Do Now: GRAB TODAY’S AGENDA (6:5).. Interest Groups Defining Interest Groups The Rise of Interest Groups Types Resources Goals and Strategies.

Do Now:GRAB TODAY’S AGENDA (6:5).

Interest Groups

Defining Interest Groups

The Rise of Interest Groups

Types

Resources

Goals and Strategies

Defining Interest GroupsFactions James Madison declared a faction to be “a number of citizens… who

are united by… some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to… the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.” (Federalist No.10)

Madison’s “factions” could be referring to political parties and/or interest groups. In some democracies not the United States, political parties are interest groups. However, that is not the case. The difference between the two in the U.S. is that interest groups try to influence government rather than striving to hold power in government.

An interest group is any group that, on the basis of one or more shared attitudes, makes certain claims upon other groups in the society. They are organizations separate from government thought often in close partnership with government, which attempt to influence public policy.

Defining Interest GroupsPurpose One way people can have their voice heard is to find others

with the same concern because a group of voices is louder than a single voice.

They work to persuade policy makers like senators and congressmen to support government actions that help their members and oppose actions that hurt them.

They also work to influence public opinion by educating the general public about their point of view. In this way, interest groups advocate, or promote, the needs and wants of the group.

The Rise of Interest GroupsMadisonian Assumptions James Madison and many in the founding generation assumed that

human nature was self-interested and that people who share interest would join together to protect and enhance them.

In Federalist No.10, Madison wrote that “the causes of faction are sewn in the nature of man,” leading inevitably to a multiplicity of interests.

He argued that “ a landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interest grow up of necessity in civilized nations and divide themselves into different classes actuated by different sentiments and views.”

The Rise of Interest GroupsMadisonian Assumptions (continued) Because factions or interests could not be eradicated, they

needed to be accommodated and controlled. Fortunately, Madison thought, there were two lines of

defense against an undue influence of factional interests on the new nation:The size of the new nationThe primitive means of communication then available

would make it hard for people who shared an interest to identify each other and coordinate their activities.

The Rise of Interest GroupsMadisonian Assumptions (continued) Madison thought that the interests that did form would be so numerous

that no one of them or combination of them would be powerful enough to dominate the national government.

Madison also thought that the structure of the new government, with its separation of powers, checks and balances, and bicameral legislature, would make it difficult for interests to control the whole policymaking process.

Hence, Madison concluded that with factions held at bay by the size of the country and the complex structure of the national government, government officials would debate, bargain, and compromise with each other in a search for the common good.

The Rise of Interest GroupsNational Groups Emerge In the decades before and after the Civil War, the telegraph and

railroad created a national market for goods and services. After the war, the pace of industrialization and urbanization in the

northern economy quickened. Businesses that had been local became regional conglomerates, and some became national trusts or monopolies.

These powerful new business interests bought or at least rented compliant state legislatures to assure friendly treatment and to control the appointments of U.S. Senators. The business-friendly Senate of the late 19th century was known as the “Millionaires’ Club.”

The Rise of Interest GroupsModern Group System

The modern group system was formed in two key phases – the Progressive and New Deal eras of the early 20th century and the Great Society years of the 1960s and early 1970s.

By the end of the Progressive Era, mass circulation newspapers, magazines, radio, and telephones were in place.

By the end of the Great Society, television was a dominant force, and computers, fax machines, and satellites were looming on the technological horizon.

In addition to technological developments, the increasing size and scope of government contributed to expansion of the interest group system. Not only did the number of business groups increase as government expanded its regulatory reach, but a thick network of public interest groups grew up to press their views as government expanded into civil rights, welfare, health care, education, parks and recreation, and agriculture.

The Rise of Interest GroupsModern Group System (continued) So dense is the modern group system that nine out of ten

Americans belong to at least one voluntary association or membership group like a professional association, a church, a social club, or a civil rights organization. The average American adult belongs to four groups.

Moreover, the interest group system extends beyond membership groups to include a diverse array of individual corporations, state and local governments, universities, think tanks, and most other institutions of the private sector.

TypesPublic Interest

Focuses on topics that affect the general public like education, the environment, and politics.

Ex. The Network for Public Education, Sierra Club, or Americans for Tax Reform.

Economic Interest

Promotes the economic interests of their members in business, labor, and trade organizations.

Ex. Associated Builders and Contractors, American Postal Workers Union, or USA Engage.

Professional Groups

Advocates for people in a particular profession, such as doctors, lawyers, and teachers.

Ex. American Medical Association, American Bar Association, National Education Association

Ideological Groups

Promotes policies based on a set of core political or religious beliefs.

Ex. Americans for Prosperity or Jewish Defense League

Single-Issue Groups

Focuses on one narrow topic, such as immigration or drunk driving.

Ex. Americans for Immigration Control or Drug Policy Alliance Network

ResourcesSize of Membership

Large groups such as the 41 million member AARP or the 10 million member AFL-CIO demand attention simply because of their size.

Ultimately, however, both unity and coverage must accompany size if it is to have its full effect.

American unions provide good examples of how the influence that might flow from size can be compromised by a lack of unity within a group and a lack of coverage. If the membership of a group is divided over policy or over candidates in an election, that group will carry less weight than it otherwise might.

Coverage is just as important as cohesion. Although more than 80% of Scandinavian workers belong to labor unions, only about 12% of American workers do. It should not be surprising then that Scandinavian unions carry more weight with their governments than American unions do with theirs.

Unions are not alone. The ABA claims fewer than half of lawyers and the AMA claims only about one-quarter of doctors as members. Public interest and consumer groups include only tiny fractions of potential members if one assumes that all citizens or all consumers are potential members.

ResourcesIntensity of Membership Large majorities of Americans favor some form of gun control and

some access to abortion services. However, well-organized and intensely interested minorities can often overcome unorganized majorities.

The NRA strongly opposes most limitations on the rights of gun owners.

Similarly, much of the Rights to Life movement favors outright prohibitions of abortion services.

Both groups are sufficiently well organized, funded, and motivated that their influence over governmental decision making in areas of interest to their members far outweigh their numbers.

ResourcesFinancial Resources of Members

Money, like numbers and intensity, is critical to interest group success.

Scholars point out that “quality leadership, access to political decision makers, a favorable public image, and a hardworking and knowledgeable staff are just some of the resources that can be purchased with the careful expenditure of adequate amounts of money.”

Money helps groups both organize internally and exercise influence externally.

Business, interest groups, and labor unions spend $210 million a month on lobbying the federal government. The Open Secrets website tracks lobbying in great detail. In 2009, interest groups spent a record $2.5 billion on lobbying.

Three business sectors, pharmaceuticals and health products ($396 million), finance, insurance, and real estate ($334 million), and energy and natural resources ($301 million) led the pack.

Goals and StrategiesThe Role of Lobbyists

An inside strategy often depends heavily on professional lobbyists.

Lobbyists attempt to influence government decision making in ways that benefit or at least avoid harm to those they represent.

Traditionally, the chief instrument of influence for most lobbyists is information that is useful to policymakers in deciding how to proceed on the issues before them. Lobbyists provide information that supports their positions and withhold or suppress information that seems to argue against their positions.

Decision makers such as members of Congress must hope that the contest for influence between and among lobbyists will produce enough diverse information to present a reasonably full and accurate picture.

Lobbyists have more than information at their disposal and some have a great deal more. “Super-lobbyist” Jack Abramoff gave $1.4 million to 300 law-makers between 1999 and 2005.

Goals and StrategiesInside Lobbying The goal of an inside strategy is to convince the elected and appointed

officials, usually by means of close and quiet consultation, to develop or modify a policy or to take some action in the interpretation or implementation of a policy that would serve the interests of a group and its members.

Since most of the Congress’ work is done in committee, lobbyists focus there as well. Committees debate pending legislation, adding, modifying, or dropping provisions as they go and along and work hard to have a role in this process. Lobbyists also attend and may testify or present evidence at administrative hearings where laws or regulations affecting their clients may be under discussion and review. Lobbyists need to know what is happening in relation to their clients’ concerns at all times and affect the process where they can.

Goals and StrategiesOutside Lobbying

An outside strategy may involve media advertising designed to educate the public, or letter-writing, phone, and fax campaigns by interest group members and others designed to impress public officials with the breadth and depth of concern in the public over a particular issue.

For example, in 1993 lobbyists for the Health Insurance Association of Americas and the National Federation of Independent Business hired top political operatives to mount a grassroots campaign against the Clinton health care reform program. In a $15 million advertising blitz, these interests took their anti-reform message directly to the American people. The now famous “Harry and Louise” ads generated over 450,000 phone calls, letters, and visits to members of Congress – that is almost 1,000 contacts per member – by persons concerned about the Clinton health care reform plan. The health care program was never even brought to a vote in Congress.

Goals and StrategiesLitigation

Interest groups that fail to influence public officials directly or indirectly by influencing public opinion may turn to the courts.

Litigation which is another name for bringing a case in court, is time-consuming and expensive. Few interest groups have experienced litigators on staff, though some, like the Chamber of Commerce, NAACP, and the Sierra Club, certainly do.

Others must either hire a public affairs law firm or join a coalition of like-minded groups that includes such a firm.

Litigation is rarely a first move. Usually it comes after a failed inside strategy and, perhaps, after or in place of an equally expensive and unlikely outside strategy.

The purpose of most interest group litigation is to demand a beneficial policy change or forestall an adverse change.

Famously, from the 1930s through the 1960s, the NAACP, unable to move the political branches of the government toward equal rights, initiated a series of court cases that eventually brought down segregation and other forms of overt discrimination.

Conclusion Interest groups emerged as a way for the

government to hear the voice of the people, divided into specific interests.

The success of an interest group is dependent on how much access they have to particular resources.

Interest groups use lobbyists to push their cause.