Interest Groups and Political Parties

Interest Groups and Political Parties (along with political ideology and the mass media) are all examples of political linkages.  They are examples of institutions and organizations that link people with government.  These are crucial in a democracy for the role they play in assuring accountability with government.

Interest Groups

Interest Groups are a “shared-attitude group that makes certain claims upon other groups” by acting through the institutions of government.

• Try to influence government policy and public attitudes
• Focused on specific programs rather than elections
• Narrow membership
• Unlimited number in a political system
• PACs (political action committees) versus 527s

 Political Science and the Role of Interest Groups

(Perspectives on Interest Groups p. 215)

Types of Major Interest Groups (p. 208)

“The Iron Triangle”                                           "The Pluralist Model of Government"

-Iron Triangle:

• Interest groups send campaign funds to congressional committee members (esp oversight committees) while the congressional committees send tax cuts, laws, and regulations back to the interest groups.
• The congressional committees send support to the Executive Branch Agency (Federal Bureaucracy) while the Executive Branch Agency covers the congressional committees’ reports and actions against any scrutiny from the general public or “watch dog groups”.
• The Executive Branch Agency sends support (for rules and regulations) to the Interest group while the interest group sends personnel back to the Executive Branch Agency.
• Elite scholars believe the Iron Triangle is an example of how the current Interest Group System in America is biased against a true democracy.  They advocate serious political reform of the interest group system (PACs, lobbying, campaign finance reform, etc) to allow average citizens a chance to have their voices heard over “monied interests.”

Interest groups = organizations to influence policy decisions and political outcomes (pressure groups)

Politics and Ideas:

Pluralism and Elitism (p. 204)

• Political Scholars are divided over the role of Interest Groups in American Society. (Two competing theories).  One believes interest groups hurt democracy (Elite Scholars) while the other believes the interest group system makes us a democracy (Pluralists).

• Elite theory = Interest group form of domination and control by wealthy elites, IG system not open, free, or fair.  They believe that only interest groups that have a lot of money have any political power.  This is an unfair bias in our democracy (or interest group system) towards the wealthy and business class (MNC’s – multinational corporations) over average citizens.
• They want serious reform of the political system (esp electoral reform)
• Campaign finance reform
• This led to the McCain/Feingold Act = limits how much money you can give to a campaign = $2,500.
• Money is reported to IRS so no one is cheated.  Group membership is open to public view.
• 527’s = an organization that comes together for a purpose. They can run ads but don’t have to report their budget or membership. Come up with cool name to make people want to donate to them. Ex: “Americans for a Free Tomorrow”
• Plutocracy = rule of the wealthy.  Elite Scholars believe America is actually a “plutocracy” or a rule by the wealthy.  They do not advocate this system, but instead use their theory to call for serious political reform.

• Pluralist theory = Pluralist scholars believe the Interest Group system is “open, free, and fair.”  There is no need for reform of the political system; Pluralists don’t like voting alone but instead believe if citizens truly want their voices heard by political leaders that they would join an interest group.
• Anyone can join an interest group.  And all interest groups have power if they are organized.
• Power in the American system goes to the many organized interests.  Pluralist Scholars do not believe that money is really all that important.  That instead organization is power.  The more organized a group is the more power it has.
• Polyarchy = rule of government of the many organized interests.  Pluralist scholars do not like the term “democracy” for the USA.  They believe it is too broad.  They created the term poly (many) and archy (rule) to define countries like the USA.
• MDP = modern dynamic polyarchy.  Modern (advanced technology) Dynamic (capitalist economic system) and polyarchy (democratic rule through an interest group system).

 Political Parties

-         organize government and give coherence to gov’t policy

-         help make government responsible to the people

-         extra constitutional political party system (political party system does not appear in the Constitution…a major oversight by the Framers)

What Parties Do

American Political Parties:

Past, Present, and Future

 CRITICAL ELECTIONS

(Pgs. 226-232)Critical Elections: Realigning Elections (major change in the pattern of support for a political party and the important issues which drive the national debate.)

-Political Party System

• 1860= Republicans dominant party. Liberal focused on civil rights and western expansion
• 1896= Republicans remain dominant party. But the Republicans switch from civil rights to business interests during the Gilded Age.  Party of business and corporations (farmers, Protestants).  First large public election in the United States.
• 1932= Democrats become the dominant party after the “business-class” fails during the Great Depression. FDR = creates a “New Deal” for the country away from strictly laissez-faire capitalism.
• 1980= Republican election. Reagan Revolution. Rather than a realigning election, some political scientists believe this was a dealigning election.  A new theory with implication that the party system is in decline or breaking down.  This is not good for a democracy.  Rather than capture or create a new national issues pattern, during the 80s Ronald Reagan and the Democratic Congress began a new period of heightened partisanship that drove people away from the major parties. Dealigning election. Congress = Democratic while the White House +Republican…or divided government. This pattern continued with Clinton (Democrat) with a Republican Congress.  Neither political party was able to create a new winning coalition.
• 2000 = Dealignment becomes a major problem with the election of George W. Bush who did not win the popular vote.  Bush was constitutionally elected President in 200, but he was not democratically elected.  Critics of the political party system say that the partisanship and divided government helped create this situation.
• 2002-2004= Bushification of America: Rove & Cheney = 50 + 1 plan. Rather than create a broad coalition of many different interests to last through several election cycles, the Bush/Cheney team create a risky 50+1 plan to only win enough states to win in the electoral college.  So long as Bush and his policies remain popular – this was a winning strategy for the Bush/Republican teams in the White House and Capitol Hill.
• 2006 =  De-Bushification of America.  Against all odds the Democrats take control of Congress by winning in key Republican states.  The President and his policies are very unpopular leading to a collapse of Republican fortunes in numerous House and Senate elections in 2006.
• 2008 = Does Obama’s election and the dominance of the Democrats in the Congress mean a realigning election has occurred?  Will Republicans be able to win in 2010 and 2012?  What shift will occur in political party platforms (i.e., liberal vers conservative?) for Republicans to win or for Democrats to maintain their electoral victories?