The role of special interest groups in American politics has been highly contentious. The national interest is a amalgam of varying private interests all vying for attention on the national stage. Instead of encouraging citizen involvement, special interest groups have magnified the fissures of the American political system. In this paper, I will discuss the role that special interest group play in public policy, examine the campaign reform movement and the pro’s and con’s.
Interest groups were a concern that the Founding Fathers had since the founding of our nation. Modern day citizens hold the sentiment that democracy in American politics is being shaped by special interest groups. According to the NCSL (National Conference of State Legislatures), the flow of money potentially can motivate politicians to serve special interests (rather than their constituency) or powerful campaign donors and large financial contributions could sway an electoral candidate to vote a certain way. The magnitude of the donations has filled headlines and even reached the Supreme Court in the case of Citizens United and McCutcheon v. Federal Election commission. The Economist claims that the “most expensive Senate election in the nation’s history” occurred in the 2014 North Carolina Senate election between Kay Hagan and Thom Tillis, therefore it doesn’t look like this issue is going away any time soon
Etzioni (1985) describes interest groups as having “a narrow social base, concentrate on limited issues and benefit mainly their own members” as opposed to constituency-representing organizations. The majority of interest groups hire lobbyists who advocate on their behalf. Lobbyists are paid, well-connected experts who may have served in the federal government and have accumulated a valuable roster of contacts and may serve as consultants with the very people who they are now lobbying for. Lobbyists testify at committee hearings, provide staff with key information and have keen insight into legislation and how it may potentially impact a politician’s key constituency. Often, lobbyists testify before administrative hearings (on behalf of their client), submit comments or file briefs (“amicus curiae”) and are involved in the drafting of regulations. Interest groups can influence public policy through advocacy and public campaigns.
Since 1975, political action committees (PAC) have grown tremendously (Etzioni 1985:177). Their main purpose of organizing is to raise money to elect and defeat candidates, representing business, labor or ideological interests. PAC’s can affect public policy by initiating ballot initiatives and pooling donations to redistribute resources to candidates, parties and other PAC’s.
The government gridlock and polarization has become apparent leading many to view interest groups with disdain as they are portrayed by the general masses as influencing legislators who are supposed to serve their entire constituencies and not just the elites who provide large donations to their political activities.
Foley and Edwards (1996) describes Robert Putnam’s “Bowling Alone” essay as an important turning point since the 1960’s the decline of social trust and social and civic-minded organizations has led to decreased voter turnout and general apathy. Interest groups are one way of exercising society’s capacity for mutually beneficial collective action. Our associations to unite based on mutual interests for the greater good of communities is what distinguishes our nation.
One drawback of interest group is the influence that accompanies money on various levels. According to the Center for American Progress, a progressive think tank, studies have demonstrated that a significant percentage of campaign contributions have resulted in gaining special favors. (Craig & Madland 2014) They point to studies that demonstrate increased lobbying has been shown to reduce a corporations’ effective tax rate. Essentially, $1 corporate campaign contribution translates to $6.65 in lowered state corporate taxes. It is these type of economic policy that has stirred public anger toward special interest groups and the privileged access to legislative agendas that have increased polarization and highlighted the increasing role that interest group play in the democratic process.
One movement that has been gaining steam to reverse the changes that money is influencing in American politics has been campaign finance reform. Campaign finance seeks to reduce the potential for corruption and alter the image that the American political system is corrupted by money.
Some ways that states can regulate campaign finance is through contribution limits, public financing and public disclosure (electronic). As there is no uniform standard of expenditure reporting, there is variation in reporting requirements. Limiting how much campaign contributions is just one strategy to regulate money in politics.
WORKS CITED
“Campaign Finance Reform: An Overview.” (2011, Oct 3) National Conference of State Legislatures. Accessed 2014, Dec. 1. Retrieved at http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/campaign-finance-an-overview.aspx
Craig, J. & Madland, D. (2014, May 2). “How Campaign Contributions and Lobbying Can Lead to Inefficient Economic Policy.” Center for American Progress. Web.
Etzioni, A. (1985). Special interest groups versus constituency representation. Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, 8, 171-195.
Foley, M.W., & Edwards, B. (1996). The paradox of civil society. Journal of democracy, 7(3), 38-52.
Lexington. Two Depressing Thoughts. (2014, Nov. 7). The Economist. Web.
