Text Book - Pressure Groups Flashcards
1
Q
introduction
A
- the intricate system of checks and balances and separation of powers created a system open to external influence - encouraging the formation of pressure groups
- the constitution created a number of access points, at both state and federal level, along with a political system that encouraged political participation and an active public, in order better hold politicians to account
- there’s a common US view that you have ‘to pay to play’ whereby wealthy individuals and groups can manipulate the political system in their favour
- the 2012 election costed more than $6 billion
2
Q
access points
A
- large number of access points open to pressure groups
- federalist nature of the US system enables groups to advance their interests to the executive and legislature at both state and federal levels
- they can also challenge decisions in the courts, try and influence the outcome of pre-election primaries
3
Q
expanding federal government
A
- the expansion in the size of federal government and the degree of regulatory control over businesses, a number of groups have been founded to advance the interests of businesses, consumers, and workers alike, in order to shape the policy framework to their advantage
- the US Chamber of Commerce claims to represent the interests of more than 3 million businesses, while the AFL-CIO combines 57 trade union groups, representing over 12 million workers in the USA
4
Q
increasing partisanship
A
- the increasingly adversarial nature of US politics has contributed to the growth of ideological and issue-based pressure groups
- there has been a growth in the number of partisan think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, which aims to ‘build a stronger’, more vigourous conservative movement’, or the liberal Centre for American Prgoress, which in contrast is committed to ‘progressive ideas and actions’
- the ideological divisions over a range of social issues have led to the creation of antithetical pressure groups
- e.g. NARAL Pro-chioce America champions a woman’s right to abortion, whilst the National Right to Life Committee works against measure which allow abortions
5
Q
scrutiny
A
- there has been an overall growing distrust of politicians which has led to the growth of public interest groups aimed to improve political scrutiny, as well as issue-centre groups looking to inform the electorate about the voting records and policy positions of politicians
- e.g. the Centre for Responsive Politics tracks the influence of money and lobbying activity on elections and public policy making.
- similarly, the League of Conservation Voters publishes a ‘Dirty Dozen’ report every two years of those politicians with the worst environmental track record, 11 of which were defeated in the 2012 election cycle
6
Q
Methods and Strategies: electioneering
Funding
A
- much of the electioneering in the USA is paid for by countless pressure and advocacy groups
- all of whom seek to influence how voters view the candidates, indirectly shaping voters’ opinions of candidates
- there has been a growth of these funding vehicles since the introduction of electoral funding laws - they can maximise their funding power
- 527s have arisen form exploiting loopholes (ambiguity in the law) in the funding regulatory system, allowing them to avoid the restrictions, following successful legal challenges about the constitutionality of such funding regulations
- the proliferation of 527 groups and SuperPACs due to their ability to collect unlimited amount of money/donations
- the Washington Post claimed that SuperPACs contributed 80% of Romney’s advertising spending in the 2012 presidential race - such as $104 million spent by ‘American Crossroads’
- Evidence of this: the liberal Centre for American Progress has been claimed to be the keystone of the Obama administration, and a Time magazine article from 2008 claimed that ‘not since the Heritage Foundation helped guide Ronald Reagan’s transition in 1981 has a single outside groups held so much money’
- NRA donated $4,950 to John Barrow in the most recent election (but he lost) and $9,900 to Thad Cochran and $32,000 to Republican National Committee
7
Q
Political Action Committees
A
- the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974 (FECA) limited campaign donations to candidates
- following this, the number of PACs increased dramatically, offering a way around this legislation
- although the maximum contribution to a PAC was $5000, donations could be made to an unlimited number of PACs
- the Federal Election Commission recorded that as of 2012 there were nearly 4600 PACs registers in the USA
8
Q
influence of PACs
A
- rise of PACs has led to the growth of electoral expenditure and given greater influence to pressure groups
- examples suggesting they go some way to influence decisions of lawmakers:
- 2 months following the Newtown shooting the Federal Election Commission disclosed that the NRA had raised $2.7 million through its PAC. In addition, the Sunlight Foundation highlighted how 42 of the 45 Senators who subsequently opposed gun control measures in 2013, to extend background checks, received funds from gun lobbyists. The NRA alone had contributed over $800,000 to 40 of those senators over the previous 23 years
- the Mobilisation for Healthcare for All claimed that Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman’s undermining of attempts to secure a government-funded health insurance, in the healthcare bill, claimed his stance was shaped by his acceptance of more than $1 million in campaign contributions from the medical insurance industry during his time in the Senate
analysis: PACs have great influence on legislation and where politicians stand on policy
9
Q
527s
A
- 527 groups began to appear following the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) in 2002, which effectively meant that PACs could no longer directly fund adverts which support or oppose a candidate
- they play a role in voter mobilisation efforts, by encouraging people to register to vote and to get out and vote
- it is quite partisan though it may not seem so
- the liberal EMILY’s list spent nearly $10 million in 2012 through its 527
- this targeted a key Democrat-voting group with the funding of its ‘WOMEN VOTE!’ program, which mobilised women voters in 22 races across 17 states
10
Q
SuperPACs
A
- SuperPACs have arisen as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v FEC, in January 2010, and the Speechnow.org v FEC ruling by the US Appeals Court, in July 2010, both of which served to lift many spending and contribution limits
- the proliferation of SuperPACs now raise unlimited amounts of money to influence elections
- although these PACs must publicly disclose their finances , and can’t coordinate with candidates of parties, they are free to advocate directly for or against a candidate
11
Q
impact of SuperPACs
A
- as of 2013, a total of 1,310 groups are organised as Super PACs
- SuperPACs spent over $609 million on the 2012 election cycle
- the conservative Restore our Future spent $147 million on Romney campaign and American Crossroads spent $104 million on Romney: top two Super PACs of 2012
- donations are often from the very wealthy: Billionaire Sheldon Adelson reportedly contributed £53.69 million to conservative Super PACs in 2012
12
Q
Methods and Strategies: electioneering
Endorsements
A
- pressure groups can also look to exert influence through the mobilisation of members and supporters to vote for a candidate
- the NRA Political Victory Fund, which grades and endorses candidates based on their voting records, is seen as particularly influential
- The NRA Political Victory Fund in 2008 succeeded in 203 of the 271 congressional races it was involved in, as well as having an 84% success rate in endorsing state legislative candidates
- the NRA also endorses conservative Democrat John Barrow to uphold his support for 2nd amendment rights
13
Q
Methods and Strategies: lobbying
A
- lobbying is the process through which pressure groups seek to build relations with lawmakers to secure favourable policy outcomes and influence the legislative agenda
- 12,411 registered lobbyists in 2012
- in 2012, the US Chamber of Commerce employed 183 lobbyists, who spent $136 million on lobbying activities
14
Q
impact of lobbyists on the 2010 Healthcare Act shows the influence of lobbyists on Capitol Hill…
A
- lobbyists linked to PhARMA contributed 20% of the campaign funds for Max Baucus (former chair of the Senate Finance Committee). Some argued that this influenced Baucus’ decision to exclude from discussions (about the healthcare reform in 2009) those pressure groups demanding wider healthcare coverage
15
Q
Methods and Strategies: grassroots activism
A
- the growth of the Tea Party movement over criticism of Obama’s economic policies, healthcare plans and ‘big government’ initiatives, shows the power of grassroots movements
- the 1963 march on Washington by various civil rights groups helped put pressure on congress
16
Q
Methods and Strategies: ballot initiatives
A
- pressure groups can use the federalist nature of the USA to achieve their aims
- 24 states currently allow initiatives and propositions, which put proposed laws onto the ballot at election times, meaning pressure groups are provided with a powerful way to influence the political system through direct democracy
- pressure groups can use their membership and resources to: introduce ballot initiatives, coordinate a campaign, fund a campaign, staff a campaign
- prominent examples in recent years of pressure groups success in this area:
1. ‘EqualityMaine’ led the efforts to collect 85,000 signatures in order to get ‘Question 1’ on the ballot in the 2012 election, allowing same-sex marriage in the state. The measure succeeded in overturning a previous initiative which banned same-sex marriage in 2009, with nearly 52% of the vote
2. in 2008 Proposition 8 was passed in California, which banned same-sex marriage. This saw over $82 million spent by various pressure groups
17
Q
Influence on the federal government: Legislature
A
- as chief law making body, Congress is an obvious target for pressure group activity
- securing the passage of legislation is a powerful way for pressure groups to gain influence over the political process
- the political system provides numerous access points and opportunities for pressure groups to influence the course of legislation through Congress
- as the USA has a bicameral legislature it means that pressure groups can use both the House of Representatives and the Senate to influence and shape legislation as it passes through either chamber
- the two chambers of government are often held by different parties, as was the case after the 2010 midterms, giving a pressure groups a greater chance of at least watering down legislation it disapproves of
18
Q
Influence on the federal government: Legislature
House of Representatives
A
- as the House was given the exclusive power to initiate money bills (a bill that solely concerns taxation or government spending), this makes it a significant target for groups wishing to secure a slice of the colossal annual federal budget, or those wishing to influence where the money is spent
- in this way since the Republican Party gained control of the House following the 2010 ‘Tea Party tidal wave’, the House has voted on 37 separate occasions to repeal ‘Obamacare’, with the most recent vote seeing all Republicans and just two Democrats support the measure.
- certainly the ongoing budget negotiations of 2013 show the influence of conservative groups on the House, with many Tea Party Republicans making clear their willingness to block any budget which raises taxes or provides funds for ‘Obamacare’, raising the threat of a government shutdown in the USA