Read Online [Free] relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support . We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free.
Get StartedAlready have an account? Log in
Monthly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 10 article PDFs to save and keep
Yearly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 120 article PDFs to save and keep
Log in through your institution
Purchase a PDF
Purchase this article for $34.00 USD.
How does it work?
- Select the purchase option.
- Check out using a credit card or bank account with PayPal.
- Read your article online and download the PDF from your email or your account.
journal article
Ties that count: explaining interest group access to policymakersJournal of Public Policy
Vol. 34, No. 1 [April 2014]
, pp. 93-121 [29 pages]
Published By: Cambridge University Press
//www.jstor.org/stable/43864455
Read and download
Log in through your school or library
Alternate access options
For independent researchers
Read Online
Read 100 articles/month free
Subscribe to JPASS
Unlimited reading + 10 downloads
Purchase article
$34.00 - Download now and later
Abstract
The degree to which interest groups gain access to policymakers has often been explained by focusing on the exchange of resources in a dyadic relation between interest groups and policymakers. This article argues that the position an interest group occupies within a coalition and the relations it has outside its coalition substantially affect the likelihood of gaining access to policymakers. Our empirical focus is on the Dutch interest group system for which we examine how coalitions among groups and the network position of interest groups within and between such coalitions shape access. The analysis, based on data collected among 107 Dutch interest groups and 28 policymakers, leads to the conclusion that network positions count differently for elected and non-elected officials, and that network ties that bridge different coalitions add significant explanatory leverage to resource-based explanations of access.
Journal Information
The Journal of Public Policy applies social science theories and concepts to significant political, economic and social issues and to the ways in which public policies are made. Its articles deal with topics of concern to public policy scholars in America, Europe, Japan and other advanced industrial nations. The journal often publishes articles that cut across disciplines, such as environmental issues, international political economy, regulatory policy and European Union processes.
Publisher Information
Cambridge University Press [www.cambridge.org] is the publishing division of the University of Cambridge, one of the world’s leading research institutions and winner of 81 Nobel Prizes. Cambridge University Press is committed by its charter to disseminate knowledge as widely as possible across the globe. It publishes over 2,500 books a year for distribution in more than 200 countries. Cambridge Journals publishes over 250 peer-reviewed academic journals across a wide range of subject areas, in print and online. Many of these journals are the leading academic publications in their fields and together they form one of the most valuable and comprehensive bodies of research available today. For more information, visit //journals.cambridge.org.
Rights & Usage
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Journal of Public Policy © 2014 Cambridge University Press
Request Permissions
Chapter Study Outline
Introduction
Individuals and organizations engage in political activity to pursue their interests, not only during elections, but between elections as well. Organized interests seeking access to government officials attempt both to shape policy directly and to shape public perceptions and the political environment within which policy makers must act. Interest groups also represent what James Madison called the evils of faction, representing their own interests as opposed to those of others. According to the theory of pluralism, competition among varied interests produces balance and compromise. On the other hand, because there are tens of thousands of groups in the United States, not all interests are fully and equally represented in the group universe.
- The Characteristics of Interest Groups
What are interest groups? What are the positive and negative aspects of group politics in America? What kinds of groups exist? What are their strengths and biases?- An interest group is an organized group of individuals or organizations that makes policy-related appeals to government; unlike parties, groups focus more on policies than on determining the personnel of government.
- Enhancing American democracy, interest groups educate and mobilize large numbers of people; they represent their “constituencies” by lobbying policy makers, engaging in litigation, and monitoring government programs.
- Many of the interests that spark the creation of groups directly involve people’s economic interests, including producers and manufacturers, labor organizations, and professional associations. In addition, public interest and public sector groups have grown more prevalent in recent years.
- In order to attract and keep members, groups advance certain policy goals and seek to provide direct economic or social benefits to members; all groups also need a financial structure capable of sustaining the organization.
- Interest groups facilitate cooperation among like-minded citizens despite the fact that working collectively is not always rational at the individual level.
- In The Logic of Collective Action, Mancur Olson argued that it was in an individual’s rational self-interest to be a “free rider” rather than to join a group or otherwise participate in collective efforts, and that the collective-action problem was felt most deeply by large, diverse groups.
- Interest groups provide selective benefits to group members to overcome the impediments to collective action; such selective benefits include informational, material, social, and purposive benefits.
- Informational benefits include special newsletters, periodicals, training programs, and conferences available only to group members.
- Material benefits are the special goods, services, or money provided to entice members to join groups.
- Social benefits emphasize the friendship, networking, and consciousness-raising advantages of belonging to a group.
- Purposive benefits emphasize the purposes and public policy accomplishments of the group.
- Because of the dominance of economic interests and the costs of group maintenance, the interest group universe is found to have an upper-class bias wherein educated, affluent, professional persons are more likely to join groups.
- Over time, we find that interest
groups form in response to changes in the political environment.
- The past thirty years have seen an explosion in the number of groups.
- A “New Politics” movement spawned many public interest groups aimed at causes such as environmentalism and consumer rights.
- Strategies for Influencing Policy
What are the various strategies interest groups employ to influence the policy-making process? Why do they choose certain strategies, and are those strategies effective?- Interest groups work to improve the likelihood that their policy interests will be heard and treated favorably by all branches and levels of government, and they employ multiple strategies to accomplish those aims.
- They engage in “insider strategies,” including gaining access to decision makers and using the courts, but they also engage in “outsider” strategies, wherein they go public and use electoral tactics to indirectly influence decision makers.
- Direct lobbying is an attempt to use direct contact and personal relationships with government officials to cultivate access and influence.
- Lobbyists exert influence in Congress by influencing the legislative agenda and crafting the language of legislation.
- A small portion of highly skilled and well-connected lobbyists also achieve access to the White House in their efforts to lobby the president.
- Executive branch lobbying is also important, as stakeholders attempt to influence bureaucratic rule making and implementation.
- Reformers have sought to provide stricter guidelines governing the lobbying industry in recent years.
- Groups sometimes turn to the judiciary to affect public policy, either by bringing suit themselves, by financing suits brought by others, or by filing amicus curiae briefs.
- Groups also engage in a kind of “indirect lobbying,” whereby they seek to influence policy by “going public” to mobilize public opinion; advertising, grassroots lobbying, and protest politics are all potentially successful means of going public.
- Given politicians’ reelection goals, interest groups also seek to influence policy through the electoral process.
- Political action committees [PACs] give money to candidates that share their views. Although outright bribery is rare, PAC donations do gain access for groups.
- The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 weakened parties and strengthened groups, which continue to donate to candidates and sponsor their own issue-advocacy campaigns through independent expenditures.
- In addition to money, campaign activism—whereby groups mobilize their memberships to participate in elections—is also a key tool for influencing the electoral process.
- Groups sometimes sponsor and promote ballot initiatives at the state level, which, although they are a form of direct democracy, are often subject to group manipulation and even domination.
- Are Interest Groups Effective?
How effective is money spent on lobbyists? Do interest groups foster or impede democracy?- In one study, the more money schools spent on lobbyists, the larger the total quantity of earmarked funds they received.
- There are many points of access whereby lobbying groups and citizens can effect political change. This could be through a state or local representative, a sympathetic court, or through swaying public opinion.