這篇論文主要在分析民主制度與專家意見，做為組織中權威之分配的基礎，能否 相互調和。如果以專家的意見為準，則專家們將主導一切，而非專家們只能遵循辦理；如果 採民主制度，則所有人皆有權利發揮其影響力，專家也不比非專家更具權威性。當然這二項 權威分配之基準均有其優點，但二者之間只能擇其一。如果必須做一個選擇，則以專家們意 見為準似乎較占優勢，因為研究上顯示民主並不是非常可行的；對決策範疇感興趣，有能力 幫助決策的制定，以及普遍被接受之產品品質的標準，為能否成功地促使員工們以民主方式 或非民主方式，參與決策的決定因素。基於此，吾人提出一種所謂組織民主之「自願者模式 」，涵蓋了專家群以理性方式從事組織中的決策。依此模式，民主制度占優勢，但決策參與 者體認到品質水準及團體生存的必需性，自願地接受專家的影響。一些例證顯示自願者模式 能被圓滿地遵行，且能調和民主制度與專家意見。

　　　　　The purpose of this article is to make an in-depth examination of the relationship between labor unions, especially the AFL-CIO, and the Democratic Party in the past one hundred years. Aside from the introduction (Section One), the main body is divided into three sections. Section Two is about the historical background of labor unions' engagement in political activities. It describes briefly, in chronological order, the six stages in the development of relationship between labor unions and the Democratic Party. Section Three analyzes how labor organizations, as special interest groups and pressure groups, use electioneering and lobbying to actually take part in political activities. It also tries to make a preliminary evaluation of their performances and assesses the causes of their successes and failures. Section Four discusses legal problems concerning labor unions' participation in political activities. It details numerous limitations imposed by federal election statutes on political contributions and expenditures by these organizations and the ensuing constitutional implications, especially the First Amendment issue of the protection of freedom of speech. It also examines whether labor unions can utilize the so-called union security clause, contained in the collective bargaining agreements, to use collected membership dues or agent's fees and engage in political activities which are opposed by their dissident members (or non members). Finally, this article concludes that due to various adverse elements, political influences of American labor unions have been declining considerably over the past twenty years. In order to safeguard their existing interests, they have not only to strengthen their cooperations with the Democratic Party, but also to rally the support of other special interest groups. Under such circumstances, their future participation in political activities will inevitably be much more aggressive and intensive, although they are currently almost totally on defense on all fronts.