I received the following email:
I am working on a paper for a political course which I must discuss “a what if” Pennsylvania transformed into a state of rationality. Everything is the same except that all the citizens, all the candidates for state office, all the state legislators, and all the lobbyists in the state behave rationally in a economic sense. Of these groups, which one is most likely to be the most politically powerful.
I am not sure how to exactly get started and thought I would see if you might have any suggestions or thoughts on the subject.
Sounds like a good assignment to me. I only teach statistics and methods courses, so I never think about this sort of interesting political-science homework problem.
I can't see that it would make any difference to the current distribution of power.
I don't know how I'd compare the amount of political power wielded by these different kinds of groups. I'd want to think of something related to power that I could measure, and look across states.
Also, "rational" can mean many different things. Does it encompass the way people discount the future? Does it encompass our preferences over preferences?
I'd prefer a narrower question.
They could all be rational now, but differ in information, preferences, and values.
As a resident of PA, I'd encourage this young scholar to read this carefully…
I second C Zorn. Second important caveat: what defines a rational person's goals? As Political Psychologist, this exercise strikes me as completely absurd.
Thank you to all who commented on this question.. I will take your comments under advisement.