Democratic advantages outweigh the concerns about their power and influence
Pressure Groups in the USA
In order to evaluate whether the democratic advantages of pressure groups outweigh
the concerns regarding their power and influence, it is necessary to firstly identify them.
The main democratic advantages which immediately stand out consist of pressure
groups' ability to engage the public with politics between elections as well as educate
them, but also represent them in ways that Representatives ironically can or may not.
Meanwhile, despite this, arguments against the democratic nature of pressure groups
discuss the concept of elitism which arises through various effects such as the "iron
triangle" and "revolving door." A further major issue with pressure groups that is hotly
contested is to whether pressure groups representing minorities lobbying government
officials elected by the majority is democratic. This essay will explore both sides of the
argument, showing the faults that some of them make and differentiating between
theory and what is actually the case.
Firstly, the iron triangle, also known as the cosy triangle concerns many people. The
term refers to the relationship which often forms between the bureaucracy, congress
and interest groups. Due to there being a weak party structure in the USA, it is pressure
groups who are increasingly behind the funding of political campaigns. In 1994, the
figure for the Democrats in Congress was 43%. With the new emergence of the
superPAC, that is almost certainly modernly a lot higher. This leads into the idea of
clintelism, where government officials feel compelled to act on behalf or in favour of
people who have given them financial favours. As interest groups fund the campaigns
of Congressman, it is they who are owed such favours. Thus, the potentially minority-
representing pressure groups have disproportionately more influence than they should.
One argument against this is the reasoning that the elected officials are elected by the
pressure groups because the pressure groups' ideology is similar to the candidates.
This being the case, the candidate that wins on these policies (the same as the pressure
groups') wins on the basis of the nation's interest. Thus, the pressure group owed
favours to by the elected candidate, does indeed have similar interests to the nation's.
However, because not all of a candidate's views may be the same as its electorate,
special interest groups still have access points.
One way of limiting pressure group power has been the impossibility and illegality of
being a member of a pressure group and a government official. This, although solving
one issue, has still left open another. Government officials can leave pressure groups
and enter office immediately as well as leave office and enter pressure groups. Dick
Cheney, for instance, former Vice President under George W. Bush's administration,
now works for top military contractors due to his knowledge, experience and contacts.
Although there is a law which makes government officials unable to join military
contractors for one year after they leave office, the time delay makes little difference.
Furthermore, the law fails to apply to all government officials, particularly the ones at
the top and therefore most wanted. Michelle Obama's Chief of Staff portrays the other
version. She used to be a member of EMILY's list before quitting and taking office.
Needless to say, she did not lose this pressure group perspective overnight. Both the
revolving door and iron triangle secure elitism because those in power stay in power.
Pressure groups, for example, the source of funding of political campaigns will almost
Pressure Groups in the USA
In order to evaluate whether the democratic advantages of pressure groups outweigh
the concerns regarding their power and influence, it is necessary to firstly identify them.
The main democratic advantages which immediately stand out consist of pressure
groups' ability to engage the public with politics between elections as well as educate
them, but also represent them in ways that Representatives ironically can or may not.
Meanwhile, despite this, arguments against the democratic nature of pressure groups
discuss the concept of elitism which arises through various effects such as the "iron
triangle" and "revolving door." A further major issue with pressure groups that is hotly
contested is to whether pressure groups representing minorities lobbying government
officials elected by the majority is democratic. This essay will explore both sides of the
argument, showing the faults that some of them make and differentiating between
theory and what is actually the case.
Firstly, the iron triangle, also known as the cosy triangle concerns many people. The
term refers to the relationship which often forms between the bureaucracy, congress
and interest groups. Due to there being a weak party structure in the USA, it is pressure
groups who are increasingly behind the funding of political campaigns. In 1994, the
figure for the Democrats in Congress was 43%. With the new emergence of the
superPAC, that is almost certainly modernly a lot higher. This leads into the idea of
clintelism, where government officials feel compelled to act on behalf or in favour of
people who have given them financial favours. As interest groups fund the campaigns
of Congressman, it is they who are owed such favours. Thus, the potentially minority-
representing pressure groups have disproportionately more influence than they should.
One argument against this is the reasoning that the elected officials are elected by the
pressure groups because the pressure groups' ideology is similar to the candidates.
This being the case, the candidate that wins on these policies (the same as the pressure
groups') wins on the basis of the nation's interest. Thus, the pressure group owed
favours to by the elected candidate, does indeed have similar interests to the nation's.
However, because not all of a candidate's views may be the same as its electorate,
special interest groups still have access points.
One way of limiting pressure group power has been the impossibility and illegality of
being a member of a pressure group and a government official. This, although solving
one issue, has still left open another. Government officials can leave pressure groups
and enter office immediately as well as leave office and enter pressure groups. Dick
Cheney, for instance, former Vice President under George W. Bush's administration,
now works for top military contractors due to his knowledge, experience and contacts.
Although there is a law which makes government officials unable to join military
contractors for one year after they leave office, the time delay makes little difference.
Furthermore, the law fails to apply to all government officials, particularly the ones at
the top and therefore most wanted. Michelle Obama's Chief of Staff portrays the other
version. She used to be a member of EMILY's list before quitting and taking office.
Needless to say, she did not lose this pressure group perspective overnight. Both the
revolving door and iron triangle secure elitism because those in power stay in power.
Pressure groups, for example, the source of funding of political campaigns will almost
