1 / 18

THE PLURALIST BATTLE A Theoretical Look at the Critiques and Defenses of Interest Group Power

THE PLURALIST BATTLE A Theoretical Look at the Critiques and Defenses of Interest Group Power. Jared N. Lyles Senior Capstone – Political Science Dr. Jeremy Lewis. Outline. I. Introduction II. Literature survey and the critiques of pluralism

scott
Télécharger la présentation

THE PLURALIST BATTLE A Theoretical Look at the Critiques and Defenses of Interest Group Power

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. THE PLURALIST BATTLEA Theoretical Look at the Critiques and Defenses of Interest Group Power Jared N. Lyles Senior Capstone – Political Science Dr. Jeremy Lewis

  2. Outline I. Introduction II. Literature survey and the critiques of pluralism Madison, Marx, Weber, Olson, and Schattschneider III. Literature survey and the defense of pluralism Bentley, Truman, Berry, Dahl, Domhoff, and Mahood IV. The modern critique of the pluralist battle V. Conclusion

  3. Introduction • The pluralist battle began with Federalist #10 by James Madison • The debate consists of two highly polarized sides: defenders and critics of pluralism • Evolution of the pluralist battle into today’s political society

  4. Literature SurveyCritiques of pluralism

  5. Literature SurveyDefending Pluralism

  6. The Pluralist Battle TodayResearch Citizen.Org Reports Two case studies of interest group power Federal Election Commission Studies: PAC and party fundraising The Candidate as a Campaign Spectator: How the candidate has lost power to the special interest groups Buying Time: Moneyed Interest and Mobilization of Bias: The effects of special interests during the committee stage

  7. Auto Industry Case Study • Auto safety legislation born out of the Ford/Firestone rollover crashes • Would require companies to recall defective vehicles and alert government about defects • 5 senators, who were recipients of auto industry money, put a freeze on the legislation • Auto Industry pushed through much weaker bill that gave even more secrecy and protection to the auto industry

  8. Asbestos Legislation Case Study Overview • Samuel Heyman and the GAF Corporation • “Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act” • What the bill would do and how GAF would gain from the passage • How the bill would effectively achieve this end • Examples of the relationship between the money contributions and the support of the bill

  9. Asbestos Legislation Case Study • 13 House sponsors received $1,000 within 2 days to 4 months of sponsoring the bill • 50% of Heyman contributions went to individuals with access to influence on bill • Gave $40,000 to DSCC, which is chaired by the ranking Democrat on the committee • In total, $110,000 went to members of the committee handling the bill

  10. Decrease in The Number of PAcs Number of PACs, 1990: 4,193 Number of PACs, 1995: 3,982 Number of PACs, 2000: 3,706

  11. Rise of Pac fundraising Contributions to Individ.: 167 million, up from 134.3 million Total Disbursements: 357.7 million, up from 279 million Total Receipts: 430.6 million, up from 344.5 million Data from 9/00 FEC Study

  12. Rise of party fundraising 1992 Election Cycle: Dem.- 191.8, Rep.- 316.1 1994 Election Cycle: Dem.- 170.2, Rep.- 276.2 1996 Election Cycle: Dem.- 332.3, Rep.- 548.7 1998 Election Cycle: Dem.- 244.9, Rep.- 404.6 2000 Election Cycle: Dem.- 513.0, Rep.- 691.8 Data from 1/01 FEC Study

  13. Candidate as a Campaign Spectator Money from large interest groups has begun to have several affects on the campaigns and the candidates. Buying Time: The Mobilization of Bias An alternative look at the impact and importance of money in the political process. The Power of Money

  14. Campaign Finance Reform

  15. Decline in Voter Turnout 1960 – 62.8% 1992 – 55.2% 2000 – 51.0% Information from Committee for the Study of the American Electorate

  16. Organizational Involvement-Education Perct. of people involved in organizations that take political stands: 8th Grade or Less: 10% Some High School: 24% H.S. Graduate: 42% Some College: 51% College Graduate: 65% Some Grad School: 70% Grad. School Degree: 82% Source: Crotty, Schwartz, and Green. Representing Interests and Interest Group Representation. University Press of America, 1991. P. 76.

  17. Organizational Involvement - Income Percent of people involved in organizations that take political stands by income: Less than 15,000: 29% 15,000-24,999: 39% 25,000-34,999: 51% 35,000-49,000: 56% 50,000-74,999: 57% 75,000-124,999: 72% 125,000 or more: 77% Source: Crotty, Schwartz, and Green. Representing Interests and Interest Group Representation. University Press of America, 1991. P. 76.

  18. Conclusion • Most of the current state of the American political system lends support to the arguments of the pluralist critics • Some still argue that interest groups serve to educate and activate the public • The Madisonian Dilemma still exists

More Related