How Lobbying Is A Negative Connotation On Everyday Language

1237 WordsOct 26, 20165 Pages
As several authors this week contend, lobbying tends to carry a negative connotation in everyday language. The key issues that the authors seek to address this week, are when lobbying occurs, the nature of lobbying, and how it works. Overall, there is some agreement on the fact that lobbying is prevalent, the disagreements arise over what purpose lobbying serves, and what the strategies underlying lobbying are. One key debate among the authors is what is actually influenced by lawmaking. On one hand, Hansen (1991) takes the perspective that lobbying influences the relationship between interest groups and lawmakers. Hansen bases his argument on the belief that because legislators want to be reelected and they lack information about the “issue preferences of their constituents, the salience of issues to their constituents, and the effectiveness of various policy options,” they will seek information to reduce this uncertainty. The service that interest groups provide the, is this information. Certain interest groups, Hansen argues have “competitive advantage,” (p. 13) in the sense that they can provide certainty about constituent beliefs in an efficient and effective manner, in order to help lawmakers get reelected. Given that elections re-occur, an additional point Hansen makes is for interest groups to have some kind of influence over lawmakers, the conditions that provide this competitive advantage must be expected to recur. When these conditions are met, interest groups
Open Document