GOVT 2301: American Government

Factions>

General Considerations:

According to Publius in Federalist #10, faction is inevitable whenever one attempts to establish an order whose intended aim is to secure the rights and liberties of its citizens. This claim becomes more evident when one examines the differences of opinion about what is meant in the Declaration of Independence by "life," "liberty," or "the pusuit of happiness." Writing as Publius, Madison points out that

A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. (Federalist #10)

Incidentally, there are two principal ways in which one can address the problem of faction. The first, eliminating the causes is seen to be "worse than the disease," for to eliminate the causes of faction would destroy liberty in an effort to force everyone to share the same opinions. Such a policy would directly contradict the purpose of government outlined in the Declaration, not to mention the Constitution, of securing rights on the one hand, and securing "the blessings of liberty" on the other.

The second means of addressing the problem of faction is to control its effects. In this case, faction is recognized as "sown in the nature of man," yet the problem is made even more difficult when a nation or a government seeks to secure liberty, for "Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires." In order to allow for political discourse, liberty must be secured; when liberty is secured faction will spread, and the most one can (or should, in Publius’ account) do is control only the most harmful effects of faction. Thus we live in a nation rife with differences of opinion, and groups who all seek to affect government.

Public Opinion

These differences of opinion are often expressed either through voting in elections; through public demonstrations, including boycotts, protests, or even violence; or through organized efforts as part of an interest group.

One looks to the distribution of public opinion—the aggregate of individual attitudes or beliefs shared by some portion of the citizenry—in order to determine how united or divided the public is on any given issue. When there is general agreement, there is said to be a consensus. When opinions are sharply divided, it is a divisive opinion. When not enough have formed an opinion, there is said to be a non-opinion. Yet, public opinion is different from private opinion, in that public opinion must be expressed.

In order to understand how public opinion is formed, it is important to understand how individuals form their opinions. Political socialization is the process by which individuals acquire political beliefs and attitudes. The interactions an individual has with others has a major impact on the formation of individual opinion. Some of the most important factors include family, educational influence, peer groups, religious orientation, economic status; demographic traits such as race, gender, age, marital status and geography; as well as the influence of formal and informal leaders, generational effects, and information media. These factors not only affect individual opinion, they also affect how these opinions may ultimately be expressed, including whether or not one votes, joins an interest group, or supports a political party.

Interest Groups

An interest group is any organization whose members share common goals and which actively attempts to influence government policy. More specific than a faction where each group seeks its own interest generally, an interest group must have some level of organization, and seeks actively to secure its interests by affecting public policy. When people who have commonly shared interests work together to change a law or to affect any aspect of public policy they are acting as an interest group. Unless participation were strictly limited to individual participation in a popular government, interest groups are inevitable, especially since organized groups are more likely to have influence than groups who lack organization. Furthermore, although groups which have a large membership are also more likely to exert more influence than those with few members, even relatively small groups, such as a farmers’ union, can still influence policy. Generally, however, an interest group requires a combination of organization and large numbers to ensure success.

After an interest group has formed, its members are likely to attempt to recruit new members. The larger the membership is, the more likely it will be successful. Individuals may choose to join an interest group for a variety of reasons. There may be social benefits, such as group activities, social events, or public recognition. There may be economic benefits, or opportunities derived from participating in the interest group. Some are committed to a particular issue, and their beliefs draw them toward an organization that focuses on that issue. Generally, individuals become part of interest groups for a variety of reasons, and have multiple incentives for their participation.

Consequently, there are thousands of interest groups in the United States. Alexis de Tocqueville pointed out that "in no country of the world has the principle of association been more successfully used or applied to a greater multitude of objectives than in America." This statement is no less true today than in 1834 when Tocqueville made the observation. Why are interest groups so successful in the United States? Perhaps the very structure of American government lends itself to their reinforcement, since "Liberty is to faction what air is to fire."

 

Types of Interest Groups.

Since an interest group is any organization whose members share the same basic objective and actively seek to secure that objective by influencing government policy, nearly any organization can be an interest group. In fact, interest groups often form alliances with others to achieve their ends. Some are active at the national level, others at the state level, some at the local level, and others at all levels of government. Generally, an interest group can include the following:

1.        Business interests, including individual businesses, such as General Motors, ADM, Microsoft, or AOL/Time-Warner, as well as groups of businesses, such as the National Association of Manufacturers or the US Chamber of Commerce.

2.        Agricultural interests, such as the American Farm Bureau Federation or the National Farmers’ Union, who seek to affect policy concerning either large-scale farming or farmers generally.

3.        Labor interests, including labor unions such as the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, as well as associations of labor unions, especially the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL/CIO).

4.        Professional interests, such as the American Bar Association (representing attorneys) or the American Medical Association (representing physicians)

5.        Public employee pressure groups, such as the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees and the American Federation of Teachers.

6.        Environmental interests, concerned with policy affecting the environment. Unlike many other interest groups in the United States these groups are primarily concerned with global issues. Examples include the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and the Audobon Society.

7.        Public interest groups, especially consumer pressure groups. Most interest groups attempt to be seen as acting in the interest of all citizens, and thus seen as public interest groups. However, public interest groups are often limited to public safety issues, occupational safety issues, and consumer issues. In the United States, the public interest group movement finds its origins with the efforts of consumer advocate Ralph Nader.

8.        Single-issue interest groups, narrowly focused groups which are not involved with any policy that does not directly affect the major issue of the organization. These include groups such as the National Right-to-Life organization and the National Rifle Association.

9.        Government interests, including foreign governments, state governments, tribal governments. These groups seek to promote the goals of the businesses and the people of their particular country, state, or tribe by influencing the policy of the United States Government.

10.      Religious organizations. Often seen either as strictly separate from government or else as single-interest organizations, religious organizations generally seek to influence policy not necessarily by lobbying Congress or any other direct means (some would argue this would undermine the separation of church and state, yet some religious organizations have been known to lobby), but by influencing public opinion, generating public pressure on certain issues.

 

Interest Group Strategies

In order for an interest group to be successful, it must be able to influence officials who are responsible for making public policy. There are two primary methods used to influence officials of the government: direct action toward the official, and indirect action which is an attempt to have others directly influence the official.

 

Direct techniques include

1.        lobbying, i.e. direct discussion with policy makers concerning the views of the interest group. This is usually associated with members of the legislative branch, although executives are also frequent targets of lobbyists. Effective lobbyists will use any or all of the following to present information favorable to the group the lobbyist represents:

a.         private meetings with public officials

b.        testifying before congressional committees

c.         testifying before regulatory agencies

d.        submitting proposed legislation to congressmen or state legislators for introduction

e.         arranging social gatherings for informal discussions

f.          providing information to legislators

1.        Ratings lists. Published voting records on selected votes by members of the legislature. A higher rating indicates support for issues important to the interest group publishing the ratings list. A lower score indicates opposition.

2.        Campaign assistance, including endorsements for election, unpaid volunteers who work for the election of the candidate, and information about voters or potential voters.

3.        Financial contributions. Political Action Committees (PACs) provide candidates with contributions which cannot exceed $5000 per election. This is referred to as a hard money contribution, as is a contribution made by an individual donor, which cannot exceed $1000 per candidate. These limits were imposed in 1974 in an effort to limit the practice of individuals and interest groups securing support for their interests by financing a congressman’s campaign. Of greater concern more recently is the issue of soft money, that is, financial contributions by individuals and special interests not to campaigns, but to the political parties to which the target candidate is a member. While efforts to regulate soft money through legislation have met with opposition in Congress, limits on  contributions are defined under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.  Under the 2002 act, soft money contributions are prohibited except at the state and local levels, and contributions to party coffers are limited to individuals or PACs. The new limits are $2000 per campaign for individuals.  Contributions from single-issue organizations other than PACs, however, are still unregulated under the new law. 

Indirect techniques include:

1.        Generating public pressure by informing the public about a specific issue. This is often done by advertising in newspapers, on the radio, and on television. Such messages are often subtle, intending to slowly gain support for an issue or group. Recent examples include commercials promoting plastic as a recyclable and environmentally sound product.

2.        Using constituents as lobbyists. This requires the interest group to convince members of the group to contact a member of the legislature by mail or phone about a specific legislative proposal. More recently, interest groups have used the Internet as a tool to contact thousands of members at once and to facilitate contact with officials.

3.        Building alliances as an effort to unite groups which have common goals. This tactic is useful in projecting a positive image to the public and to policy makers.

In generating public pressure or using constituents as lobbyists, interest groups generally employ one of two basic methods:

1.        The Rifle: Groups may target a single policy maker, a single district or state, or a single demographic group.

2.        The Shotgun: Groups may target Congress generally, or may embark on a nationwide campaign reaching the general population.

Regulating Lobbyists

Efforts have been made to regulate the direct efforts of lobbyists in government. In 1946, the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act established guidelines, which required anyone who received money for the purpose of influencing legislation to register as lobbyists. It also required that they disclose their lobbying-related financial information and make quarterly reports about their activities. In 1995, the 105th Congress overhauled the lobbying laws, redefining a lobbyist as anyone who spent 20% of the time lobbying members of Congress, and requiring lobbyists to register within 45 days of making contact with a congressman. Reports must disclose the nature of the lobbying business twice a year, and lawyers for foreign companies must register as lobbyists. Tax-exempt organizations and religious organizations, however, are exempt from the 1995 requirements.

Many claim that these regulations are not strong enough to curb the power of organized interests. At the beginning of each new Congress, numerous proposals which would dramatically restrict interest group activity are proposed. However, since interest groups are already highly successful at influencing legislation, most of these proposals quickly die in Congress.

Political Parties

In a way, political parties are themselves interest groups, and at the time of the ratification of the Constitution, they were generally understood to be a part of the "associations" Tocqueville would write about in 1834. Although there is no provision for political parties in the Constitution, they have evolved into a crucial part of the operation of government. Unlike other interest groups, a political party is primarily focused on electoral politics. The goal of any political party in the United States, is simply to have its members hold elective offices, although a competing theory of partisan behavior describes a "responsible party" organization which develops a party platform and ensures that party candidates and elected party members adhere to party principles and objectives. They recruit candidates, they organize and run elections (although the responsibility for the conduct of general elections falls to individual states), and mobilize their membership among voters. They present alternative policies to the electorate, and make clear the party position on particular issues, usually in the form of a party platform. Finally, they provide opposition to the party whose members form a majority in Congress, or hold executive offices such as the Presidency.

Political parties did not formally exist when the Constitution was ratified, but the seeds of the two-party system we now see originated among supporters of the Constitution (Federalists) and those who thought the state should be a locus of authority and a advocated a Bill of Rights (anti-Federalists) From 1790 to 1816 the political landscape began to form, with the Federalists as the first party to gain control of the national government. By 1796 the Democratic-Republicans, headed by Thomas Jefferson, had entered into the process. This party held the government from 1817 to 1828 and today’s Democratic Party claims its origins with Jefferson. The Federalists eroded as a viable party, to be replaced in a two-party system in 1828 by the National Republicans, or Whigs. This would last until the 1840s when the Whigs began to collapse and the Democrats split into separate factions. The Republican Party did not become a factor until shortly before the Civil War. From 1860 to about 1928 the Republicans controlled the government and the Democrats were seen as the opposition party. Since the 1930s these two parties have traded control of the government, while minor parties have had only a very limited influence.

The Three Faces of a Political Party.

Political parties in the United States are composed of three components:

The party organization, which provides leadership and structure for the party, outlining a party platform, fielding candidates, and submitting electors to represent their party in presidential elections.

The party in electorate, which includes those people who identify with the party or who regularly vote for the candidates of the party in general elections. Without the party in electorate it would not be possible for the party to have electoral success.

The party in government, which includes all elected and appointed officials who gained office on the label of the party. Once in office the leaders work to organize the efforts of the party in order to influence government policy which is favorable to the platform of the party. In this way it is clear that a political party, while unique in its institutionalized electoral position, is nevertheless a kind of interest group.

For a political party to be successful, it must have all three components. Institutional obstacles such as state and federal laws which favor the existence of a two-party system, the winner-take-all electoral system, and social self-perpetuation of the two-party system have all prevented new parties from developing or even allowing existing third parties to have parties in government. However, minor parties have had an impact in that they raise issues which the two major parties must address.

Political parties may choose the candidates they field for a particular elected office through a variety of means, including caucuses and primary elections. The older method, the caucus, focuses on the party organization, who meet to establish the party platform and choose those members who will seek to attain elected office. Caucuses may also be opened to include those party members in the electorate who wish to participate. Generally only those in attendance may choose who shall run.

In a primary election, on the other hand, the choice of nominee is up to the party in electorate through an election, not unlike a general election for the office itself. Most state parties have adopted the primary election system in order to connect partisanship with the electorate. Primaries may either be closed, or direct, primaries, in which only declared party members may participate in the election, or they may be open primaries, in which any registered voter in the state or district is eligible to participate. Primaries and caucuses are the principal methods by which the field of potential candidates for any election, but especially the Presidential election, may be narrowed down. Consequently electoral politics typically receives a great amount of attention from news media organizations, often publishing poll results and following the "horse race" that is an electoral season.

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1 1 1