Special Interests and Mass Media - AP Government and Politics

Interest groups have a wide range of processes that are intended to affect the country's laws and policies, depending on what branch of the government and what kind of law the group is trying to change. Regarding the legislative process, their chief activity in effecting change is through lobbying members of Congress to help craft and pass legislation.

Hyperpluralism is the political theory that government policy, and ability to enact laws for the good of the nation, is heavily weakened by the various competing interest groups, who all demand a say in government. Often these groups contradict one another and slow down the overall process of government policy-making.

The Taft-Hartley Act was designed to reduce the impact of labor unions in the United States and, as such, would logically have the support of many members of Congress (who answer to businessmen more than they do to the working classes), but would be less likely to have the support of the President. The Act was passed in 1947, after it was vetoed by Harry Truman, who believed the Act would enforce a type of “wage slavery” in the United States; however, Congress overturned Truman’s veto and the Act passed.

Members of an interest group all share the same position on one specific issue, whether it is religious, social, political, or moral. Their main goal is to use lobbying, media campaigns, polls, and research to influence the public in favor of their beliefs. In this way, they are able to catch the attention of presidential candidates.

Jonathan Rauch is a political and economic writer who coined the term “demosclerosis” to refer to the loss of government power in the years since World War II, more specifically to the stagnation of the ability of government to affect policy change because of the increased power of special interest groups who effectively hold the government hostage.

Pluralism asserts that the best system is one that represents as many or all possible interests. This allows for the competition of many different interests until a decision can be reached. Some of the answers may be the outcome of a success of the pluralist system. And the most wealthy option represents the elite theory.

Unlike political parties, interest groups do not in fact put forth candidates to run for public office. While they do often support and/or endorse candidates, it is considered a suspicious conflict of interest for any interest group to actually nominate a candidate. This fact also partially results from the specific nature of interest groups– because interest groups focus on only a few select issues, with a serious depth of knowledge only in these few areas, it would be quite difficult to nominate a candidate who would be merely a specialist amongst the other generalist nominees of every other political party.

Elitist theorists believe that the government is, in fact, controlled by a small circle of select elite individuals whose monetary resources allow them to reign all-powerfully behind the scenes in Washington, D.C. Due to this belief, elitist theorists therefore take a derisive view of lobbying, dismissing the practice as ineffective, corrupt, and useless. The average citizen, no matter how passionately he or she may lobby the government, is helpless to even match, let alone truly combat, the massive bases of power and influence which the elite inner circle enjoys. Large corporations and extremely wealthy individuals are able to hire entire units of highly skilled lobbyists to continually assail the government on their employers’ behalf, so that ordinary people, who have no great collection of money, perks, or influence to offer, are hopelessly drowned out. By and large, elitist theorists thus denounce lobbying as a futile practice, which only ends up benefitting those already in the best position to profit– aka the elite.

"Electioneering" is a general term that encompasses every overt but legal method by which interest groups and their lobbyists are directly involved in politics. The most frequently used electioneering tactic is the creation and organization of PACs– the majority of interest groups highly prioritize funding the electoral campaigns of candidates whom they see as somehow favorable or aligned with their cause. Other popular electioneering strategies include loaning staffers to help manage campaign efforts, sponsoring advertisements, and helping to organize rallies and other venues at which citizens are urged to demonstrate their support for a group’s preferred candidate.

James Madison wrote a great deal about interest groups (which in his day were called “factions”), which he saw as unfortunate but necessary evils whose efforts and machinations must be diligently circumvented. Madison was keenly suspicious of any and all interest groups, especially those which profess to be working for the public good– according to Madison, such claims are merely an elaborate façade meant to disguise the selfish motives which nearly every single group seeks to further. A double-edged difficulty thus faces the nation, or so Madison believed: a democratic society must not seek to silence the voices of those citizens who band together to exert their will upon their government but neither can a democratic society allow one group to ride roughshod over the rights of any other. Madison’s proposed solution involves allowing interest groups to exist but under carefully controlled conditions, with corruption minimized as much as possible and as many groups permitted to operate as is feasible, in the hopes that their vast numbers will serve as a simple system of checks and balances.

Rather than being a solution, in fact, hyperpluralists decry iron triangles as the most damaging part of the modern interest group politics. Iron triangles are more generally known as lesser governmental organizations, in which interest group leaders join with relevant government agencies and congressional members to control policy decisions and implementation. This cooperation between leaders of interest groups, agencies, and congressional committees constitutes an unfair monopoly of power– or so hyperpluralist theorists allege. Members of Congress draft and sponsor favorable laws and government agencies carry out and uphold these directives, so that by banding together, these individuals together are able to wield far-reaching control over government activities. Each of these three groups thus forms one side of the triangle, while the so-called “iron” is provided by the inflexible stores of power which the triangle’s members amass.

The correct answer is the revolving door. The iron triangle refers to the people who influence the creation of legislation. Gerrymandering involved drawing borders for electoral districts. Pork barrel and logrolling are types of legislative practices that involve trading favors to get the best outcome for one’s constituents.

There are indeed two main types of lobbyists: those who are regularly paid employees of a particular interest groups and those who are hired on a temporary basis by smaller interest groups or less prominent political figures. Lobbyists most often seek to influence members of Congress, because these politicians, in their roles as legislators, hold the most sway over governmental laws and enacted policies. In keeping with this tendency, lobbyists overwhelmingly tend to approach governmental figures who have already expressed opinions in line with their interest group’s goals– these individuals are the easiest and therefore most beneficial to win over to a group’s side. As per the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, an interest group must register ALL lobbyists in its employ with the Secretary of the Senate and must also report all of each lobbyist’s earnings.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is currently ranked as the nation’s most dominant lobby. The NRA enjoys such great influence due to its robust team of lobbyists, armed with ample funds, powerful allies (including government members and celebrities), and the support of a slew of weapons and ammunition manufacturing companies. The group’s prestige is further elevated by its lengthy roster of public supporters, many of whom consider the Second Amendment and its strict defense to be vital to the exercise of their citizenship.

While educational interests are indeed deemed important by many average Americans and their governmental representatives, education groups have so far failed to successfully scale the narrow and fiercely competitive ladder of interest group prominence. Environmental groups such as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Sierra Club enjoy widespread public support and are zealously promoted by both legislators and favorable legal rulings. Labor groups like the AFL-CIO and business groups sponsored by Google, Microsoft, and the Chamber of Commerce are all immensely influential as well. Additionally, as significant are equality groups, including the NAACP and NOW, which advocate for equal rights and representation for minorities in both the legislative and legal spheres.

Labor unions organize and lobby corporations and government to help workers get better wages, safety conditions, benefits, etc... They are often the primary group working to protect worker rights.

Grassroots has been defined as the practice of organizing people at the base level to try and influence public officials.

Lobbyists are often former congress people or people with expertise in a specific policy area. Congress people must by policy generalists, and thus may rely on lobbyists for more specific expertise on policy.

In recent years, the government has placed limitations on the amount of money one individual can contribute to a political campaign. One of the consequences of this ruling has been the increased use of bundling. Bundling is when one individual or organization campaigns for and collects contributions from a large group of people within a community.

The problem faced by most interest groups is that the majority of people who benefit from the policies of the interest group can do so without actively participating in the interest group. This is known as "The Free Rider Problem." One of the main things that interest groups try to accomplish is to convince those who benefit from their policies and goals is that it benefits them so much that it behooves them to get involved and help accelerate the movement.