The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Yes, the growing number of interest groups support US Senator Byrd’s conclusion.
There is too much money involved in interest groups, and an increasing number of these groups have been appearing in the United States political scene. Senator Byrd was worried about this increased number and lack of control over these groups. Let's have in mind that these interest groups hire lobbyists to negotiate with legislators and offer support. But the US Congressmen had to be aware that it is the citizens that voted for them and put them in Congress as their representatives. So they serve the people, not the particular agendas of interest groups.
Article iv states that the federal government guarantees each state a REPUBLICAN form of government <span>and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the </span>Legislature<span>, or of the Executive (when the </span>Legislature<span> cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.</span>
In my opinion, yes, there are still groups who are disenfranchised and not considered as an equal source of power in our democracy. An example of these people is those in the lower class of the society. In today's setting, only the 'representatives' have power and those whom they represent do not. <span />
He's Russian and a former Soviet statesman
He drafted soldiers and raised taxes making himself less popular, underestimated the power of nationalism, and lost most of his army in Russia.
