GOVT 2305 Interests Groups. In this section one of the driving forces of politics. Interest Groups.

GOVT 2305

Interests Groups

In this section one of the driving forces of politics.

Interest Groups

What is an Interest Group?

“any association of individuals or organizations, usually formally

organized, that, on the basis of one or more shared concerns, attempts

to influence public policy in its favor.” - Britannica

They are similar to political parties since they attempt to influence

what governing institutions do, but while parties compete in elections,

interests groups do not.

They tend to focus very narrowly on a specific issue, or on the needs

of a specific group.

Environmental groups, for example, focus on the

environment.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce focuses on the need of American

businesses.

They do so by working with members of the different branches

to pursue their aims.

The relationships they establish with people are often based on electoral support. Interest groups get heavily

involved in funding the campaigns in order to make these connections.

There are various ways this can be done. A common way is for these

groups to form political action committees (PACs). Recent changes in electoral laws

have allowed for the development of Super PACs.

Contributions to political campaigns may not guarantee a seat at the table, but it helps. An interest group may threaten to fund an opponents otherwise.

These are the relationships they attempt to develop.

The Legislature

Interest groups try to gain influence with the

standing committees that have jurisdiction over the legislation of

interest to the. Example: The energy sector is interested in having close connections with

members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee

.

Donations to leaders of the House and Senate can help expedite

legislation being heard on the floor of either chamber.

The Executive

Donations to presidential candidates can influence who gets appointed to head executive agencies. The ideal

situation for interest groups is for their members to be appointed to these

agencies. This allows then to regulate themselves.

This is called agency capture, or regulatory capture.

In addition, interest groups try to develop relationships with lower

level people in the executive branch in order to influence the

rulemaking process. These are the agencies create in order to clarify how laws are to be implemented.

The Judiciary

Support for candidates for the presidency and the Senate can allow interest groups influence over who is appointed to the

federal courts and the Supreme Court. Some current members of

the Supreme Court have worked as legal counsel for different interests groups prior to being on the court.

Interest groups can also get involved in Supreme Court cases

by initiating test cases designed to take constitutional challenges to

the court, and by submitting amicus briefs to the court that

present the court with arguments regarding cases they are about to

consider.

Here’s a diagram that attempts to lay out how interest groups

influence government officials.

Notice that the diagram makes repeated mentions of lobbying.

We will discuss lobbying and influence seeking later in this class, but a lobbyist is a person

skilled in getting the attention of members of the proper governmental branch or agency and persuading them to make decisions on behalf of

their client – usually the interest group.

Their major skill is knowing which door to knock on, how to get it

opened, and how to get invited in with to talk with an influential

person like the head of an executive agency and a legislator.

That skill can be worth a lot of money.

People who have experience working in any of the branches

make ideal employees for interest groups and lobbying firms.

The best employees are ex-office holders, especially people who

were once members of Congress.

Others include:

Ex staffers in congressional offices and congressional committees.

Ex employees in executive agencies

Ex clerks of members of the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court.

People who work in these positions gain experience in how

these institutional work and connections with people within

them.

They know how the governing process actually works and can be

valuable to interest groups.

Their experience can lead be lucrative to interest groups

interested in promoting legislation and rules that affect them.

They tend to be worth the money.

Powerful interest groups can help develop networks that establish

relationships with legislative, executive and judicial officials in

order to tighten control over policies that benefit them.

Critics argue that a revolving door exists between people that work in

governmental agencies, congressional offices, and interest

groups.

These are the people that may really run things.

Popular names for these arrangements:

Iron TrianglesIssue Networks

Sub Governments

The most common arrangement is called an iron triangle.

Members include:

Interest GroupsLegislative CommitteesBureaucratic Officials

Perhaps government can be best thought of as hundreds of small

sub-governments that have developed around each of the policies established over time.

If the interest group is strong enough to influence elections to congress and the appointment of

executive officials, they can effectively regulate themselves

Question: Is this corruption?

But this is not popular.

It leads to the impression that interest groups serve special interests whose benefits are

antithetical to those of the general public. They do not promote the

general welfare.

James Madison would agree.

But we are all special interests if you think about it.

Other terms are also used to describe these groups:

Pressure GroupsSpecial Interest Groups

Advocacy Groups

Examples of Interest Groups

National Groups

The AFL- CIOThe National Rifle Association

The American Civil Liberties UnionThe Family Research Council

If there’s an interest, there’s likely a group to represent it.

This does not mean that that interest will be effectively

represented however. Not all interest groups are equally

powerful.

Today’s interest groups are similar to what James Madison called a “faction.” We discussed these

when we discussed Federalist #10.

Madison gave them a definition:

“By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole,

who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of

other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the

community.”

This could easily define interest groups.

Madison argued that factions develop naturally in free, civilized societies, and they tend to develop around whatever interests exist in society. Contemporary political scientists call these pocketbook

issues because they are material concerns that hit people in the pocketbook.

“A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a

mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser

interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views.”

People will pursue policies that benefit themselves. And since a democracy is driven by the majority, the laws that

will be passed will be those that benefit whichever group has a

majority in the legislature.

Policies will not necessarily benefit the common good or protect the interests

of the minority.

Madison was concerned that a democratic system allows a majority faction to become

tyrannical since it can control governmental institutions.

Tyranny of the Majority

A minority faction cannot.

He suggested that a great variety of interests should be allowed to compete in the legislature in order to break apart permanent majorities.

He predicted that the large republic which would be established under the Constitution

would guarantee that a large number if issues would not only emerge, but would lead to the development of a large number of factions.

Madison argued that a diverse nation would develop a sufficient

variety of interests that would split majorities into minorities.

It would produce lots of interest groups, and these would break

apart the majority factions.

This is an important point because it reminds us that there is nothing new with the concept of a special

interest.

Furthermore, the constitutional system assumes they will exist and

is designed to encompass and compensate for them.

Madison’s prediction, after all, came true. There are thousands of interest groups around the nation.

But this can create a problem.

Madison warned that minority groups have a negative side:

“[They] may clog the administration, it may convulse the

society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence

under the forms of the Constitution.”

A minority can make administration difficult. It can lead

to gridlock.

The author Jonathan Rauch coined the term demoslerosis to refer to

this problem. What is it?

Demoslerosis: The progressive loss of government’s ability to adapt due to interest group pressure.

Interest groups have a tendency to pursue their interests through governing

institutions, and once they are attained, fight to retain those interests. This can

make it difficult for government to innovate and change when necessary.

The political scientist Mancur Olson went further and argued that the rise of special interest

groups can lead to the decline of a nation.

It makes dynamic change less likely to occur.

A common complaint heard about interest groups is that they resist

any innovations that might compromise or undermine their

interests.

This can be problematic for the common good – Madison

understood this.

Example: Do oil companies really want renewable energy to

compete with them?

Do they do what they can to minimize federal support for companies that research and provide alternative energy?

This makes adaptation difficult. Bad policies can sometimes not be

changed because of the political strength of the groups that are

benefitting from them.

Current examples:

SubsidiesPublic Employment

How do interest groups form?

Are all interests in society able to represent themselves well?

Madison’s Mistake

Implying that the existence of an interests in society leads to the

development of a group to represent those interests.

Groups needs catalysts in order to form.

In Federalists #10, Madison seemed to suggest that any

interest that existed would result in the creation of a group that would fight for that interest.

But not all interests are able to do so.

Think about it, which is more powerful, interests groups that

represent the wealthy or the poor?

Interests in society are only effectively represented if there is an organized group that does so.

But what would convince someone to organize such a group? What

incentive exist for someone to do so? What benefits accrue to

people who do so?

This has been a subject of study for political scientists.

In The Logic of Collective Action, Mancur Olson argued that large

groups have disincentives to form because there will be a tendency

for some to free ride.

Modern understandings of interest groups hold that organized groups only form and remain powerful if a

mobilizing force works to form a group and that there is a material interest that convinces people to

join and work for the group’s goals.

Problem: Not all interests are easily converted into groups.

Not every group can easily overcome the free rider problem.

Here’s the basic question presented buy the Free Rider

Problem:

Why work for collectively for a groups’ goals if you will benefit from it even if you don’t do any work? If the benefit

can’t be separated between those who contribute and those who do not.

If you’ve ever tried to organize a group of people you know this.

There is little need to join a group, if you will benefit from the group’s

efforts even if you do not contribute. But if everyone thinks this way, the group will not form,

and its objectives will not be reached.

For a more thorough definitions of the Free Rider Problem: Stanford

In order for a group to be formed, there has to be a driving force

making it happen.

A political entrepreneur has to develop incentives for people to

join the group. They have to convince members to avoid the

temptation to free rider.

Political Entrepreneur

Notable Policy Entrepreneurs:

Richard Mellon ScaifeJames Leininger

This person has to figure out how best to overcome the free rider

problem that prevents individuals that have a common interest from working together to achieve that

interest.

Olson pointed out that these individuals provide selective benefits to individuals

that they would not be able to get if they were not members of the group and did

not participate to further the group’s objectives.

A selective benefit is a reward or punishment that fosters cooperation among a group of people who might

otherwise free ride.

There are four basic types of Selective Incentives

MaterialPurposiveSolidary

Informational

Material

Members are encouraged to join because they will receive material

benefits if they do so. Jobs or business opportunities for

example.

Purposive

Joining the group helps one advance a grand “purpose” such as cleaner air, greater public morality, or some other intangible reward.

Solidary

Joining the group puts one in touch with other, similarly minded

people. Social options increse

Informational

The group makes its members privy to information they cannot

get elsewhere.

An interesting read:Salvation as a Selective Benefit

The strongest groups are those that can provide tangible material

benefits to their members.

This explains why business interest often win out over public interests.

Interest group politics benefits the interest that can be most easily

organized.

Current example: the old are more easily organized than the young.

Here’s a list of the top 25 interest groups from 2001. Note that the

bulk are business and professional organizations. A couple of labor unions are there as well. All are able to offer tangible benefits to

their members that they would not otherwise receive if they were not

members of the group.

1.  National Rifle Association2.  American Association of Retired People (AARP)3.  National Federation of Independent Business4.  American Israel Foreign Affairs Committee 5.  Association of Trial Lawyers of America

6.  AFL-CIO7.  Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America

8.  National Beer Wholesalers of America9.  National Association of Realtors

10.  National Association of Manufacturers11.  National Association of Homebuilders of the United States

12.  American Medical Association13.  American Hospital Association

14.  National Education Association of the United States15.  American Farm Bureau Federation

16. Motion Picture Association of America17.  National Association of Broadcasters18.  National Right to Life Committee

19.  Health Insurance Association of America20.  National Restaurant Association21.  National Governors' Association

22.  Recording Industry Association of America23.  American Bankers Association

24.  Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America25.  International Brotherhood of Teamsters

Very few of these groups promote the public interest.

Other interests – including environmentalism, public

education, public health – are not to be found on the list.

Here’s the irony: Those groups can claim to represent the interests of

more people that the business groups.

Size can create a disadvantage for an interest group. The free rider problem is more pronounced in

larger than smaller groups.

The benefits are more dispersed and it is more difficult to deny them to people who are not

members of the group.

It is more difficult to determine whether someone is actually contributing to the group’s objectives. It is easier to monitor the actions of

500 people than a million people.

Again, for a benefit to work properly it has to be selective, it can only be received by people who have joined and contributed to a group’s effort.

Unions are only strong if they can limit job opportunities to their members. Professional organizations are only strong if they can limit the practice of a trade to people they license.

This helps explain why environmental groups – and public interest groups in general – can be

weak.

If the goal of a groups, for example, is clean air, how can you limit that benefit only to people

who contributed to the group? If the air is cleaner, everyone gets to breath it. The free-

rider problems are obvious.

Access to proper resources help as well.

Wealthy groups can be effective because they can hire experts and

have the ability to persistently pursue their interests.

Anti-poverty groups lack muscle.

Types of Interest Groups

Business GroupsProfessional Organizations

Labor Unions

Examples:

AFL – CIOUnited States Chamber of Commerce

American Bar AssociationAmerican Medical Association

Public Interest Groups

National Rifle AssociationNational Organization for WomenAmerican Association of Retired

PersonsAmerican Civil Liberties Union

Family Research Council

Think tanks are a unique type of group that develops policy

proposals and rationales that can influence political debate

Examples of Think Tanks

American Enterprise InstituteBrookings Institute

Cato InstituteCenter for American Progress

List of Think Tanks

Interest Groups active in Texas

Info from the Texas Tribune.A list from Google.

Notable area groups:

Greater Houston Chamber of Commerce

Metropolitan Organization