US pressure groups

Question 1

what is political pluralism

Answer 1

US intented to be pluralist society
right to deliver pluralism by inducing politicians to take account of ideas across society- disagreement healthy

Question 2

insider and outsider groups

Answer 2

insider: close ties with gov, well funded e.g. NRA
outsider: no close links. try to influence gov through public pressure e.g. Climate Direct Action

Question 3

promotional and interest groups

Answer 3

promotional: particular cause for society- altruism not self interest e.g. Greenpeace USA
interest: represents interests of members e.g. NAACP- people from same social group

Question 4

electoral campaigning

Answer 4

endores candidates by encouring public to vote
donate- e.g. 2018 League of Conservation Votes spent $85m on campaigning and won HoR back for Ds- 60 of their candidates elected
scorecards- e.g. League of Conservation ‘dirty dozen’- politicans with worst environmental records. 2020 5 of these defeated

Question 5

emily’s list

Answer 5

elect pro-choice D women to office- $37m on 2018 elections

Question 6

lobbying

Answer 6

influence exec/leg members and convince them to adopt positions- 1st amendment- petition gov for a redress of grievances

Question 7

proffessional lobbyists

Answer 7

2019 over $3.47b on federal lobbying usually key issues
e.g. lobbied gov regarding Trump trade deal with Mexico and Canada

Question 8

revolving door syndrome

Answer 8

lobbying firms hire those previously worked with executive or congress- take advantage of contacts, then return to exec roles
e.g. Eugene Scalia worked with Bush administration before lobbying for US chamber of commerce, then secretary of labor 2019

Question 9

elitism in lobbying

Answer 9

lobbying must be disclosed
however rich firms buy influence e.g. US chamber of commerce spends more on lobbying than any org. However, still couldn’t convince Trump to reverse tarriffs on China and EU goods

Question 10

pressure groups legal challenges

Answer 10

target area of law to see change e.g. NAACP funded Brown v Topeka 1954- “seperate but equal” unconstitutional.

hold exec to account by challenging actions e.g. Trump ban on immigrants from muslim maj countries halted by federal court 2017

Question 11

amicus curiae briefs

Answer 11

submit info to cases- evidence hoping to sway justices.
e.g. 1950s avg. case one brief. 2019 16 briefs.
e.g. American Legion v America Humanist Association 2019- RBG quoted brief by Jewish War veterns in her dissent of allowing war memorial in shape of cross

Question 12

grassroots

Answer 12

get members to contact congress showing mass support (email, social media e.t.c)
encourage marches and demonstrations

Question 13

direct action

Answer 13

public pressure to force concessions
e.g. 1950s and 60s, Afr Ame sit ins in segregated areas- 1963 250,000 “march on washington for jobs and freedoms”

Question 14

ineffectiveness of direct action

Answer 14

link the cause to violence
e.g. Weatherman- bombing campaign 1969 to destroy ‘US imperialism’-focus on gov sites. however, violence easier to discredit so easier for exec to maintain policy

Question 15

effectiveness of direct action

Answer 15

Keystone Pipeline XL
2011 activists sit in in front of white house, most got arrested
last 2 weeks of August- congress break so no distraction for news coverage
Obama vetoed R legislation for the XL pipeline 2015

Question 16

PG funding of elections

Answer 16

2018 Dan Lipinski pro-life D support from pro life group SBA list who spent $100,000 campaigning against another pro-choice D. Lipinski won by 2000 votes

Question 17

funding of washington insiders

Answer 17

spend mainly on 2 main pres candidates and main senate.
e.g. 2020 $1.5b senate, $700m HoR- 6 year term so more influence
e.g. 96% NRA budget on 6 senate races and pres campaign
However, Clinton insider, Trump outsider and Clinton raised far more

Question 18

PG spending reinforcing incumbency

Answer 18

fund insiders= incumbency reinforced.
higher profile, record, easier to attract donations e.g. over 90% congress people who run again are victorious

Question 19

iron triangles

Answer 19

1. PGs donate to senate races and friendly legislation in return
2. Congress fund exec depts. and get execution of policies in return
3. Exec create PG regs and gain support back

Question 20

example of Iron Triangle

Answer 20

pharmacuetical companies strong links with FDA who regulate drugs- focus attention on congress committees.
Scott Gottlieb worked with FDA 2005-2007, then pharmacuetical companies 2007-2017, then back to head of FDA

Question 21

PACs

Answer 21

PGs spend millions through PACs- hard money donations
can only donate $5000 to PAC per year, and PAC cand’t give over $5000 to candidate’s campaign

Question 22

Super-PACs

Answer 22

can spend unlimited on campaigning but not direct
PGs donate unlimited to super PACs.
e.g. 2020 super PACs $1.8b

Question 23

arguments for PACs having much influence

Answer 23

1. funded by tiny minority- less than 1% americans= 2/3 candidate funding 2016
2. wealthy donors buy influence e.g. Sheldon Adelson $100m+ to super PACs 2020
3. election campaigns transformed by donations from PACs so legislators may vote in interests of PAC

Question 24

arguments against PACs having much influence

Answer 24

1. pluralist society- PGs should be able to fully participate
2. large donations dont = victory e.g. 2016 spent $129m more on Clinton
3. PGs rep broader range of issues than those in party platforms and more diverse range of groups

Question 25

arguments for pressure groups too powerful

Answer 25

1. elitist- well funded more influence than smaller
2. revolving door
3. donations through PACs

Question 26

arguments against pressure groups too powerful

Answer 26

1. pluralism essential - lobbying is a right
2. PGs help defend cons. liberties e.g. NRA
3. funding- free speech. is regulated and doesnt always sway election e.g. Trump 2016