans may know a little or a lot about any particular area, but they tend to have clear and coherent thoughts about the scope of what the national government should be doing.  This, of course, is the question that most divides Republicans and conservatives, who tend to favor less activity, from Democrats and liberals, who tend to favor more...When asked directly to choose ideological labels or the general question of whether government should do more of less, more Americans describe themselves as conservatives than as liberals, and a majority consistently say that government is too large, too intrusive, or spends too much.  Yet when Americans are asked specific questions about spending to achieve particular policy goals-environmental beauty, better nutrition for poor children, improved schooling, and the like-some six out of then consistently favor liberal positions"(Katzneslon, Kesselman, Draper, 81-82).   We are a county that is divided on beliefs, but at the end of the day we are all Americans and want our democracy to work.  We just need to stay informed and continue to speak our minds about the issues that are important to us and make sure we stay true to ourselves.  Throughout reading the chapter in the book and pondering on my own thoughts, it has been made clear to me that public opinion is very influential. 

How do government and the private sector intersect? How should they?

Wow, what a question!  First, what is the private sector?  According to businessdictionary.com, the private sector is defined as, "Part of national economy made up of, and resources owned by, private enterprises. It includes the personal sector (households) and corporate sector (firms), and is responsible for allocating most of the resources within an economy"(businessdictionary.com, 2011).  Based on this definition, I would say that they are very intersected.  The economy generally is self maintaining as a whole, but since we have had the sock market dive, the government has become very hands on when it comes to the economy.  In the book, The Politics of Power, the authors wrote a chapter entitled, "The American State and Corporate Capitalism, in this chapter they write, "Capitalism is often described as a system in which production for private profits is organized and coordinated through markets that are free of political direction.  But the free market has always been a fiction.  Markets cannot exist without a government to maintain order, enforce contracts, create currency, and provide a host of other public goods.  Markets require a protective, facilitating political order in order to function"(Katznelson, Kesselman, Draper, 51).  I think that this quote clearly explains that the private sector and government have and are still very intersected.  The two almost go hand in hand it seems.  It seems that the government really became intersected after the Great Depression and the New Deal with President Roosevelt.   In the book that was mentioned above, the authors write, "FDR was not hostile to capitalism but believed that greater management by the federal government was required to save it"(Katznelson, Kesselman, Draper, 59).  He became more hands on with the economy.  After the Depression, the American economy adopted Keynesianism.  The book states that, "For the next four decades, from the 1930's to the 1970's, both Democratic and Republican administrations followed Keynesian prescriptions of economic management"(Katznelson, Kesselman, Draper, 61).  The U.S. continues to use this principal still today, just more "conservative form". 
I think that the government should be intersected with the private sector to some extent.  I do not feel that government officials should have their hand in every cookie jar so to speak, but some government intersection is appropriate.  I do not believe we should have bailed out the corporations and banks that we did to the degree that we did and that if the government continues to do so and continues to be so hands on and overspending, we as Americans and the generations to come are in big trouble.  Even as the book, mentioned above, states in the "Conclusion" portion of the chapter, "...economic inequalities and difficulties created by the model of extreme market capitalism are generating heavy costs for current and future generations of Americans",( Katznelson,Kesselman, Draper, 61). 

The role that power plays in government, the ecnomy and politics...

If you look the word power up in dictionary, you will find 16 different definitions.  The 5th and 6th definitions, define power as, "A person, group, or nation having great influence or control over others and
[t]he might of a nation, political organization or similar group"(The American Heritage College dictionary, 1072).  Power in my opinion is what most people seek, weather it be in their daily life or in the working world.  The problem with power though is it can lead to greed and treating other very unfairly!  In the book, The Politics of Power, the authors tell a story on page 32 about corporate capitalism that you would hope to be false and the sad reality is, the story is all facts.  A little of what they say is as follows, "Suppose it was learned that a small group had gained control over vast concentrations of economic resources and political power in the United States.  Imagine that in a country with a population of 270 million people, several thousand Americans-unrepresentative, not democratically chosen, not even known to most people-controlled key aspects of American economic life.  This small group determined what the level of investment would be, where investment would occur, what would be produced, and how production would be organized." The authors go on to state, "[T]hey based their decisions not on what the country needed but on what would be most profitable for them.  This small group used its vast wealth to buy private islands in the Caribbean,drive luxury cars, and live in stately homes in various cities and fashionable vacation spots.  At the same time, tens of millions of other Americans could not afford to obtain medical care, pay the rent, care for their kids, or put food on the table (Katznelson, Kesselman, Draper, 32).  This is not right and it is true!!!  Now I am not in favor of a socialist government, however there is something wrong with this picture!  Power comes into play in ever aspect of the world today. 
Power plays such a huge role in the government, the economy and politics today.  I was shocked to read how much power does actually play a role.  It seems that power is almost like a disease that has infected all three.  I am most shocked about how much power plays in our economy.  Again in the book, The Power of Politics, the authors write that, "The total corporate revenues of this group [Fortune 500] of giant corporations were $6.3 trillion in 1999, accounting for over half the gross domestic product (GDP) of the entire American economy and employing about one-seventh of the American workforce" (Katznelson, Kesselman, Draper, 33).  The corporations make or break our economy.  We have so much invested in them and don't have much of a say as to how they manage and run their businesses.  In the book the authors say that most of these companies have stocks, most of the CEO and executives own stock, so they are shareholders of the company and the boards are run by the shareholders, so basically the company insiders run the company and have the say so, there are not really any outsiders who have the authority to make any decisions.  We as Americans are left to see what this small group decides to do with their companies and reap what they sow,so to speak. Something that I thought was interesting in the book was on page 37 when the authors are writing about corporate executives, they write, "Many corporate executives come from upper-class families, attend the most selective colleges, are graduates of either business or law school or both, and are generally white and male, although there has been a small increase in minority members and women within the top ranks of the business elite"(Katznelson, Kesselman, Draper).  In my opinion the bottom line is, if you have a lot of money and a good name, you have power.  You have the power to give money to politicians that can get you more power, the politicians are apart of the government and in turn you fund the government and get that power.  It seems like it is a vicious cycle.  It starts with the corporate executives though.  The Fortune 500 runs the American economy, politics and in turn government in my opinion.