Chapter 7 Interest Groups

SIGs and Democracy• Line of communication• Increases public awareness and action• Great source of research and information• Public watch dog• Access to government officials• Reinforces pluralistic aspect of

democracy.• “Melting pot” contribution

– Heterogeneity of political culture

7-1Percentage of Americans Belonging to Various Groups

SIGs and Parties

• SIGs– Influence– Specialists– Centralized– Tightly Organized

• Political Parties– Populate government– Control policy– Generalists– Decentralized

Organized membership and pursuit of policy goals because of shared interests.

Why Organize?

• Increase the chance that their views will be heard and they will be able to influence who is in office and policy decisions.

• Interest groups enhance political participation.

• Policy versus personnel influence.• Primary tactics: education, mobilization,

lobbying, and monitoring government actions.

Organizational Components

• Leadership— Most groups are dominated by a strong

leadership.• Money• Agency staff to carry out tasks• Passive members• Accordingly, groups are considered

oligarchic rather than democratic.

Why Join?• Informational benefits - data sharing and

training• Material benefits - monetary (pay and perks)• Solidary benefits - social, network connections• Purposive benefits - non materialistic but issue

specific• Ideological - supporting liberal or

conservative agendas

The Free Rider

• Group benefits may be available to the public (a collective benefit).

• No reason to join the group if you are already receiving benefits

• Creates a “free rider” problem

The Characteristics of Members

• Higher incomes• Higher levels of education• Work in management or professional

positions.• Group membership has a very

pronounced upper-class bias.

7-4Decline in Union Membership, 1948 to Present

Strategies: How to Shape Policy

• Lobbying• Electoral Politics• Going Public• Grassroots Mobilization• Litigation

Lobbying• Lobbying is a strategy by which organized

interest groups seek to influence the passage of legislation by exerting pressure on members of the legislature.

• Full time career• Washington, D.C. - epicenter• Revolving door between lobbyists and

government• Money and bad press for “gifts”

Lobbying

• Personal contacts• Research and specialized information• Congressional testimony• Legal assistance - write legislative

proposals• Follow up on execution

Using Electoral Politics versus Direct Lobbying

• Many groups engage in electoral politics to ensure the election of politicians sympathetic to the groups interests.— Campaign contributions through political

action committees— Campaign activism

• “Issue advocacy” media uses to change public opinion and influence elections.

Political Action Committees PACs

• PACs - interest groups work in the electoral arena.

• Watergate Scandal 1972• PACs regulated by the Federal Election

Commission.• Contributions are limited to $5,000 per

election.• Attempts to reform have failed

– Opposed by business and labor– Importance of soft money.

• DNC and foreign contributions for influence.

PAC Campaign Activism• Other than fund raising.• Can be temporary.• Republican efforts to increase voter turnout

very successful in 1994.– NRA– Christian coalition

• Not much support continued into 1996 for Bob Dole.

• Labor groups increasing efforts in support of Democrats.

Gaining Access• Groups must maintain access to the decision making

process through relationships with Congress and agencies.

— Iron triangle (Interest groups, legislature, executive agencies) fairly permanent

— Issue network (Add consultants, officials, activists, academics) usually temporary

— Corridoring (Gaining influence within an executive agency)

— Capture (Control of an agency)

Defense Oriented Iron Triangle

Going Public – Indirect Lobbying• Going public is a strategy that attempts to

mobilize the public to support the groups objective.

— Institutional advertising ( Creating a positive group image)

— Social movements (Boycotts, demonstrations, marches)

— Grassroots mobilization (Encouraging members to contact legislators)

Using the Courts• Groups sometimes turn to litigation when they lack

access or when they are dissatisfied with governmental decisions.

• They finance individual litigation, provide attorneys, or file amicus curiae briefs in support of a particular position.

• Most expensive tactic.• Used as a last resort at times to slow down policy

process.

Types of SIGs• Economic

– Business (IBM, Farm Bureau Federation)– Labor (AFL-CIO, Teamsters)– Professional (ABA, AMA)– Trade (Industry specific - oil, telecomm, railroads)

• Social (NOW, NAACP, AIM, MALDEF)• Religious (Christian Coalition, Catholic

Conference, Jewish Defense League)• Ideological (People for the American Way,

Heritage Foundation)• Public Interest (ACLU, Sierra Club, Common

Cause)• Single Issue (National Abortion Rights

Campaign)• Seniors (Gray Panthers, AARP)

AARP• Originally single issue group with selective

benefits• 33 million members• $500 million income each year• More circulation of magazine than Time,

Newsweek, and US News & World Report combined

• Extremely powerful grassroots capabilities

Regulatory Efforts• Federal Lobbying Act of 1946

– Only applies to Congress– Registration and employer identification– Only applies to those declaring their principal

purpose is to try to directly influence legislation– No agency to oversee

• Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974– Watergate scandal– limited campaign contributions– dramatic increase in PACs (100 - 4500)

Putting it in Perspective• Positives

– Fits nicely into pluralistic model– Overlapping concerns results in cross-cutting

cleavage – not creating major polarization• Negatives

– Not all represented– Unequal influences– Interest Group Elitism– Government gridlock

Groups and Interests: The Dilemma

• Attempts to limit - First Amendment freedom of speech and right to petition the government.

• Groups provide access to public officials.• Business groups are most powerful• Balance is inconsistent with democratic ideals.• Groups have more impact than voters.• Regulating groups limits freedom.• Not really regulating groups limits equality.