Week 9: Interest Groups in American Politics

1
Week 9 Interest Groups in American Politics

• James Madison, Federalist Papers
• The causes of faction are sown in the nature of
  man.
• Saw the need to limit the negative effects of
  faction by promoting competition among groups
• Created the concept of checks and balances, the
  conservative governmental system we have
  inherited.

2
Hugo Black, U.S. Senator/Supreme Court Justice

• Contrary to good morals. The lobby has reached
  such a position of power that it threatens
  government itself. Its size, its power, its
  capacity for evil, its greed, trickery, deception
  and fraud condemn it to the death it deserves. 

3
Arthur Bentley (1910) and David Truman (1950)

• They saw groups as the heart of politics and
  policy making in a large, complex governmental
  system
• Truman noted the multiplicity of co-ordinate
  points of access to governmental decisions
• He concluded, The significance of these many
  points of access and of the complicated texture
  of relationships among them is great.

4
Theodore Lowi

• Interest group liberal solutions to the problem
  of power provide the system with stability by
  spreading a sense of representation at the
  expense of genuine flexibility, at the expense of
  democratic forms, and ultimately at the expense
  of legitimacy.

5
Loomis/Cigler (1998)

• Interest group liberalism the proliferation of
  groups and their growing access to government is
  pluralism, but it is sponsored pluralism, and the
  government is the chief sponsor.

6
The Climate for the Group Proliferation

• Substantial cleavages among the citizenry
• The Constitution
• Decentralized political power structure
  (multiple points of access)
• Decentralized political parties (power vacuum)
• American value system (individualism/personal
  achievement) 

7
Why have interest groups proliferated?

• A great rise in the number of interest groups
  since the 1960s
• Centralization of group headquarters in
  Washington, D.C., rather than in NY or elsewhere
• Technological developments in information process
  that promote more sophisticated, more timely, and
  more specialized grassroots lobbying
• The rise of single-issue groups
• Changes in campaign finance laws (1971,1974) and
  the ensuing growth of the PAC

8
Why have interest groups proliferated?

• The increased formal penetration of political and
  economic interests in the bureaucracy (advisory
  committees), the presidency (White House group
  representatives), and the Congress (caucuses)
• The continuing decline of political partiesThe
  increased number, activity, and visibility of
  public-interest groups (Common Cause and Ralph
  Nader-inspired public interest research
  organizations)
• The growth of activity and impact by
  institutions, including corps, universities,
  state and local government, and foreign
  interests
• A continuing rise in the amount and
  sophistication of group activity in state
  capitals.

9
Theories of Group Development

• TrumanThe complex society, characterized by
  economic specialization and social
  differentiation, is fundamental to group
  proliferation.
• Change some orderly, some not is also key.
• Technological advancements
• Social disturbances (war, immigration, etc.) 

10
Theories of Group Development

• Groups formed from an imbalance of interests in
  one area induce a subsequent disequilibrium,
  which acts as a catalyst for individuals to form
  groups as counterweights to the new perceptions
  of inequity.
• Group politics is characterized by successive
  waves of mobilization and counter-mobilization.

11
Political Participation and Mobilization Who,
What, When, How and Why

• While spontaneous popular action warms the heart
  of any good democrat, a moments reflection shows
  that the people initiate little of what we
  normally call participation. Acts of
  participation are stimulated by elites if not
  by the government, then by parties, interest
  groups, agitators, and organizers. (Jack Nagel,
  Participation 1987) 

12
Rosenstone and Hansen (1993)

• People participate in politics when they get
  valuable benefits that are worth the costs of
  taking part. People participate in politics
  when political leaders coax them into taking part
  in the game.  Both sides are necessary
  Strategic mobilization without individual
  motivation is impossible, and individual
  motivation without strategic mobilization is
  illogical (RH, p. 10)

13
Rosenstone and Hansen (1993)

• Who participates?
• People with abundant money, time, skill,
  knowledge and self confidence devote more
  resources to politics
• For those with limited resources, politics is a
  luxury they often cannot afford, particularly
  when outcomes have only a modest impact on their
  economic situations
• Those better educated participate more than those
  less educated
• Those with a sense of political efficacy
  participate more.

14
People participate because they get something out
of it (Olson/Wilson)

• Collective rewards (everyone benefits, regardless
  of participation)
• Selective rewards (only participants benefit)
• Whether a person participates or not depends upon
  their unique set of interests, preferences,
  identifications and beliefs. (RH, p. 17)
• Their level of participation is dependent,
  however, upon their level of resources available
  to do so.

15
When do they participate?

• People participate when the benefits outweigh the
  costs of participation.
• Paradox of Participation in Politics
• Rational Ignorance
• If people are rational, and they receive only
  collective benefits from participation in
  politics, they will not participate. Politics is
  irrational.
• In the same way political learning is likewise
  irrational hence, Rational Ignorance.

16
Important Factor Social Networks

• They provide information at a lower cost to
  individualsThey provide the ability to
  selectively reward and sanction members.
• A necessary, but not sufficient, element to
  political action.
• Others in the system IGs, parties,
  entrepreneurs and activists take advantage of
  this resource in the struggle for political
  advantage.

17
Political Mobilization (RH)

• Mobilization is the process by which candidates,
  parties, activists, and groups induce other
  people to participate.
• Two Types of Mobilization
• Direct
• Indirect
• Leaders mobilize people directly when they
  contact citizens personally and encourage them to
  take action.
• Leaders mobilize people indirectly when they
  contact citizens through mutual associates or
  social networks.

18
Political Mobilization (RH)

• These social networks particularly formal
  groups reduce costs for everyone involved.
• Through mobilization, political leaders provide
  information that would otherwise be unavailable
  to citizens and their social networks.
• They create an opportunity to target those
  citizens already predisposed to participate, and
  they focus political information to those most
  interested at a significantly reduced cost
  (social, financial and psychological).

19
Strategy of Political Mobilization

• Political activity is costly
• Citizen participation is but one strategy
  available to political elites
• Citizen participation is a resource that is used
  selectively in their fights for political
  advantage (RH, p. 30)
• They target and time their efforts for maximum
  effect.
• The decisions made by elites determine much of
  who participates, and when they participate.

20
The Collective Action Problem and Group
Mobilization

• Based on the model of the rational economic man
• Posits that even individuals who have common
  interests are not inclined to join organizations
  that attempt to address their concerns.

21
The Collective Action Problem and Group
Mobilization (cont)

• The major barrier The free-rider problem
• Rational individuals choose not to bear the
  participation costs (time, membership) because
  they can enjoy the group benefits (such as
  favorable legislation) whether or not they join.
• Groups that pursue collective benefits will have
  a more difficult time forming and surviving.
• Olsons key selective incentives These
  rewards go only to members of the group
• Is this an accurate theory of Interest Group
  formation?

22
  The Collective Action Problem and Group
Mobilization (cont)

• Other ideas
• People are more likely to support interest groups
  if they object of collective action is the
  prevention of a collective bad rather than the
  creation of another collective good (Hansen,
  1985)
• Collective action is more likely in a repetitive
  scenario (Walker, p. 47)

23
Origins and Maintenance of Groups

• Many factors contributed to the origination of
  groups
• Apart from incentives, the role of patrons is
  critical to the growth and development of the
  interest group system.
• I.e. SDS
• Walker argues that the growth is a product of
  finding alternative sources of revenue outside
  membership (patrons, donors, etc.)
• The energy that drives the process of group
  formation may come from below or above.

24
Group StrategiesTwo Choices Inside and Outside

• Four factors influence the choice of political
  strategies by interest groups
• The degree of conflict in the political
  environment
• Internal organizational resources
• Character of their memberships
• The principal sources of their financial support.

25
 Walkers findings

• Interest groups tend to choose strategies that
  are compatible with their organizational form
• Groups that are decentralized are likely to
  increase their use of outside strategies
• Groups with members from the profit or mixed
  sectors show little tendency to adopt outside
  strategies under any circumstances
• Citizen groups or those with members from the
  nonprofit sector are much more likely to respond
  to conflict with outside strategies
• The presence of patrons has a dampening effect on
  the choice of outside strategies.

26
The Three Modes of Political Mobilization

• The association based upon a tightly knit
  commercial or occupational community in the
  profit sector whose members share a concern for
  protecting or advancing their economic interests.
• Also based upon occupational communities, but
  entrepreneurs serve to make strong appeals on the
  behalf of the membership. The role of government
  sponsorship is high.
• Groups founded upon the commitment of individuals
  attracted by a cause, along with a package of
  financial contributions and other forms of
  patronage from foundations, wealthy individuals,
  churches, and other institutions. Strongly
  non-profit in nature.

27
 Final Thoughts

• Political mobilization is seldom spontaneous
•  The essential prerequisites for successful
  mobilization are organizational, and many are
  subject to manipulation through public policy.
  (Reagan policy to defund the left)

28
Final Thoughts

• The reason why some of the most deprived
  elements of American society are either ignored
  or represented in the legislative process only by
  small, nonmember organizations is not that they
  are satisfied with their status and have no
  interest in political activity it is because
  there is no institutional foundation from which a
  successful effort at mobilization can be
  launched.