Interest groups in the U.S. politics Essay Example for Free

Interest groups in the U.S. politics Essay The United States is a democratic country, which supports non-violent political and social movements, seeking different improvements in the U. S. domestic and international policies. That is to say, the requirements of interest groups are not always met, because whereas various types of interest groups are acknowledged, there still exist those factions, which have narrow social base and whose political presentation is limited in scope, as a rule, to financial interests of their members. For instance, the sugar lobbies (such as SIG) represent the opinion of 10, 000 -15,000 farmers, who call for the restriction of import of sugar and for the special social programs for sugar farmers. Such factions are usually intended as those with narrow interests and their founders and members lobby these interests in special moments and periods, when the atmosphere becomes more conductive for promotion –for instance, when they find out that the imported sugar does not fir into the international quality standards, or before the elections (Elhauge, 2002). Special interest groups are usually distinguished from â€Å"constituency-representing organizations, which have a broad social base, address a wide range of issues, and balance members’ interests with a strong commitment to the commonwealth† (Etzioni, 1990, p. 172). These organizations might pursue such non-financial interests as those related to social status, value issues in addition to financial ones, for instance the Urban League represents the interests of urban residents and seek environmental, social and political changes in large cities. â€Å"While the public views interest groups as threatening pluralistic democracy, the conventional wisdom of political science has seen them as beneficial† (ibid). In fact, it is possible to assume from the present situation, that the most beneficial activity is related to the constituency-representation. Furthermore, special interest groups are likely to bring problems to larger factions, due to dynamic interactions between political parties, movements and non-profit organizations. Small factions pursuing narrow goals are also more likely to use ‘black PR’ technologies, directed to changing public attitudes towards certain political parties and either to increase or to decrease loyalty rates. On the other hand, the eradication of small ‘narrowly-specialized’ factions is neither possible nor useful, as the statement that competing factions (Mcwilliams, 1988) are likely to reduce each other, is valid only for small groups, whose interests are temporary. On the contrary, constituency-representing organizations are more likely to produce long-term programs including political, economic, social and cultural dimensions of human life. â€Å"The balance between interest groups and the shared polity is maintained most effectively when the pro-community forces rise up, but not higher than, the level they are able to contain but not suppress interest groups† (Mcwilliams, 1988, A9). Moreover, the role of factions is viewed in the context of the historical development of the United States. Over the last three decades, the American political institutions have become less integrated, and the power of factions has increased. On the other hand, due to the growth of their number, it is much more difficult nowadays to maintain the balance between the main political course and the consent between the state and narrower interest groups (Etzioni, 1990). It would be also important to mention the functions of interest groups. First of all they serve as a supplementary force that intensifies the public opinion representation, especially during the electoral process. Moreover, they make the political process more receptive comparing to the electoral process, which is intended as a domination of majorities, while factions are more likely to have goals, which are cohesive with the main wishes of social and national minorities; and thus they serve as a mediating force standing between the person and the state. Interest groups are known to improve the disproportionate separation of the legislative and the executive branches, because their propositions of legislative changes are logically supplemented by similar propositions for the executive branch. Another important cultural function is associated with the growth of political consciousness and political culture as well as the amount of political information in media, which represents a number of standpoints. At all times interest groups and political parties served an indicator of public consciousness and diversity as well as intensified political antagonism, especially in the most critical periods: for instance, during the Vietnamese military invasion, Carter’s position were actually weakened by interest groups, including the most peaceful youth movements, dissatisfied with the resolution of Iranian hostage crisis. As a rule, interest groups arise in the most conductive atmosphere (liberal or democratic regime), in which human rights and freedoms are declared. Political, economic and social factions can originate from professional unions or leagues (like social workers’ professional organization), which seek to represent the opinions of their professional group or their customers’ viewpoint (for instance, social workers nowadays initiate law enforcement and the adoption of certain legal acts as well as get directly involved in lobbyist activities). The discontent with government policies is another important recondition for the arousal of an interest group: political activity is actually determined by the existing economic and social policies, so it’s easy to predict, for instance, the activation of industrial unions, when under the pressure of ecological groups, the U. S. government or certain local authorities put additional taxation on enterprises, dealing with toxic substances or with oil and natural gas. It is also important to note that interest groups will exist as long as the democratic system exists, because it is impossible to satisfy the needs of the whole society with respect to its diversity. Consequently, those concerns, which have already been satisfied, are likely to be replaced by new demands. This means, human needs are immeasurable and never-ending, whereas material resources are limited, so the U. S. government today can provide only partial gratification of political claims. Furthermore, the issue of representation is also quite contradictory: on the one hand, the growth of diversity among political parties signifies positive dynamics in this sense, on the other hand, due to the increase of public consciousness, the diversity in worldviews has grown disproportionably to the number of existing factions, so that even small groups (families, local communities) seek social or economic support, but in this case we cannot speak about true representation, since their influence is insufficient to initiate the changes at legislative or executive levels. The representation of each citizen’s interests is a utopia, as at the present time only large (more than 100,000 members) interest groups can achieve representation, can be heard, if speaking figuratively. Furthermore, it is important to note that the complete representation is inhibited by the demands of the epoch, to which self-respecting factions are supposed to adjust. For instance, the ISN movement, whose leaders several years ago (in 2000-2001) called for the changes in the U. S.immigration policy and were representing the viewpoints of national and ethnic minorities, who live and work in the country (Elhauge, 2002), has changed its directions and now are trying to create more constructive basis for the U. S. foreign policy. On the one hand, it is associated with the events of September 11, which were close followed by the violations of Muslim minorities’ human rights. On the other hand, political changes forced this faction to make a more profound inquiry into the current state of affairs and to find the most acute concerns of the society. Similar dynamics can be noticed in a number of special and constituency-representing interest groups which removed irrelevant concerns and posed new questions, such as those related to women’s rights, ethnic minorities’ human rights, social security and intellectual property. As one can assume, certain interests remain overlooked or underrepresented, whereas the most ‘fashionable’ sociopolitical trends (gender equality) are overstated and therefore prioritized. Works cited 1) Elhauge, E. Does interest group theory justify more intrusive judicial review? Yale Law Journal, 2002, Vol. 110 2) Etzioni, A. Special interest groups versus constituency representation: Research in social movements. Conflict and Change, 1990, Vol. 8. 3) Mcwilliams, R. The best and the worst of public interest groups; from lifting up the poor to shaking down the elderly, Washington Monthly, March 1988, Vol. 20.