Interest Groups

Collective action problems arise in politics because as individuals we are conflicted between our own interest and the interest of the group. Our choice is either to be selfish or cooperate with the group. “It involves building, combining, mixing, and amalgamating people’s individual goals” (Lowi, et al. 13). There are three main theories as to why collective action problems exist. First, according to Mancur Olson individuals are tempted to free-ride which is getting a benefit without contributing to it and that no individual is incentivized to work for the collective good. (Lowi, et al 571). Free-riding becomes a bigger issues as a group gets larger. Second, the Prisoner’s Dilemma is a theory in which there are two individuals in a situation were neither has an incentive to cooperate although both would be better off if they did cooperate. Third, the tragedy of commons occurs when individuals’ use of a resource causes its depletion however it’s supposed to be shared by everyone. Collective action problems are difficult to solve because a group is formed to achieve common goals however as individuals we have different objectives and preferences. This is most evident in politics. My goal in this paper is to provide three different solutions to collective action problems in politics specifically in political parties, electoral process and interest groups.

In Truman’s analysis, the political role of the individual is to be in groups. People act and interact only as members of groups. Truman argues that evidence regarding group affiliations and individual behavior has concluded that individuals are not ignored in any interpretation of politics as based upon groups because groups accommodate the political interests of individuals. Individuals are not found anywhere else but in groups. “The individual” and “the group” are simply convenient ways of classifying behavior, not two separate things.

Interest groups have a lot of influence over decision that the government makes and has made. These groups, when formed right, are highly organized and have a definite agenda they are trying to push that is important to them. Interest groups will lobby in congress as well as other levels of government to get new laws and regulations passed.

Limiting interest group is like cutting off the blood that flows through America’s vein. Interest groups plays a pivotal role in todays U.S society ranging from but not limited to; helping Congress and the administration to draft legislation and policy initiatives, provide information both to government and the public on a broad range of topical issues, and contribute significantly to political

government assistance. The difference between interest groups and political parties is that political parties seek to constitute the government, whereas interest groups try only to influence it. Some of the things that interests groups seek from government are

The reason why labor union in the U.S. is viewed as “special interest groups,” is because U.S. has few unions. The employers have greater bargaining power than the workers, and there is almost no governmental policy that protects the workers from the power of their employers. Unlike Sweden and Germany, U.S. is also hostile towards collective bargaining, which diminishes employees’ motivation to work. As a result, U.S. has poorer economic and political outcomes, as well as equality between employers and employees. Consequently, U.S.’s labor union can be categorized as special interest groups, because most of the union is decentralized, almost to an individual firm’s level. They do not form one large labor union, which is why each has narrow

An interest group also known as a special interest group or a lobby is an organized group of individuals, organizations, or businesses who share a goal. The interest group forms an alliance in support of their cause to influence public policy and government officials in the group 's favor. The goal of the group could be focused on small group, such as the Japan Eraser Manufacturer 's Association; or the goal could be focused on a large public group, such as family and friends of public school-aged children in the United States. "The most important lobbying forces in any society are the various entities of government: national, regional, and local government agencies and institutions such as the military" (Thomas).???????????

“Interest groups are no less a threat than they are an expression of freedom” (Berry, 1984).

Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page argue that policy change can be characterized into four theories such as Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic Elite Domination, and two types of interest group pluralism: Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased Pluralism. Majoritarian Electoral Democracy claims that policies are “attributed to the collective will of the average citizen, who are empowered by democratic elections”, (Martin Gilens 2014). Majoritarian Electoral Democracy rests on the idea that government serves for the people and is governed by the people. Economic Elite Domination is significant, because it provides that “policy making is dominated by individuals who have substantial economic resources, i.e. high levels of income and/or wealth…” (Martin Gilens 2014). In the theory of Economic Elite Domination, the influential factors of policy are people with financial resources, or executive power. Economic Elites use their resources to shape, influence, or sway policy in his or her

Pluralist theory views politics and decision making as a competitive phenomenon where different groups and individuals have different views and that there is no single elite group that exercises influence (Davis & Go, 2009). The theory holds that power is relatively broadly distributed among different interest groups. These groups hold different views of the same aspect and compete with each other for

Even today, divisions in groups have been as a result of continued differences among the uniting groups. Humans have a tendency to incline towards the protection of their interest’s aid favors of their perceived groups. Such favourism makes them advocate fully for their interests posing a challenging opposing side to the interests of their unperceived groups. Many nations today are faced with such opposing groups having differing interests and ideals. People advocating for similar ideals tend to create strong ties of

Limits cannot be placed on the amount of money companies and groups spend on lobbying in Texas because this money is not coming from the government or from taxes. This money comes from companies and groups who voluntarily chose to fund lobbyist agendas or pay for lobbying on their behalf. It is very difficult to control how much a group can “donate” to a cause or how much they spend lobbying without angering lobbyists or the companies who pay the lobbyists. If individuals choose to set aside millions of dollars to fund lobbyists, that is their own prerogative. Lobbyists are often seeking “face time” with legislators, which makes “the spending worthwhile from the lobbyists’ standpoint” (Ramsey). The

Groups provide common information and some groups tend to share common traits, which impact their voting calculus, creating an “independent effect” for group membership on voting behavior.

In addition, these two groups share similarities, both being voluntarily organized groups of people, that are involved in the process of politics. They each have a significant role in democratic societies. They work towards specific goals in the government and both encourage politicians and raise money to accomplish those goals. They are involved in interest expression, political socialization, political communication and leadership requirement. They both have key roles in the social and political life of the

It is my contention that the group interests are by far soupier to those of the individual interests. The problem prevailing in the article is referred to as a "resource dilemma." This occurs primarily through a non renewable resource that is generally needed by the entire population. Examples include oil, coal, copper, gold, and so forth. Generally, as supply diminishes within these resources, the greater the resource dilemma becomes. As the resource becomes scarcer, individuals begin to put their own interests before those of the group. This individualism is often to the overall detriment of the group. This occurs periodically