Essay plans - Pressure Groups Flashcards
What are the differences between parties and pressure groups?
AIMS
Parties are organisations of people who come together to form the government.
Pressure groups are an organisation of people who come together to influence the government.
The National Rifle Association successfully got Washington D.C.’s handgun ban to be declared unconstitutional in District of Columbia v Heller (2008).
Parties can play the very important and necessary role of forming the government, so uphold the principles of a representative democracy.
Pressure groups can act as a check and balance on parties in a more impartial way as they are not interested in forming a government, therefore this should help prevent a dictatorship-style government.
NUMBER
There are very few parties in existence - 2004, 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, 99% of all votes cast were for either the Democrat or Republican candidate.
In the 114th Congress, there was not a single third party or independent Congressman, and there are only 2 independent Senators.
There are a huge number of pressure groups in existence - 34,000+ lobbyists operating around K Street in Washington.
There were many different pressure groups that were active during the Civil Rights Movement, including the NAACP, SCLC, SNCC and CORE. They all represented slightly different aims, ideologies or methods of achieving its aims.
Having few parties should promote stability and continuity and having a huge number of pressure groups should mean that many different interests can be represented, which promotes flexibility and development.
APPEAL
Parties often aim for broad appeal in order to get more votes, therefore they need to consider many difference political issues.
The Rep Party is made up of moderate Republicans (MS Partnership), conservative Republicans (RS Committee) and libertarian Republicans (LC).
The Dem Party is made up of liberal Democrats (PC), centrist Democrats (ND Coalition) and conservative Democrats (BD Coalition).
Pressure groups can sometimes be quite divisive as they focus on particular issues which could be controversial.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving focuses on the specific issue of drunk driving, leading to alcohol related fatalities dropping by around 40% by 2000.
What is the significance of pressure groups?
INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS
It could be argued that the Founding Fathers wanted pressure groups to be formed in the USA by writing a constitution that supports their work.
First Amendment – the right to freedom of speech, to peacefully assemble and to petition the government.
NAACP v Alabama (1958) – used the First Amendment to rule that Alabama telling the NAACP to hand over a list of its members was unconstitutional.
Access points – lots of ways for pressure groups to influence policy.
Separation of power and checks and balances – executive, bicameral legislature and judiciary.
Federalism – federal government, state governments and local governments.
Direct democracy – referendums, initiatives and recall elections.
POLITICAL FACTORS
Lobbyists representing interest groups are happy to provide evidence and arguments to Congress.
Party bosses used to select candidates but now its pressure groups that encourage candidates to run, fund campaigns and provide evidence in policy discussions.
Increasingly complex laws – means that government officials need pressure groups to provide them with information, advice and even drafts of bills.
The 111th Congress passed the two longest non-appropriations bills in history: the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010) and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010).
Increasing election finance – elected officials need donations from pressure groups in order to win elections – in 2012, the average cost of winning a seat was $1.6 million for the House and $10.3 million in the Senate.
In 2012, PACs in the finance, insurance and real estate sector gave $71 million to candidates to help with their campaigns, 89% of which was given to incumbents.
Since Citizens United v FEC (2010), lobbyists can donate to Super PACs, which can spend unlimited amounts of money on TV adverts supporting candidates.
DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS
They are helping to prevent tyranny of the majority by representing the interests of the minority, which could otherwise go unheard.
Religious: 69% Christian, 20% Catholic, 2% Mormon, 1% Islam etc.
Racial: 60% white, 18% Hispanic, 13% Black, 5% Asian etc.
Economic diversity: huge range of industries that need representation.
Huge economic inequality – the wealthiest 1% possesses 40% of the nation’s wealth, whilst the bottom 80% has just 7% of the nation’s wealth.
What types of pressure groups are there?
SECTIONAL/INTEREST GROUPS
Sectional/interest groups aim to defend the specific interests of a section of society, usually their members.
Membership exclusive with criteria to qualify.
Business groups (represent companies in a similar industry) – Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.
Professional groups (represent individuals in a similar industry) – the American Medical Association.
Labour groups (represent skilled/unskilled workers) – the United Auto Workers.
Agricultural groups (represent the interests of farmers) – the National Farmers’ Union.
Business groups represent companies in a similar industry.
CAUSE/PROMOTIONAL GROUPS
Promotional/cause groups aim to promote a cause for the whole of society - issues that don’t exclusively benefit groups’ members - open to all.
Women’s Christian Temperance Union and Anti-Saloon League led to 18th Amendment (prohibition).
American Woman Suffrage Association and National WSA led to 19th Amendment.
The Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth promote the cause of environmentalism.
Common Cause promotes good government and lobbies on issues such as campaign finance reform.
UMBRELLA GROUPS
Umbrella groups are organisations representing many individual pressure groups.
US Chamber of Commerce represents 300,000 businesses.
The National Retail Federation represents over 1.6 million U.S. retail establishments with more than 24 million employees.
They have a large influence on policy - the US Chamber of Commerce supported the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (2009), which could have influenced the Act’s success in being passed.
They raise a lot of money - CofC spent more than $301 million lobbying in 2009-10.
What are the differences between pressure groups and social movements?
ORGANISATION
Pressure groups have a clear structure, leadership and membership.
The NAACP has a clear structure and membership. In May 2014, Cornell William Brooks was chosen to be the NAACP President.
Social movements are loose coalitions of people and organisations.
The Occupy Wall Street Movement (beginning in September 2011) refused to elect leaders and made decisions collectively.
Many social movements often develop into pressure groups, which suggests that it is seen as more beneficial and more successful to be a pressure group than a social movement.
AIMS
Pressure groups have focussed, particular aims.
The National Rifle Association aims to protect the right to bear arms.
Social movements have broad aims that challenge the status quo.
The Feminist Movement in the USA aims to promote the rights of women, including reproductive rights, domestic violence, maternity leave, equal pay, women’s suffrage, sexual harassment and sexual violence.
Social movements can help to build a national agenda and national unity by having broad aims that have broad appeal.
Pressure groups can focus on particular issues; therefore, tyranny of the majority should be prevented.
METHODS
Pressure groups often operate inside the political system.
The American Conservative Union and the US Chamber of Commerce provide voting cues for Republicans.
Social movements operate as outsiders - The Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and 1960s effectively used marches (e.g., 1963 March on Washington), boycotts (e.g., 1955 Montgomery Bus Boycott), sit-ins (e.g., 1960 SNCC Greensboro Woolworth’s sit-ins) and voter registration drives (e.g., 1964 Mississippi Freedom Summer).
Social movements may be less likely to succeed because they can’t directly communicate with politicians in order to directly influence decision making, whereas pressure groups often can - however, may be seen as less corrupt.
What access points do pressure groups use?
CONGRESS
Pressure groups can lobby Congress’s standing committees.
In the 113th Congress, 8,565 bills were referred to the standing committees, but only 613 were reported on by them.
Senate standing committees usually have around 20 members, and House standing committees usually have around 40-50 members, so pressure groups only need to form a few relationships.
Voting cues inform representatives of how pressure groups would like them to vote.
The AFL-CIO and the NAACP provide voting cues for Democrats.
The American Conservative Union and the US Chamber of Commerce provide voting cues for Republicans.
Pressure groups can donate to PACs that will donate to candidates’ campaigns; therefore, these candidates feel loyal to the pressure groups.
In 2012, PACs in the finance, insurance and real estate sector gave $71 million to candidates to help with their campaigns, 89% of which was given to incumbents.
EXECUTIVE
Pressure groups can lobby the executive branch.
In the first two years after the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010) was passed, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase met with federal agencies 356 times, which is 114 more meetings than all of the groups in favour of tighter regulations combined.
Pressure groups can fund or endorse to elected executive branch officials.
In 2012, the pro-life group the National Right to Life endorsed Mitt Romney during the presidential election, whereas the pro-choice group NARAL endorsed Barack Obama.
SUPREME COURT
Pressure groups can take cases to the Supreme Court.
The National Rifle Association successfully got Washington D.C.’s handgun ban to be declared unconstitutional in District of Columbia v Heller (2008).
Amicus Curiae briefs are written legal arguments that try to convince the court to give a particular decision.
In the 2012-13 session, 1,001 briefs were filed for 73 cases, with 96% of cases having at least one brief submitted, and 156 briefs filed on same-sex marriage.
In Grutter v Bollinger (2003), about whether educational institutions were allowed to consider race as a factor in admissions, the judges repeatedly mentioned the case’s amicus curiae briefs during the arguments, and they were directly referenced in the majority opinion.
Pressure groups can lobby Supreme Court appointments.
When President George W. Bush nominated John Roberts in 2005, almost 70 groups gave written or oral testimonies.
In 2005, many pressure groups criticised President George W. Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers, who had never served as a judge and had no experience in constitutional law.
STATE GOVERNMENTS
Pressure groups can lobby state governments.
Friends of the Earth lobbied the California legislature and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to introduce the Global Warming Solutions Act (2006) after Presidents failed to sign the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gas emissions.
Pressure groups can start initiatives and recall elections in the states.
In 2012, there were 115 referendums and 42 initiatives/propositions.
The 2012 “Colorado Amendment 64” initiative on marijuana legalisation legalised marijuana for personal use in Colorado.
During the history of the USA, there have been three recall elections of state governors.
The 2012 recall election of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker was unsuccessful.
Between 1913 and 2012, there were 36 recall elections of state legislators.
What is the significance of iron triangles?
UNDERMINE DECISIONS
Iron triangles are mutually beneficial relationships between pressure groups, members of Congress and executive branch agencies - insider groups want members of Congress and executive branch agencies to write favourable regulations and give them contracts to provide goods and services, members of Congress want the support/donations of PGs and exec want more power/funding from Congress.
They are referred to as “iron” because they are seemingly unbreakable.
In 2003, the federal government purchased $3 billion of fighter jets from Lockheed Martin. This decision was undermined by the fact that Lockheed Martin was part of the “military-industrial complex” iron triangle between weapons manufacturers, Congress’s Defence Committee and Pentagon Staff - this gives less legitimacy and authority to government policies due to decisions not being made impartially.
PROMOTE ELITISM
The wealthiest people have the largest influence on policy.
The iron triangle in the field of veterans’ affairs allows elites in the Vietnam Veterans of America pressure group, the Veteran’s Affairs Committees of the House and Senate and the Department of Veterans Affairs to have huge influence on policy and prevents outside groups form having an influence – oversight?
Iron triangles promoting elitism is significant because they undermine the principles of a pluralist democracy.
Ordinary members of the electorate could see this as corrupt and be put off from politics, therefore could increase political apathy and decrease political participation.
EFFICIENCY
However, iron triangles may increase government efficiency.
Congress and executive agencies don’t have enough time or resources to always carry out accurate and reliable research on specific policy areas, therefore pressure groups involved in iron triangles can do this for them – voting cues.
Congress and executive agencies may not always be able to work together, especially if they are controlled by those with conflicting ideologies or viewpoints, therefore iron triangles help to increase cooperation
Iron triangles increasing government efficiency is significant because it helps to reduce the effects of gridlock.
What is the significance of the revolving door?
UNDERMINES DECISIONS
The movement of individuals in and out of jobs in the government/private sector.
Retired government officials often take high paid jobs in the private sector and lobby their former colleagues in government.
Senior figures from the private sector are often hired by the government and regulate the industry they just left.
In 2003, the Undersecretary of Defence, Edward Aldridge, approved the purchase of $3 billion of fighter jets from Lockheed Martin.
However, this decision was undermined by the fact that Aldridge became a board member for Lockheed Martin a few months later.
In 2008, the Secretary of the US Treasury, Henry Paulson, bailed out Goldman Sachs with $13 billion.
However, this decision was undermined by the fact that Paulson had previously been employed as the Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs.
Gives less legitimacy and authority to government policies due to decisions not being made impartially.
PROMOTES ELITISM
The wealthiest people have the largest influence on policy and ordinary citizens don’t have a say.
In 2015, US Attorney-General Eric Holder left his office to become a partner at Covington and Burling, a Wall Street Law firm, for which he could continue to have a large influence on society.
When the House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, was defeated in a primary challenge in 2014, he soon announced that was taking a new job at the investment bank Moelis & Co as a strategic advisor with a $3.4 million salary.
Undermines the principles of a pluralist democracy.
REGILATIONS
Ethics in Government Act (1978) – required executive branch employees to wait at least a year before they could be hired as lobbyists.
Ethics Reform Act (1989) – expanded restrictions to include members of Congress and their staff.
Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (2007) – increased the “cooling off” period from one to two years before Senators and senior executive officials can lobby after retiring.
In January 2017, President Trump signed an executive order imposing new limits on the revolving door - restricts employees from engaging in lobbying activities that relate to the agency in which they worked for 5 years after they leave their post, instituted a lifetime ban on employees becoming lobbyists for foreign governments. employees are also banned from working on any issues that involve former clients for a period of 2 years after leaving government.
What methods are used by insider pressure groups?
LOBBY CONGRESS
LOBBY EXEC
LOBBY SC
What methods are used by outsider groups?
INDIRECT ACTION
Politicians pay little attention to the arrival of sacks of identical letters or postcard and so pressure groups encourage their members to use their own communications.
Indirect action involves influencing representatives to make changes whilst working withing normal political channels.
These methods include making posters, canvassing, collecting signatures for petitions, writing letters, making telephone calls, sending emails and even simply voting in elections.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving collected signatures, wrote letters and gave interviews, leading to alcohol related fatalities dropping by around 40% by 2000.
DIRECT ACTION
Non-violent direct action is when groups work outside the normal political channels to bring their aims to the attention of the public through media coverage, which will pressure the government into acting in support of the pressure group’s aims.
Marches and demonstrations are sometimes aimed at state and federal courts where other forms of lobbying are inappropriate - Occupy Wall Street 2011.
When the Supreme Court is passing a decision on a controversial issue – the streets outside are filled with pressure groups of the opposing argument.
Violent direct action includes assaulting people, destroying property and committing acts of terror - Operation Rescue is an anti-abortion group that has blocked women’s health clinics and has issued “Wanted” posters of abortion providers which listed their home addresses.
Timothy McVeigh claimed that his Oklahoma City Bombing (1995) was aimed to put a check on government abuse of power.
DIRECT DEMOCRACY
Colorado Proposition in 2015 voted on giving GM foods special labels – drafted and sponsored by Right to Know Colorado.
Two Democrats recalled from State Senate in 2013 in Colorado – grassroots recall campaign after new gun control legislation supported by them.
What factors determine success of PGs?
AIMS
Need to be in-line with government policy to be impactful – Tea Party groups that opposed Obamacare struggled to have success whilst Obama pres BUT once Trump elected manages to repeal part of the act with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (2017).
Easier to obstruct then pass legislation – opposition from fiscally conservative PGs like Club for Growth meant and united Dem opposition meant Trump had to drop the American Health care Act in 2017 – didn’t think it went far enough.
Easier to influence state legislatures than Congress – Dem Chris Murphy manages to halt gun leg with 15-hour FB to convince people to pass bill for background checks but could only cause gridlock whereas Every Town for Gun Safety has extended controls in many more liberal states.
ORGANISATION
Unlike pressure groups, social movements are large, loose networks of people and organisations that wish to make significant, broadly similar changes to society.
The Occupy movement emerged in 2011 as a reaction to the financial crisis and Wall Street bailout - the movement did not want to elect leaders, and preferred decisions to be agreed by a public vote from the demonstrators in the park - as the movement included a huge range of diverse groups, this made agreeing on a plan of action very difficult and challenging the influence of extremely well organised and funded banks and businesses even tougher.
The BLM movement, which campaigns for racial and social justice, and against systemic racism towards black Americans, has grown equally rapidly - now a major social movement that organises a variety of protests and other events.
The movement, as a whole, is not a centralised grouping and has no official hierarchy. However, in response to critics who claimed the movement lacked clear aims, several activists released a 10-point plan in 2015, called Campaign Zero, which made specific legislative proposals for police reform.
Moving from protest to policy is likely to give these activists more influence.
STATUS
Insider groups are expected to be more successful because, due to their professionalism or expertise, the government often consults them, and they have direct contact with key figures.
Some groups have been able to form effective ‘iron triangles’ by exploiting their knowledge of the workings of government.
The top five contributors to House Representative Mac Thornberry in 2015-16 were all defence companies like Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin - likely because Thornberry is the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, giving him considerable influence over defence spending.
Other well-established groups can provide influential amicus curiae briefs to the SC - the American Civil Liberties Union often prepare amicus curiae briefs for cases involving a challenge to constitutional rights.
MONEY
Financial resources pressure groups to use methods of influence unavailable to less well funded groups - they can hire expensive professional lobbyists to advise them on how best to conduct their campaign, or to represent the group in Washington.
Many lobbyists are retired members of Congress, or congressional staff, who can charge significant fees due to their experience and connections.
One example of this ‘revolving door’ is Jim Coon, who worked as the majority staff director for the Aviation Subcommittee in the House of Representatives until 2013, and was hired in 2014 as the new Senior Vice-President of Government Relations at the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association.
In addition to hiring lobbyists, wealthy pressure groups can also afford to give sizable donations to influence politicians, or to help ensure that candidates sympathetic to their cause get elected.
Money has become even more important in the aftermath of CU v FEC (2010) - led to the creation of ‘Super PACs’.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the NRA donated less than $14 million from 1998 to 2016 - far less than many other industries.
However, from 1998-2017 the group also spent $144.3 million influencing elections in other ways e.g. purchasing TV and online ads that attack candidates that support gun controls.
Clinton was accused of giving greater access to foreign governments, corporations and pressure groups that had donated to the Clinton Foundation while she was Secretary of State, while Trump was accused of buying his way out of a state investigation, after Florida’s Attorney General dropped an investigation into Trump University just four days after the Donald J. Trump Foundation made a $25,000 donation to a PAC supporting her re-election.
HUMAN RESOURCES
Pressure groups with mass memberships have significant power because of the threat they pose at election time.
The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), a pressure group representing the interests of retired Americans, has over 40 million members.
An endorsement from the AARP could therefore potentially deliver a large number of voters - attracted considerable media attention when the group came out in opposition to the Republican Party’s alternative to Obamacare in March 2017.
The NRA – over 4m members - scores each member of Congress from A+, for those who promote the Second Amendment, to an F grade, for those who are a “true enemy of gun owners’ rights” - members can be very keen to retain high NRA ratings for the next election.
Mass membership can also make certain methods, like direct action, much more effective – in 2014, over 400,000 people took part in the People’s Climate March in New York City - the US then announced that it had reached a joint agreement with China to address climate change.
A small group with a particular expertise might be consulted by the government and may not need to spend money on lobbyists - can provide evidence to congressional committees, or to individual members, or perhaps prepare amicus briefs.
When President Trump signed an executive order in January 2017 that banned all foreign nationals from 7 countries from entering the US, the International Refugee Assistance Project offered legal representation to individuals affected by the ban and judges then temporarily blocked the enforcement of the order.
How are PGs good for democracy?
REPRESENTATION
Pressure groups give a voice to minority groups that might otherwise go unheard.
Tyranny of the majority - as a majoritarian democracy, with only two main parties, it is easy for representatives to overlook minority groups and unpopular causes in favour of the popular concerns of the majority of voters who will determine election.
Pressure groups like the ACLU, which has worked to defend the civil liberties of a wide variety of minority groups e.g. transgender high-school students, are essential to democracy.
In March 2016, the Governor of South Dakota vetoed a bill prohibiting transgender students from using the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity, after the ACLU organised for him to meet with a group of transgender students and a number of businesses have also taken action to show their opposition to ‘bathroom bills’ in other states.
SCRUTINY
Many pressure groups issue scorecards rating representatives based on how they voted on key issues affecting their members – keep track of behaviour.
The NRA regularly informs members of Congress of how they should vote on gun legislation, and then grades them from A+ to F - the NRA argues that scorecards help members to make more informed decisions at elections.
Groups also use their knowledge and experience to provide useful scrutiny of proposed bills - the Kaiser Family Foundation used its healthcare expertise to provide an assessment of the likely impact of the Republican Party’s proposed Obamacare replacement (American Health Care Act), long before the Congressional Budget Office was able to perform its own analysis.
LOBBYING RESTRICTIONS
The Lobbying Disclosure Act (1995) requires lobbyists to officially register themselves and defines lobbying as any oral or written communication to legislative/executive branch officials about bills, federal programmes, and or nominations.
It also requires organisations to report how much they have spent, who they contacted, and what issues they have lobbied on.
The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (2007) requires lobbyists to report any contributions they make to federal candidates, PACs and committees.
It also introduced a ‘cooling off’ period before former Members of Congress can begin to lobby Congress - Senators 2 years and Reps 1 year.
In January 2017, President Trump signed an executive order imposing new limits on the revolving door of executive agency employees who wish to become lobbyists after leaving their posts - restricts employees from engaging in lobbying activities that relate to the agency in which they worked for 5 years after they leave their post.
It also instituted a lifetime ban on employees becoming lobbyists for foreign governments and employees are also banned from working on any issues that involve former clients for a period of 2 years after leaving the government.
Finally, the order restricts former lobbyists from participating in a particular government matter upon which they have previously lobbied for 2 years.
Why aren’t PGs good for democracy?
ELITE
The influence held by a wealthy elite undermines the idea that America is a pluralist democracy.
While there are many pressure groups in America, they have vastly different human and financial resources, giving some groups significant advantages.
Wealthy, well-connected insiders have financial resources that give them a much louder voice - In the 2016 general election, just 0.52% of the US adult population was responsible for 67.8% of all political contributions - problematic because this small group has very different interests and concerns to the rest of the American population.
Many critics have questioned whether President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida has become an exclusive access point for the wealthy elite.
Initiation fees have already risen from $100,000 to $200,000, but, with Trump spending so many weekends at the resort, this is arguably a small price to pay compared with the cost of lobbying in Washington.
UNBALANCED OPINIONS
There is no guarantee that their expertise or information is fair and balanced.
Lobbyists are paid to make the best possible case for their employer, and so they’re unlikely to present a balanced view when trying to influence Congress.
This raises the concern that, when making key decisions, Members of Congress have not been given both sides of the argument and are not actually making fully informed decisions.
Less wealthy groups, who cannot afford lobbyists, or less professional groups, who lack the contacts in Congress/exec, or the expertise to write amicus briefs, may be unable to make their case as effectively.
In 2015, the pro-life group Centre for Political Progress released a video of Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Research that had been edited to give the impression that they were profiting from the sale of aborted fetal tissue.
When the legal case against Planned Parenthood was taken to court, the Texas grand jury cleared Planned Parenthood of any alleged wrongdoing and instead indicted the videographers on multiple charges, however, regardless of the outcome in court, the misleading viral footage may have already shaped opinions.
DIRECT ACTION
Pressure groups using direct action, can undemocratically force their agenda.
They are attempting to force others to give in to their demands, rather than going through the usual democratic channels - sometimes this can take violent and illegal forms, such as physical attacks on abortion clinics and the staff who work for them.
In 2016, the National Abortion Federation reported that there had been eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, and 186 instances of arson associated with U.S. abortion clinics since 1977.
In November 2015, Robert Lewis Dear Jr shot at police and civilians as part of a protest against Planned Parenthood - a reminder that, at its most extreme, direct action can become terrorism.
Even where direct action is peaceful, critics argue it can ultimately cause more harm than good, as pressure groups put their own self-interest above the wider national interest - since 2013, workers for various fast food companies have used strike action to pressure their employers, and the Government, to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour.
Critics argue that the government should not give in to calls to raise the minimum wage because, while it would benefit the protestors, it would cause broader economic issues, as businesses may respond by cutting jobs.
LOBBYING
Pressure groups can still take advantage of the ‘revolving door’.
The legal restrictions on lobbying only apply to officially registered “lobbyists” and to activities that technically qualify as “lobbying” - led to many lobbyists rebranding as ‘strategic advisers’, who, instead of directly contacting officials on behalf of clients, advise them on how best to present their case to key figures/the public.
When the House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, was defeated in a primary challenge in 2014, he soon announced that was taking a new job at the investment bank Moelis & Co as a strategic advisor with a $3.4 million salary.
Critics have also pointed out a number of loopholes in President Trump’s executive order - restrictions only apply to the specific agency or area former employees worked for whilst in government, enabling them to lobby other areas.
The order also only applies to those who officially register as lobbyists, doing little to discourage ‘shadow lobbying’.
An analysis by ProPublica published in March 2018 found that at least 187 Trump political appointees are former lobbyists, and waivers have been signed to allow many to circumvent Trump’s executive order and oversee the industry they previously lobbied on behalf of.
Other critics have argued that any efforts to make lobbying more transparent have also been undermined by Trump’s stays at his Mar-a-Lago resort, which they argue has become an exclusive access point that is not subject to any of Washington’s rules and regulations.
Membership lists are kept confidential, making it very difficult to know who may or may not be influencing the President.
How have pressure groups been regulated?
DEFINITION
The definition of lobbyists has caused problems.
Lobbying Disclosure Act (1995): defined a lobbyist as someone who is paid to make more than one lobbying contact and spent at least 20% of their time lobbying.
Included lobbying of congressional staff and senior staff in the executive branch.
Not effective: many lobbyists have simply changed the focus of their work to spend less than 20% of their time on lobbying in order to avoid restrictions - 3,627 lobbyists deregistered in 2008 in order to avoid restrictions.
Many lobbyists now call themselves “strategic advisors” as they don’t directly contact officials on behalf of clients and instead provide advice on how clients can best present their message to the government and the public.
The American League of Lobbyists changed its name to the Association of Government Relations Professionals.
DISCLOSURE
Lobbying Disclosure Act (1995): required the disclosure of lobbying activities for each client paying over $5000.
Organisations spending over $20,000 in six months on in-house lobbyists had to report spending and issues they lobbied on.
Available to the public on “opensecrets.org/influence”, so should allow greater public involvement in transparency and accountability.
Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (2007): increased disclosure rules so lobbyists had to file reports every 3 months rather than every 6 months as before.
Increased penalties for not complying with regulations from $50,000 to $200,000 and added a criminal penalty of up to 5 years in prison.
Required the filing of semi-annual reports on contributions to federal candidates, party committees and PACs.
Candidates and PACs were required to report “bundled” donations from lobbyists that exceeded $15,000 in a six-month period.
BUT they can still accept/spend large sums and contribute to political campaigns.
REVOLVING DOOR
Ethics in Government Act (1978): required executive branch employees to wait at least a year before they could be hired as lobbyists.
Ethics Reform Act (1989): expanded restrictions to include members of Congress and their staff.
Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (2007): increased the “cooling off” period from one to two years before Senators and senior executive officials can lobby after retiring.
BUT Regulations don’t completely stop the revolving door, they just delay it, therefore there is still potential for corruption in the future.
The revolving door has actually increased - In 2013, 50% of Senators and 42% of Representatives became lobbyists after retiring.
Obama’s Exec Order in 2009 prohibited appointees in the exec from accepting gifts from lobbyists and banned participation in matters involving appointee’s former clients/employer for two years – Trump did similar.
Why are pressure groups more powerful than parties?
INFLUENCE ON DECISION-MAKING
Parties are weak in Congress and the executive branch.
In 2015, most House Democrats voted against Obama’s TAA and only 40 House Democrats voted in favour, therefore it lost.
Pressure groups have more influence on decision-making as they can lobby officials by meeting with or contacting them to directly ask them to support the pressure group’s interests - In the first two years after the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010) was passed, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase met with federal agencies 356 times
Pressure groups may be able to form iron triangles - in 2003, the federal government purchased $3 billion of fighter jets from Lockheed Martin because Lockheed Martin was part of the “military-industrial complex” iron triangle between weapons manufacturers, Congress’s Defence Committee and Pentagon Staff.
INFLUENCE ON ELECTIONS
Parties are weak during elections due to limitations - the Federal Election Campaign Act (1974) limited party donations to candidates to $5000.
The Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act (2002) banned soft money donations (money that is not directly used on an election campaign) from parties to candidates.
Candidates are no longer selected by “party bosses” in “smoke-filled rooms” due to the introduction of primaries.
Pressure groups have a larger role during elections as they can more easily set up PACs and Super PACs to donate to candidates’ campaigns.
In 2012, PACs in the finance, insurance and real estate sector gave $71 million to candidates to help with their campaigns.
There were 1,310 Super PACs created by the 2012 Election and they raised over $828 million.
Pressure groups can have a lot of impact by endorsing candidates - in 2012, the pro-life group the National Right to Life endorsed Mitt Romney during the presidential election, whereas the pro-choice group NARAL endorsed Barack Obama.
SUPPORT
Party identification is low.
In 2014, 39% American voters identified as Independents, 32% as Democrats and 23% as Republicans.
Pressure group membership is high.
The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) has over 40 million members.
Participation crisis.
Why aren’t pressure groups more powerful than parties?
LIMITED SUCCESS
Many groups enjoy limited success.
The Occupy Wall Street Movement (beginning in 2011) has been largely unsuccessful and so lacked power due to its lack of organised leadership and structure.
The American Dehydrated Onion and Garlic Association is not a powerful pressure group - once spent $300,000 annually on lobbying, but it finished 2012 with a lobbying expenditure of just $20,000.
DECISION-MAKING
They are the ones who make decisions.
Pressure groups need parties to make the changes they want.
The Civil Rights Movement needed the Democrats in Congress and the executive branch to pass the Civil Rights Act 1964 and the Voting Rights Act 1965, otherwise the Civil Rights Movement couldn’t have established civil rights.
If pressure groups are ignored by parties, they cannot make the changes they want.
Pro-gun control movements, such as the “Million Mom March” in Washington in 2000, have not been able to introduce gun control legislation due to the extent of anti-gun control officials in the federal government.
PERMANENT
Parties are more powerful because they are permanent.
The main two parties must have some degree of power because they have been successfully winning elections since the 1800s.
Every President has been a Democrat or a Republican since 1857.
In the 2004, 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, 99% of all votes cast were for either the Democrat or Republican candidate.
In the 114th Congress, there was not a single third party or independent Congressmen, and there are only 2 independent Senators.
Pressure groups come and go, which suggests that they aren’t powerful enough to remain permanently influential.
The Black Panther Party (formed in 1966) dissolved in 1982 due to dwindling membership.
