Special Interest Groups

We all have our own interests. We all have viewpoints and causes that we are at least somewhat attracted to. This is where interest groups come in. They are essentially organized groups of people that share common ideals or concerns, like the AARP or the NRA. In America especially, they have become politically associated. In the Federalist No.10, James Madison stated, “The latent causes of factions are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degree of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society.” (Document 30, Federalist 10, pg. 174) Everyone feels a need to associate with a larger group that exists to protect beliefs of their own. This is an issue of concern for many Americans. Though people feel a need to belong to an interest group, they are quick to criticize them for interfering with government, “Intellectually we accept the legitimacy of all interest groups; emotionally we separate them into those we support and those we must view with suspicion.” (Document 38, Madison’s Dilemma, pg. 223)
Today interest groups are viewed with suspicion when the public perceives that a specific group has gained too much power. Interest groups achieve their political power through different political figures. In Document 40, David B. Truman outlines some of the different ways that interest groups achieve political power. The decentralized American government allows for independent power centers, which can be manipulated in order to gain access to higher forms of government. The national party system is an example used by Truman because it is essentially large interest groups composed of smaller interest groups. Having access to local organizations means having a “channel” that could eventually lead from the larger party to the government. Truman also describes what influences the power a certain interest group can have, “The extent to which a group achieves effective access to the institutions of government is the resultant of a complex of interdependent factors. For the sake of simplicity these may be classified to in three somewhat overlapping categories: (1) factors relating to a group’s strategic position in the society; (2) factors associated with the internal characteristics of the group; and (3) factors peculiar to the governmental institutions themselves.” (Document 40, The Governmental Process, pg. 236) In other words, an interests group’s power depends on the status and money of the group, their organization and cohesion, and the way the government itself operates. Document 42, “Interest Groups and the American Political System”, also examines the different ways in which special interest groups. The first is that the American decision making system offers many opportunities for policy to be influenced, the second is that because the major parties are open to outside influences of any kind a member with any beliefs could theoretically rise to power, and the third is that the frequency of American elections offer many opportunities for a candidate with certain beliefs to rise to power. (Document 42, Interest Groups and the American Political System, pg. 241) In addition to interest being able to influence bureaucrats, they can also be members of the interest groups themselves. This means that interest groups have a wider sphere of influencing policy because members of the interest groups could be the ones making the policy.
Certainly, all interest groups try and protect their own interests to some extent or another. Some are even lucky enough to have relationships with politicians, who seek their support for power. The American government, as outlined in the Constitution, is designed to try and keep such groups from gaining so much power that they are able to dominate competing views. James Madison was able to predict the different groups that would eventually arise in the American public. He sought not to prevent these groups, but to control their effects, “The inference to which we are brought is, that the causes of faction cannot be removed; and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects.” (Document 30, pg. 176) He found that the relief could be found in a republican government. A pure democracy allowed too much opportunity for the majority to overpower the minority, but a republican government offered “delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest;” (Document 30, pg. 177) This delegation would allow for the generalization of views, or, in other words, force those in power to focus on the greater good and not the views of a specific group. Madison also accounted for the opposite reaction, that the elected representatives would be susceptible to the persuasions of different interest groups. He argued that the size and scope of a nation determined the outcome. A small nation would allow more opportunity for the majority to grow and gain the favor of the representatives, but a large nation would have a far greater spectrum of different views fighting for dominance and that would keep any one interest group from gaining much greater power over the others. The larger nation would also keep the interest groups from controlling the elected representatives, “as each representative will be chosen by a greater number of citizens in the large than the small republic, it will be more difficult for unworthy candidates to practice with success the vicious arts, by which elections are too often carried; and the suffrages of men being more free, will be more likely to center in men who possess the most attractive merit, and the most diffusive and established in characters.” (Document 30, pg. 177) However, though America is a large nation, interest groups are still able to exert a considerable amount of power over the government. Relationships with politicians are still being formed and maintained, and, whether we like it or not, American citizens are also influenced by interest groups. In Document 38, “Madison’s Dilemma”, Jeffrey M. Berry examines the influence of interest groups. In his article, Berry states that though there are groups in power Madison’s theory is still credible and might even be a goal for modern America, “groups freely participating in the policymaking process, none becoming too powerful because of natural conflict of interest, and government acting as a synthesizer of competing interests. This ideal remains cotemporary America’s hope for making interest group politics compatible with democratic views.” (Document 38, pg. 222) So, instead of preventing special interest groups, Madison’s solution was to create a balance between the protection of a citizen’s freedom to have his beliefs and the protection of an uncorrupted government.
This debate over special interest groups raises a question: doesn’t a person act on his or her own personal beliefs, regardless of involvement in an interest group? Every day each one of us talks and acts based on some of our own principles. Simply because a person may not be affiliated with an interest group does not mean that person is not biased in any way. When it comes down to simple definitions, interest groups are ways of organizing people with the same set of beliefs, ideals, or goals. So, in order to solve the problem modern America has with interest groups gaining to much political power, there need to be strong and educated representatives in government who know how to take in all the opposing views and come up with compromises to benefit the greater good.

-Christie