Which factors determine a pressure group’s success?
Wealth
• Since the introduction of PACs and Super PACs, and the increased role of finance in politics,
PGs have utilised wealth to their advantage – finance dominates Congress; “the best Congress
money can buy” (Edward Kennedy)
• Some PGs are wealthy on their own - the NRA spent $2.7m immediately after the Newtown
Shootings and they spent $11.2m in the 2014 election cycle; Planned Parenthood spent $6.5m
endorsing the Democrats in 2012
• Other PGs associate themselves with Super PACs – the American Conservative Union and
the Heritage Foundation worked with American Crossroads and Priorities USA in backing
Romney in 2012; these two PACs spent $250m collectively
• Finance often leads to insider status, which further increases the PG’s success:
o Iron Triangles – e.g. the Military Industrial Complex spent $500,000 in 2012 to prevent the
proposed $2.6bn proposed cuts to defence spending
• Evaluation:
o It is illegal to bribe Congressmen – e.g. Duke Cunningham in 2006 was sentenced to 8
years in prison after accepting $2.4m in bribes
o Finance has been stigmatised by both Sanders and Trump in the recent election, and
thus there has been a public backlash, especially against Clinton and Wall Street
o Congress has tried to cut down the role of finance – the 2002 McCain-Feingold Act
banned soft money and foreign donors, and the Honest Leadership and Open
Government Act in 2007 promoted complete transparency of donors and lobbying – “gone
are the days when lobbyists could by lawmakers” (Stone and Vaida, 2008)
o Wealth isn’t relevant when trying to lobby the Supreme Court, and thus, its applications
have a ceiling
o Money not a prerequisite for success e.g. Jeb Bush and Right to Rise raised $60m
Membership
• The larger the group, the greater the electoral influence that the PG wields, and thus, the more
coveted their endorsement is to the Congressmen
• PGs exploit this electoral advantage as a means of pushing through their agenda – e.g. the
AARP and its 40m+ members are representative of the ‘grey vote’, and are a hugely important
coalition of voters during elections; they used this to prevent his initiation of voluntary private
retirement accounts, a policy largely unpopular with many older voters
• Evaluation:
o Membership not always significant – the NRA has a relatively small membership of
around 2.7m, but it still has the ability to hold the government ransom
o Regardless of how many members the PG has, it is still always in the minority of the
electorate, and many people find this undemocratic, which undermines its usefulness as
a method
Whether they conform to the government’s agenda
• With politics becoming increasingly partisan and ideologically distinct, it is important that a PG
conforms to the government agenda, so they can ensure insider status and priority of their
agenda
• E.g. the American Conservative Union and the Heritage Foundation worked closely alongside
New Gingrich during his formulation of the Contract with America in 1994, and later with his ‘K
Street Project’
• Likewise, the NRA and its agenda has been far better received by the Republican Congress in
recent years, and thus, its influence has increased drastically – it was instrumental in the
passage of District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 that guaranteed the right to owning a firearm,
and has had significant success in backing candidates e.g. 42 of the 47 Senators in 2013 that
voted against the extension of the Brady background checks were endorsed by the NRA
• PGs often work alongside the governing party and the President in implementing a bill, and
this is made easier when they have shared objectives – e.g. the ACLU during the Obergefell v.
Wealth
• Since the introduction of PACs and Super PACs, and the increased role of finance in politics,
PGs have utilised wealth to their advantage – finance dominates Congress; “the best Congress
money can buy” (Edward Kennedy)
• Some PGs are wealthy on their own - the NRA spent $2.7m immediately after the Newtown
Shootings and they spent $11.2m in the 2014 election cycle; Planned Parenthood spent $6.5m
endorsing the Democrats in 2012
• Other PGs associate themselves with Super PACs – the American Conservative Union and
the Heritage Foundation worked with American Crossroads and Priorities USA in backing
Romney in 2012; these two PACs spent $250m collectively
• Finance often leads to insider status, which further increases the PG’s success:
o Iron Triangles – e.g. the Military Industrial Complex spent $500,000 in 2012 to prevent the
proposed $2.6bn proposed cuts to defence spending
• Evaluation:
o It is illegal to bribe Congressmen – e.g. Duke Cunningham in 2006 was sentenced to 8
years in prison after accepting $2.4m in bribes
o Finance has been stigmatised by both Sanders and Trump in the recent election, and
thus there has been a public backlash, especially against Clinton and Wall Street
o Congress has tried to cut down the role of finance – the 2002 McCain-Feingold Act
banned soft money and foreign donors, and the Honest Leadership and Open
Government Act in 2007 promoted complete transparency of donors and lobbying – “gone
are the days when lobbyists could by lawmakers” (Stone and Vaida, 2008)
o Wealth isn’t relevant when trying to lobby the Supreme Court, and thus, its applications
have a ceiling
o Money not a prerequisite for success e.g. Jeb Bush and Right to Rise raised $60m
Membership
• The larger the group, the greater the electoral influence that the PG wields, and thus, the more
coveted their endorsement is to the Congressmen
• PGs exploit this electoral advantage as a means of pushing through their agenda – e.g. the
AARP and its 40m+ members are representative of the ‘grey vote’, and are a hugely important
coalition of voters during elections; they used this to prevent his initiation of voluntary private
retirement accounts, a policy largely unpopular with many older voters
• Evaluation:
o Membership not always significant – the NRA has a relatively small membership of
around 2.7m, but it still has the ability to hold the government ransom
o Regardless of how many members the PG has, it is still always in the minority of the
electorate, and many people find this undemocratic, which undermines its usefulness as
a method
Whether they conform to the government’s agenda
• With politics becoming increasingly partisan and ideologically distinct, it is important that a PG
conforms to the government agenda, so they can ensure insider status and priority of their
agenda
• E.g. the American Conservative Union and the Heritage Foundation worked closely alongside
New Gingrich during his formulation of the Contract with America in 1994, and later with his ‘K
Street Project’
• Likewise, the NRA and its agenda has been far better received by the Republican Congress in
recent years, and thus, its influence has increased drastically – it was instrumental in the
passage of District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 that guaranteed the right to owning a firearm,
and has had significant success in backing candidates e.g. 42 of the 47 Senators in 2013 that
voted against the extension of the Brady background checks were endorsed by the NRA
• PGs often work alongside the governing party and the President in implementing a bill, and
this is made easier when they have shared objectives – e.g. the ACLU during the Obergefell v.
