Pressure Groups Flashcards
1
Q
Political Pluralism meaning
A
- Political Philosophy
- Emphasises benefits of many different groups influencing the decision-making process
- Gov takes into account views from across whole society
2
Q
Traditional pluralism in the USA
A
- Tradtional motto of the USA “e pluribus unum” - “out of many, one”
- Displayed on the Great Seal of the United States
- Aim to forge united nation from diverse people, states and ideas
3
Q
History of pluralism in USA
A
- Intended to be a pluralist society, many voices heard
- Initially only voices male, white, wealthy, Protestant, like founding fathers
- Over time more female, working-class, minority ethnic and religious voices heard but still not on equal terms
4
Q
Constitutional protection of pluralism
A
1st Amendment - “Right of the people peaceably to assemble”
- Freedom of association gives pressure groups constitutional right to exist
5
Q
Role of pressure groups in political pluralism
A
- Force politicians to hear broad range of ideas
- Ideas of different groups often conflict
- Americans United for life anti-abortion vs Planned Parenthood (health provider and interest group)
6
Q
Role of Pressure Groups in Democracy
A
- Disagreement healthy for democracy - people & gov hear both sides of argument, best decisions after public debate & scrutiny
- Broader opportunity for participation than joining political party
- Many significant developments a result of pressure groups - desegregation, abortion
7
Q
Criticism of pressure groups
A
- Fear of elitism
- Wealthy groups spend heavily on ads, legal challenges, prof. lobbysits, campaign spending - more influence
- Country run by elite of pressure groups leaders and gov
8
Q
Examples of elitism
A
- Best-funded groups prevented change majority of US supports
- NRA successful in preventing gun control, 60% of Americans supported reform as of 2020
- Wealthy corporations influence politicians, system prioritises big business over policies reducing inequality - 2024 oligarchy
9
Q
Difference between pressure groups and political parties
A
- Pressure groups aim to influence those with power rather than win elected office/power themselves
- Do not put candidates up for election, instead campaign for candidates who support agenda
10
Q
Insider Groups
A
- Have close ties to government or parties
- American Medical Association, US Chamber of Commerce, NRA
- Usually well funded, spend heavily on lobbying and campaings, have expertise to ensure policy-makers listen
11
Q
Outsider Groups
A
- No close links to political establishment
- Influence via public pressure - marches, direct action, etc.
- Frequently anti-establishment - oppose existing system
- 2016 - Climate Direct Action turned off valves on 15% of US crude oil imports for nearly a day, several members convicted on felony charges, group classified as extremist by Dep of Homeland Security
12
Q
Promotional/Cause groups
A
- Promote a particular cause they believe will benefit society
- Altruistic over self-interest
- Environmental groups e.g. Greenpeace USA
- Gun control groups e.g. Everytown for Gun Safety
- Civil liberties groups e.g. Amrican Civil Liberties Union
13
Q
Interest/Sectional groups
A
- Defend and advance specific interests of members
- Unions - AFL-CIO
- Business or Trade groups - US Chamber of Commerce
- Professional Organisations - American Bar Association
- Social groups - NAACP
- Religious groups - Christian Coalition for America
14
Q
US Chamber of Commerce
A
- Worlds largest business organisation
- Represent interests of > 3 million businesses - all sizes, sectors, regions
Methods: Advocacy, Lobbying
15
Q
American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organisations
A
- Voluntary federation of 55 national & international labor unions
- Represent 12.5 million
- Strive for fair treatment, decent wages and benefits, safe jobs, dignity, and equal opportunities
Methods: Provide research to policy-makers, oversee unions, perform union provisions
16
Q
NAACP
A
- Ensure political, educational, social, and economic equality of all
- Strive for equal rights, eliminate race prejudice
- Remove racial barriers through democratic processes
Methods: lobbying, lawsuits, marches, rallies, non-violent civil disobedience, “zap” actions (public demonstrations to embarrass a public figure), fund PACs, endorse candidates
17
Q
American Bar Association
A
- Provide law school accreditation, continue legal education, assist lawyers in work
- Defend liberty and deliver justice
- National representatives of legal profession
Methods: Advice government (e.g. SC nominees), advocacy
18
Q
National Rifle Association
A
- Defends right to bare arms
Methods: Provides political funding, lobbying, mobilises grassroots support
19
Q
Mothers Against Drink Driving
A
- End drunk driving, fight drugged driving, support vicitms, prevent underage drinking
Methods: fundraising, lobbying, monitor court cases
20
Q
National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL)
A
- Pro-choice organisation, oppose restrictions on abortion and efforts to exapnd access
Methods: Petitions, Lobbying, Marches, Endorsements, PACs
21
Q
ACLU
A
- Non-profit organisation, defends rights and liberties of the Constitution and laws
Methods: Provides representation in legal cases, lobbying
22
Q
Common Cause
A
- Non-partisan, grassroots organistion, protects and strengthens democracy at local, state and national level
- Strive for open, honest and accountable gov that serves public interest, equal rights, opportunity and representation, encourage participation
Methods: Provide research, write letters, lobbying, legal action, raise public awareness
23
Q
Sierra Club
A
- Environmental organisation
Methods: Direct Action, protests, petitions, media attention
24
Q
Functions of pressure groups: Representation
A
- Citizens have views represented and grievances publicised
- Link public & politicians
- Easy route for ordinary citizens to voice opinions
- Represent views at all levels of gov, don’t have to individually call each respresentative
25
Functions of pressure groups: Participation
- Increase opportunity for participation between elections
- Political participation seen as a virtue in USA - Americans seek greater & more frequent process
- Participate in specific policy area - pro-guns, anti-abortion, pro-environment, anti-war
26
Functions of pressure groups: Education
- Educate public opinion
- Warn of dangers if not addressed, likely effects of gov decisions
- Raise awareness of problems and propose solutions
27
Functions of pressure groups: Agenda building
- Influnece agenda of parties, legislators, bureaucrats
- Bring together different parts of society w/ common interest
28
Examples of pressure groups agenda building
The Sunrise Movement:
- Youth-led political movement
- 2018 - Multiple sit-ins in office of Speaker Pelosi and Jim McGovern:
Nov 13 - over 250 occupied Pelosi's office, 51 arrested
Dec 10 - Hundreds occupied offices, 138 arrested
- Pelosi reinstated House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis in response, mandate to draft Green New Deal legislation
29
Functions of Pressure Groups: Programme Monitoring
- Scrutinise and hold gov to account in implementation of policies
- Ensure promises fulfilled, policies delivered and regulation enforced
30
Examples of pressure groups programme monitoring
- BCRA 2002 (McCain-Feingold Act) - Campaign Finance Institute commissioned studies on the act's impact of campaign funding
- NRA & ACLU sometimes bring cases to state and federal court, ask judiciary to measure effects of legislation as a result of monitoring
- ACLU first to challenge Trump's muslim ban (90 day ban on entry to US from 7 majority-muslim countries)
31
Traditional Social Movements
- Began 19th century
- Campaigned for political and economic change
- Made significant gains 20th century
- Women's, labour, & civil rights movements
32
New Social Movements (c20th)
- 1960s onwards
- Environment, anti-nuclear
33
c21st Social Movements
- Grown, largely due to social media
- Can begin from a simple hashtag, activists use to organise & recruit at little cost
- "Start-up" social movements - mobilise large numbers of voters, dominate political agenda
- Occupy, #MeToo, BLM, March For Our Lives, youth climate movement
34
Methods: Electoral Campaigning
- Endorse candidates
- Campaign donations - hard money limited
- Voting "scorecards"
- 2018 - League of Conservation Voters spent $85 mn. on electoral spending - largest single issue group - aimed to win back House for Dems, 60 new candidates elected
35
EMILY's List
- Est. 1985, aims to elect pro-choice women to office
- Recruit candidates, support campaign through whole process, get out the vote
- Provide crucial early funding to grow and attract further donations
- Spent $37 mn. 2018, record no. of female Congress members
- 2020 - $5.5 mn. on digital ads for Harris, first female VP, 7 new endorsed candidates elected to House
36
Voting scorecards
- Show voters how candidates score on certain key policies
- US Chamber of Commerce - record in advancing pro-business policies
- NRA - grade A to F based on voting record on gun rights
- League of Conservation Voters - "dirty dozen" with worst environmental records - 5 from federal defeated, 6 from state defeated 2020, + "Dirtiest of all Time" President Trump
37
Methods: Lobbying
- Influencing members of executive or legislature
- Share detailed knowledge of policy area, useful source
- Convince officials to adopt favourable positions
- Right to lobby protected by constitution - 1st amend right to "petition the government for a redress or grievances"
38
Lobbying - Insider contacts
- Many offices in Washington DC - access fed gov and Congress
- Develop relationships with officials, persuaded to introduce or support legislation
- Meet key officials - cabinet officers, senior agency figures
- Reps. from JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs >350 meetings w/ fed agencies 2010-12, writing reg. for banking sector in response to financial crisis
- Build relationship with staff - influence bosses
- Some also work at state level
39
Lobbying - Professional Lobbyists
- Professional firms clustered around "K-Street" in DC - "K-Street corridor of influence"
- 2019 - $3.5 bn. on federal lobbying
- lobbying on Mexico and Canada Trade deal 2019, record $3.51 bn. lobbying for Obamacare 2010
- One study estimated lobbying spending by US corporate groups led to $90 mn. of subsidies for businesses
40
Lobbying - Revolving Door Syndrome
- Lobbying firms hiring lobbyists who have previously worked within executive or Congress
- Pre-existing contacts, may return to political careers later
- Eugene Scalia - worked in Bush Jr. Admin, then lobbied for US Chamber of Commerce representing Chevron, Facebook and Goldman Sachs, Sec. of Labor 2019
41
Regulation of Lobbying
Lobbying Disclosure Act 1995: requires registration and reporting of activity of lobbying firms
Honest Leadership and Open Government Act 2007:
- quarterly reports
- expanded disclosure obligations
- restricted gifts and travel provided by lobbyists to gov official
- civil penalties and criminal sanctions for non-compliance
42
Elitism of professional lobbying
- Pressure Groups with deep pockets able to buy more influence - US CoC spends most on lobbying, $77 mn. 2019 - convinced Congress to pass USMC Agreement after meeting 36 members
- CoC could not convince Trump to reverse tariffs on goods from China and the EU + steel and aluminium imports
43
Trump and lobbyists
- 2016 campaign, promised to "drain the swamp" (populist rhetoric)
- After 2 years in office, had hired 281 lobbyists, 4x no. Obama appointed in 6 years
- Close ties to practising professional lobbyists - Pam Bondi (AG), Susie Wiles (WH CoS) and Duffy (Transp Sec)
44
Ballard Partners
- Founder Brian Ballard names by Politico as most powerful lobbyist during Trump 1.0 admin
- Spent years lobbying Florida state government on behalf of The Trump Organisation (500 business entities owned by Trump)
- Raised millions of Trumps presidential campaigns
- Gained 100 clients in less than 2 years after Trump elected, earned $28 mn.
- FIrm used by Amazon, American Airlines, General Motors
- Many lobbyists have worked for prev. govs - Jamie Rubin, assistant Sec of State for Clinton
45
Pressure Groups using the Court
- Target area of law, support cases
- May lose in lower courts and appeal up to USSC, seek landmark ruling
- NAACP - Brown v Topeka 1954
- ACLU - Obergefell v Hodges 2015
46
Pressure Groups targeting state law
- Target state law eroding previous ruling by SC
Planned Parenthood, Health provider and non-profit, defending Roe v Wade 1973:
- Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992) - filed suit against Pen. govenor, enacted abortion restrictions based on leg. passed by state. Right to abortion upheld, 1 restriction struck down
- 2019 - legal challenges against highly restrictive Alabama, Geogia, Indiana and Ohio
47
Pressure Groups holding executive to account
- Challenging actions in court
- ACLU 56 legal challenged agsint Trump 2017-18:
- Ban on immigrants from maj-Muslim countries, halted by fed court 2017, allowed by SC 2018 after modifications
- Ban on transgender people in military 2017 - halted by fed. court, allowed by SC
48
Amicus Curiae Briefs
- Submit information to court cases
- Do not need to be involved in case, can ask lawyers to write briefs on behalf
- Amicus Curiae = "friends of the court" - set out evidence or research to influence justices
- Can be submitted by anyone interested in case
- "Green briefs" if non-governmental - printed in green booklets
49
Impact of amicus curiae briefs - number
No. submitted increased:
- 1950s average 1 per SC case
- Record 16 per case 2019-2020
- More to landmark rulings - Brown 6, Obergefell 148
50
Influence of amicus curiae briefs
- Some referred to by justices in written opinions
- 2019-20 - justices mentioned 10% green briefs submitted
- American Legion v American Humanist Association (2019) - ruled war memorial in shape of cross was constitutional - Bader Ginsburg quoted brief submitted by Jewish War Veterans of the US to support dissent, Kavanaugh wrote of respect for brief but voted against
51
Extent to which amicus curiae briefs are elitist
- Can give voice to people otherwise overlooked, e.g. Jewish war veterans
- More likely to be cited if written by legal experts - favours specialist groups - ACLU, NACDL
- 2019-20 - 40% cited green briefs from specialist PG's
- Expensive to write - more effective if wealthy
- Financial contributors must be published - 2018 SC rejected brief by US Alcohol Policy Alliance as some crowdfunding donors anonymous
52
Grassroots campaigning
- "Grassroots" = membership
- Pay membership fees, campaign
- Contact representatives & gov officials - communications "blitz" to demonstrate mass support, officials keen to secure support
- Organise petitions or fundraising drives
- Share advertising or social media campaigns
- Marches and demonstrations
53
Direct Action of Pressure Groups
- Methods that go beyond standard constitutional methods of campaigning
- Direct Action - pressuring executive to force concessions
- Conventional - petitions, letter-writing campaigns - persuade legislators to adopt agenda
54
Direct Action in the civil rights movement
- 1950s and 60s, non-violent protest inspired by Indian independence leader Mahatma Ghandi
- "Sit-ins" in segregated "white-only" areas
- Bus companies - pressure on companies to desegregate
- 1963 - 250,000 attended "March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom"
55
Direct Action around the Vietnam War
- Vietnam War late 60s/early 70s
- Students for a Democratic Society, the National Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy
- Public protests - 500,000 in NYC 1967
- Illegal civil disobediene - Marching on Pentagon, breaking through police lines, blocking access to recruitment offices
- Protests from Vietnam Veterans against the War - 800 veterans threw medals in front of the Capitol, occupied Statue of Liberty
56
21st century direct action groups
- Black Lives Matter
- the Women's March
- March for Our Lives
- #MeToo
57
Effectiveness of direct action - publicity
- Generates publicity and media attention
- May alienate policy-makers or public
- Particularly negative if violent - most groups restrict to non-violent civil disobedience
58
Effectiveness of direct action - violence
- Leaders cannot prevent cause becoming linked to violence - mass mobilisations spiral
- Huge demonstrations and street protests from BLM since 2013
- 2020 - demonstrations in >140 cities across USA, defying Covid mandates - some peaceful, some rioting, looting, arson and violence against police
59
Effectiveness of direct action - response to violence
- Curfews, tear gas, smoke grenades, rubber bullets, arrested journalist covering riots
- "When the looting starts the shooting starts" - Trump, threatened to send in military to end riots
- Made publicly visible same attitudes that BLM condemned as racist
- Public and celebrity support, Air Force General CQ Brown Jr shared experience as African-American in military
- Statues of Confederate figures defaced or pulled down, international debate around glorifying racist individuals
60
Using violence to pressure executives
- Weatherman organisation, faction of Students for a Democratic Society
- Bombing campaign 1969 to destroy "US Imperialism"
- Bombed government sites, aimed to bring down gov via revolutionary means
- Pursued into hiding by FBI's anti-terrorist task force
- Easier for executive to maintain policy - violence easy to discredit
61
Jan 6 insurrection as direct action
- Failed mob insurrection at the Capitol
- Protecting incumbent executive at expense of democracy
- Trump - "If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore" - executive approval
62
Pressure Groups funding campaigns
2018:
- Democrat congressman Dan Lipinski, pro-life Catholic, supported by pro-life group the Susan B Anthony List
- Spent $100,000 on Lipinski's primary, members canvassed 17,000 homes
- Lipinski won by 2000 votes, SBA List seen as crucial
63
Tactics of the NRA
- 5 million members, most powerful PG
- Funds electoral campaigns - 1992 37% of congressional campaign spending to Dems, 98% on Reps 2016
- Opposes moderate Reps in primaries - 2012 spent $167,000 opposing Senator Richard Lugar, rated F
- Supports some Blue Dog Dems - Henry Cuellar
- 2018 - Blue Dog PAC returned donation from NRA after criticism
63
Impact of NRA's electoral spending
- 2016 election season - spent $52.5 mn. on campaigning
- Funded TV and radio ads - 1 in 8 TV ads in Ohio in October
- Revenue from membership fell 2016-18 - successful electing Rep Pres. & Senate
- Spent half on 2018 midterms than 2014 midterms
- Gun Control groups - Giffords, Everytown for Gun Safety - outspent NRA for first time 2018
64
NRA and Trump
- Spent $30 mn. promoting Trump's presidential campaign 2016
- 2018 - Trump accused Rep Senator of not including age limit on bill for background checks on guns because he was "afraid of the NRA" - high school shooting at Parkland, Florida
- March 2019 - Trump admin introduced national ban on bump stocks (make semi-auto rifles fire faster) - NRA "disappointed"
65
NRA 2020 spending
- $29 mn. total, $16 mn. on Trump
- Total spending fell since 2016 - faced legal challenges over alleged financial impropriety
66
Funding of Federal Politicians
- Most funds on presidential candidates in relevant elections
- Heavy spending on influential members of Congress - high-profile party members, committee chairs, rising stars
- Senate increasingly more donations than House - 2020 spent $1500 mn. on each Senate race, $700 mn. on House
- Senators 6 year terms, better investment, + greater individual influence, fewer & more power
- 96% of NRA's 2016 budget on 6 Senators + presidential
67
Funding of Washington insiders
- Insiders maintain status quo to benefit on PG
- Difficult for outsiders to break through
- Favours candidates pro-business & establishment
- Hillary Clinton raised $1.2 bn., anti-establishment Washington outsider Trump $600 mn. - Clinton lost - limits to power of money of PG's
68
Pressure Groups reinforcing incumbency
- Tendency to fund insiders reinforces incumbency advantage
- Incumbents higher profile, have record to run on, existing relationship with constituents
- Incumbents easier to attract campaign donations - advantage buying ads and promotional literature
- Incumbency re-election rates ~90%
69
Iron Triangles
- Interest groups, Congress and executive bound in network of mutual advantage
- Interest groups influence Congress & executive - donations. Some large employment in congressional districts
- Congress responsible for funding exec. deps, produce laws over dept. - gov incentive to develop policy Congress approves
- Congress influences interest groups - passes legislation affecting them, oversight of activity in committees
- Exec create regulations interest groups must follow
- Exec set policy agenda + determine how fed. bureaucracy will implement laws
70
Development of the military-industrial complex
- Eisenhower 1961 warned "military-industrial complex" growing too powerful, could lead to def. and foreign policy not in public interest
- Large armaments industry grew 1950s
- Small no. of huge def. firms become part of military infrastructure - Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman
71
Military-industrial complex today
- Def. companies spend millions on prof. lobbysits to convince Congress to support objectives
- Lockheed Martin (largest) - $14 mn. per year on prof. lobbysits
- Industry dominated by handful of huge companies, operate in many states and congressional districts
- Influence over Congress members, keen to ensure companies receive gov contracts to secure employment for constituents
- Lockheed Martin claimed programme to build F35 fighter jet (most expensive weapons system) would create 125,000 jobs over 46 states
72
Military-industrial complex - lobbying congress members
- Donate millions to campaigns - $30 million 2018
- Spread across many states and districts - maximise influence
- Substantial donations to members of defence committees
- Joe Courtney (D, CT-2) chair of Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, oversees naval and marine corps contracts - def contractors biggest contributors to 2019-20 fundraising - Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Raytheon - "two subs Joe" - secured funding for two submarines a year in district
73
Military-industrial complex - insider trading
- Members of Congress personal investments in def companies
- 2019 - 52 members/spouses combined $2.3-$5.8 mn. - profited directly if contracts awarded
- incl. 1/3 of Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defence - decides funding given to US DoD to spend on contracts
- Senator Roy Blunt $100,000 stock in Lockheed Martin, member of subcommittee awarded $1.85 bn. contract to company 2020
74
Iron Triangle of the military-industrial complex
- Defence companies integral to economies of many states
- Fed gov strong incentive to ensure they prosper
- Lockheed Martin "Too big to fail" - made itself essential to so many weapons systems it was militarily and economically imperative for gov to continue support with large contracts
75
Military-industrial complex - Revolving door syndrome
- Revolve between big contractors and the Pentagon
- Patrick Shanahan previously Boeing's Sr. VP - deputy Def Sec. 2017, acting def sec. 2019. - overaw def spending benefitting Boeing - 20 contracts worth $13.7 bn. in Sep 2018 alone
76
Big Pharma and Congress
- Big Pharmaceutical companies pursue strong links with Food & Drug Admin. (FDA) - fed agency to regulate pharma
- Focus on committtee members - House Energy Subcommittee on Health chair Anna Eshoo (D) received $100,000s from pharma and health companies 2020 cycle
-
77
Big Pharma and the Executive
- Revolving door
- Scott Gottlieb worked for FDA 2005-07, worked for sev. pharma companies 2007-17, head of FDA 2017-19, joined board of directors for Pfizer 2019
78
Pressure Groups are more powerful than political parties
- Iron triangles allow large corps. and interest groups to influence executive and Congress
- Campaign donations and prof. lobbyists allow PG's to influence Congress members & President
- Corps. provide essential jobs - "too big to fail"
- "Revolving door" - some PG's close relationship w/ Congress and executive
- Large, well organised PG's more focussed than large "big tent" parties, contain conflicting ideas
79
Political Parties are more influential than Pressure Groups
- Parties formulate policy for all areas of gov, not just specific sector/issue
- Select and support electoral candidates for leg. and pres.
- Legislative power in Congress
- Determine fed. gov. policy if hold presidency
80
81
"Hard money"
- Donations to a particular candidate
- Regulated and limited by FEC
82
"Soft money"
- Given to party or PAC, not used for election of specific candidates
- Can be used for "party-building" activities
- No limits to contributions
- Presure groups can make unlimited independent expenditures
83
"Independent expenditures"
- Money spent on campaigning to elect or defeat a candidate, w/out involvement (independent) of any party or candidate
- No restriction on use by pressure groups
84
Political Action Committees (PACs)
- Raises money for direct purpose of electing/defeating candidates
- Support other political campaigns for leg. or initiatives
- Make direct "hard-money" contributions to candidates
- Donations to a PAC limited to $5000 per donation per year
85
Super PAC
- Type of PAC that only deals with independent expenditures
- Raise and spend unlimited amounts of money for political campaigning
- Forbidden from making direct contributions to candidates or parties
- Sheldon Adelson and wife donated $100 mn. to con Super PACs 2020 - $75 mn. to Preserve America (anti-Biden) and $50 mn. to Senate Leadership Fund
86
Citizens United v FEC (2010)
- Landmark ruling, SC split 5-4 on ideological lines
- Ruled 1st amend. rights of free speech applies to corporations, unions and PG's in same way as individuals
- Spending money on political campaigning seen as free speech
- Allowed corporations and PG's to spend unlimited amounts on political campaigning, provided independent expenditure
87
Consequences of Citizens United
- Led to creation of Super PACs
- Spend unlimited amounts on independent expenditures to camapaign for/against political candidates
- 2020 - spent $1.8 bn. - $250 mn. by con Senate Leadership Fund, $225 mn. by lib Senate Majority PAC - 50-50 split
- 2016 $215 mn. on Clinton, Trump $85.5 mn.
88
PACs and Super PACs have too much influence in US elections
- Right to spend unlimited amounts, bypass campaign finance restrictions
- Funded by tiny minority of citizens - 1% provided 2/3 2016
- Super PACs increased spending on US elections
- Few wealthy indiv. make enormous contributions, buy influence in politics
- Donations transform campaigns of indiv. members, legislators vote in interest of financial backers not public
- Increased influence reduced importance of parties
89
PACs and Super PACs do not have too much influence in US elections
- USA pluralist - PG's must be able to participate fully
- Represent broader range of issues than covered by party platforms & diverse range of groups
- One of largest increases in total election spending 2004-08, predacted Super PACs - Obama set precedent by refusing matching funds
- Large donations do not guarantee victory - 2016
- Public hold members of Congress to account in elections - must vote with public interest in mind
- Spending helps campaigns of parites - raise and spend lots in US elections - 2020 RNC $500 mn. DNC $325 mn.
90
Debates around power of pressure groups
- Agreement that PG's important for pluralism and participation
- Clinton and Biden promised to work to reverse Citizens United via constitutional amendment
- Reps accuse Dems of hypocrisy - PAC spending often greater
- Reps support Citizens United upholding 1st amend rights, freed wealthy corp. Reps to make unl. ind. expend.
- 2018 - 75% supported constitutional amendment to reverse Citizens United, incl. 66% Reps
- "Dependence corruption" - legislators prioritise needs of donors on whom they are dependent, framers wanted members to be dependent on the people
91
Pressure Groups in USA are too powerful
- Elitist - well funded groups and large corps. greater influence than smaller groups more rep. of society
- Revolving door, iron triangles, extraordinary influence Congress
- Growing use of amicus curiae briefs in SC cases favours wealthy groups, afford legal experts
- C.U. increased PG's funding elections - elitist & unpopular
- Reinforces incumbency, lead to dependence corruption
- Undermine role of political parties
92
Pressure Groups in USA are not too powerful
- Essential to pluralist society
- Social movements cheap and effective alternative
- Right to lobby protected by 1st, lobbying industry regulated
- Access =/= influence
- legislators/exec use specialist info provided by PG's to write better laws and regulations, scrutinise exec/Congress
- Legislators accountable to voters, make decisions in interest
- Challenges policy, uses landmark rulings to update constitution and improve civil rights
- Provide info for voters e.g. scorecards
- Direct action puts important issues on agenda, lasting change
- Tend to support party best serving interest, contribute to "big tent" parties
