Is the government is run for benefit of a “few big interests” or
the benefit of all?
Percent of Americans saying “few big interests” 1964 – 2008.
Are officials "crooked"? 1958-2008
How much of the time can you trust the federal government in
Washington DC to do what is right? Always, most of the time,
or only some of the time?
Percent of Americans saying only sometimes or never, 1958 – 2008:
Why low trust?
Why do people think officials "crooked"?
Why do they thing government run for "few big interests?"
"Special interests" more power now?
Growing gap between rich and poor?
Change in media coverage of government?
Government policy not what people want?
Then who's interests does it reflect?
Trends follow economic conditions?
Events







Watergate
Vietnam
Reagan administration convictions
Clinton impeachment
Campaign fundraising scandals
Bush White House leaks, indictments
etc.
I. Interest Groups
A. In contemporary perspective:
1. What role for interest groups?
• what are “special interests”?
2. Why public cynicism w/ politics?
Americans think:
 government works for "big interests"
 government can’t be trusted to "do the right thing”
3. Can interest groups replace political parties?
• Can interest groups play the same role as parties at
making our “Madisonian system” work?
• Can interest groups govern in “public” interest?
4. Why are Americans cynical about interest groups?
 Do we simply misunderstand pluralist competition?
 Do some interests have inordinate power?
• how/why do groups form?
• how are they maintained?
• what groups do people join?
• what groups don’t people join?
 Campaign finance
5. Other issues:
 does bias in interest groups system affect public policy?
 can interest groups buy PACs buy public policy?
B. Interest Groups, defined: (Key, Schattschneider)
“an organized group of individuals promoting a shared
interest in public affairs”
PAC  Political Action Committee of interest group
legal, registered lobbying / contributing arm of group
Pluralism: No single interest controls government (Chpt 10).
1. compare interest groups to political parties:
•
•
•
•
narrow, not a broad coalition
not running candidates for office
goal is to have access to elected officials
goal is to influence legislation
2. Types of interest groups (PACs)
a. Economic, or private groups
 organized around selective, material benefits
 seek things from government that are
narrowly distributed to target group
• divisible
o targeted to specific recipients
• visible
o to recipients! not to general public
• excludible
o benefit to group, not to everyone
Examples (what they "lobby" for):
 tax exemption for specific investments
 tax credit for oil producers
 price support for specific agricultural commodity




exempt specific place/firm from a regulation
govt. subsidies to specific industry, or firm
subsidies to developers (in local politics)
government contract award to specific firm
Examples of these groups:
Ranked by Fortune Mag. survey of lobbying "clout"
Professional Associations:
Natl Fed of Ind Business,
American Trial Lawyers Assoc,
AMA,
Natl Assoc of Realtors,
American Bankers Assoc,
Natl Assoc of Manufactures,
US Chamber of Commerce,
Vets of For. Wars,
American Farm Bureau Fed. 17
Motion Picture Assoc of Amer.
Natl Home Builders Assoc,
Natl Assoc of Broadcasters,
American Hospital Assoc.
American Legion,
Natl Restaurant Assoc.
4
5
8
11
12
13
15
16
18
19
20
21
23
24
Labor Unions:
ALF-CIO
NEA,
3
9
AFSCME,
Teamsters
14
25
b. non-economic, “public” groups
organized around “purposive” benefits,
collective goods
often seek benefits that are "public"
benefits are broadly distributed
non-divisible
non excludible
often low visibility (to recipients)
Examples of what they seek:







clean water, clean air
civil rights and liberties,
consumer protections (product safety)
neighborhood preservation
national security (?)
campaign finance reforms
balanced budgets
Examples of such groups:
AAPR
NRA
Christian Coalition,
Natl Right to Life Com.,
1
6
7
10
others "public" groups, not rated:
PIRGs
ACLU
NOW
Sierra Club
consumer organization
Key differences btwn. economic and non-economic
groups
 size (# of potential members)
 resources
 ability to mobilize resources
 seeking public vs. private goods from Govt.
 ability to maintain group
 ability to get contributions from potential members
Economic groups:
 advantages in getting contributions
 incentive: contribute or lose govt benefits
Non-economic groups have trouble:
 hard for potential members to see advantages
 incentive: free-ride on others
public groups can offer “selective benefits” to members
that non-members will not receive
coercion
problem of large (public) constituencies…collective action problem
weaker incentives for individuals to contribute
weaker incentives for one person to shoulder burden
Free-Rider Problem
can’t exclude anyone from consuming a collective good
incentives to “free-ride” while others pay to get good
no/weak rational incentives to join group
ex: dairy consumers
Public Broadcasting
UNIONS
the Washington Student Lobby
Which groups give BIG $$ to elected officials
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/
Top givers in American politics, previous decade:
$10,000,000 to $35,000,000 each
AFSCME
1 (wages, )
Realtors
2 (monopolies)
NEA
3 (credentials)
Trial Lawyers
4 (caps on suits)
SEIU
6 (bargaining)
Altira
12
Fed Ex
13 (mergers, regulations, etc)
Goldman Sachs
16 (regulations)
ATT
17 (mergers, regulations)
Citigroup
20 (mergers, regulations)
UPS
21 (regulations)
Auto Dealers
22 (monopolies)
SBC
29 (mergers, regulations, monopolies)
Microsoft
30 (monopoly issue)
Beer Wholesale
31 (monopolies)
Time Warner
28 (mergers, regulations)
JP Morgan
33 (regulations)
Bell South
34 (mergers, regs)
Lockheed Martin
38 (mergers, contracts)
Blue Shield
43 (health care)
GE
44 (media, regs, contracts)
Bank of America
45 (mergers, regulations)
Boeing
61 (mergers, contracts)
Enron
95 (mergers, regulations, privatization)
Anderson
99 (regulations)
The Logic of Collective Action (M. Olson)
1. Q: How do groups form, how maintained?
A: by members having incentives to contribute
if benefit narrow enough, only contributors get it
o increases incentive to contribute
o recipients very aware when benefit lost
o they have rational incentives to join group
ex: dairy subsidies (Am. Dairy Assoc.)
ex: Grain subsidies (Archer Daniels Midlands)
b. Logic = small, private economic groups well maintained
= greater chance private groups act collectively
= large, public groups struggle
= fewer public purpose groups
ex: look at the US tax codes
c. How some large groups 'solve' collective action problem:
Some “large constituency” groups do survive
1. Coercion:
Force members who benefit to contribute
ex: Labor Unions, “closed shops”
2. Purposive benefits
PETA, NRA
3. Material benefits:
encourage contributions w/ addl. benefits
ex: Sierra Club, magazine
discounts, credit cards
ex: AARP....
4. Social benefits
Consequences for Democratic Systems
or, who gets what from governments...
1. More narrow interests represented in legislature than
"public" interests
pass policy w/ narrow benefits % broad costs
general public not organized to resist
•
more Tobacco subsidies while govt fights smoking
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
more weapon systems DoD does not want
mohair subsidies decades after war ends
paying farmers to not grow crops
inflating costs of consumer dairy products
ban imports of Jamaican sugar while pushing free
trade
subsidies for factory trawler fishing fleet
subsidies for logging roads on public lands
exemptions from regs to allow cyanide pools…
credit card fee scams
cell phone contract scams
each policy passes costs on to all taxpayers &/or consumers
each policy directs benefits to very narrow group
long-run bias in policy output
“corporate welfare” that is far, far larger than AFDC
Iron Triangles
another way of viewing long-run consequences
1. Interest groups capture implementation of policy
US policy process = many unconnected, isolated networks
networks use public power for private purpose
three elements of each network:
Interest Groups (PAC, lobbying firms)
Bureaucracy (exec. branch agency)
Congressional sub-committee
ex: Dairy Price Supports:, 1930s law passed ...
broad legislation, discretion to bureaucracy
sub-committee does “oversight”
int. group contributes to sub committee
Am. Dairy Assoc.
House/Sen Agriculture
committee, sub-com.
.
US Dept. of Agriculture
office of Dairy Assistance
What does all this say about Pluralism?
Interest groups' political resources are unequal
Groups do not form automatically
"Equilibrium" does not reflect public interest?