Pluralism vs. Elitism

In a pluralist democracy like in the United States, interest groups have played a major role throughout the history through highly organized factions and are aimed at different levels of government. Lobbying is one of the tactics of the interest groups to aid their agenda through implementing new laws and regulations. "If you want to have your face in the light, you should have your back in the dark". Similarly, the influences of the interests groups and lobbyists have good and bad effects on the people and the society.

The controversy surrounding political lobbying does not question the act of influencing public officials, but rather the ethics relating to how these public officials are influenced. It is important to distinguish the fine line between bribery and lobbying. It is illegal to bribe a public official in the United States. This would mean that an individual could not provide compensation to a public official for them to behave, or vote, in a specific manner. Lobbyists may donate money to a specific candidate’s political campaign, but they may only do so when there is no expectation that the public official will behave in a favorable way toward the lobbyist or their clients (Mackinder). Lobbyists may bring public officials, their immediate families, and staff on trips or out to dinner. While it is illegal for a lobbyist representing a corporate client from directly bringing, it is not illegal for foreign governments to sponsor for these said trips (Goldmacher). What has begun to happen is lobbyists representing corporate clients may bring public officials on these trips, if the trip is sponsored by a foreign government. The Senate Office of Public Records reported that $3.23 billion was spent on lobbying in 2013, with 12,300 registered lobbyists. Professor James Thurber, who teaches at American University, has studied congressional lobbying for over 30 years, and does not believe these figures are accurate. He believes

Moreover, the Schoolhouse Rock presentation identified the major committees that play a vast role within legislation, but furthermore failed to acknowledge the significant influence of interest groups, lobbyist, and campaign contributors. Interest groups are pertinent to the legislation process because of their vast influence. While interest groups strive to “influence public policy” to benefit its members, it accomplishes this task by using inside strategies that “pursue a narrow policy of change and directly influence legislation” and through its relationship within the iron triangle that works to “seal off” external influencers that are irrelevant to the groups view towards public policy; thus leaving a “closed

Foreign governments often gain influence within Congress by hiring former members of Congress as lobbyists.

The United States has experienced fundamental changes that are dramatically detrimental to democracy. Voters’ ability to define political discourse has been so diminished that even decisive election results like Barack Obama’s in 2012 have little impact. That’s because powerful interests — freed to, in effect, buy elections, unhindered by downsized and diffused media that must rely on revenue from campaign ads — now set the rules of engagement. Lobbying involves working to bring pressure to bear on policy makers to gain favorable policy outcomes. In order to accomplish their goals, interest groups develop a strategy or plan of action and execute it through specific tactics. The particular strategies developed and the specific tactics used, however, vary widely both among and within political

Many controversial topics have surfaced recently, but one that tends to fly under the radar is lobbying. Lobbying is defined as a group of persons who work or conduct a campaign to influence members of a legislature to vote according to a group’s special interests (“Lobby”). Although average citizens are not fully aware of the issue, it is quite contentious in politics. For those who are against it, they believe that restrictions should be placed on lobbying because it distorts democracy. Lobbyists use money and cost-effective strategies to sway the opinions of lawmakers. Others see lobbyists as effective, political tour guides who help pass legislation. An analysis of the lobbying process reveals the outcomes are often

Business tycoons would do things from bribing politicians to bribing immigrants to influence an election in their favor. In document D, artist Joseph Keppler paints an amusing picture of the Senate in Washington. However, what catches the eye of observers is the extremely large "money-bag" shaped men who stand looking down upon the senators. On each man is an industry followed by the word "trust. " One might also notice the sign stating how the senate is for the monopolists, and finally, along with that, the door that says "people's entrance" is closed.

Legislators often utilise the agenda-building function of pressure groups to obtain information on specific legislative issues because pressure groups, particularly insider groups, are “recognised by government as legitimate spokespersons for particular interests or causes” (Grant, 2004, p. 408). This assumption can often be taken advantage of by insider pressure groups, as they are often able to “hire the most skilful and eloquent lobbyists, some of whom obviously gave a higher priority to pleasing their clients.” (Garnett and Lynch, 2012, p.

In politics, racial and ethnic backgrounds tend to outline the outcomes of public policies- especially in minority communities. Minorities in the United States yearly increase due to both legal and illegal immigration (Shaw et al. 332). The trend will continue and by the middle of the 21st century, the minority population, cumulatively, will surpass the so-called White majority in the United States. The definitions of pluralism and two-tiered pluralism differ between the person’s race and ethnic backgrounds. As for the minorities, it may both bring some advantages and as well as disadvantages in public participation and the passing of public policies; however, in current times, two-tiered pluralism is becoming more dominant in politics as the racial divide within the United States continues to worsen.

Wayne, Lasser, Miller and others tend to agree that lobbyists and PACs have a great amount of influence over congress members because they may have direct connections and give campaign contributions. Recently, the airlines industry convinced congress to pass a $15 billion aid package it needs in order to survive. “The airlines had plenty of resources to draw on: 27 in-houses lobbyists, augmented by lobbyists from 42 Washington firms, including former White House aides and transportation secretaries, as well as the airlines own chief executives and corporate board members, whom all are well known in the halls of congress”(Wayne, NYT, 10/01/01. Lasser, American Politics, 1999. Miller, The American Prospect, 10/23/00. Geiger, Washington Post, 11/4-10/91.)

creating a relationship with the staff of congress. This relationship provides a window for the group to testify at hearings. The interest group provides personal transportation for their group members to vote in crucial elections. Some of their members will vote on their group issues since lobbying brings them in direct contact with the political candidates. The groups? members are more than willing to teach their legislators about technology which the legislators sometimes lack this information. The members look forward to informing the legislators about their groups? concerns

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

People are important for the success of democracy. After electing their representatives, some individuals wish to be more involved in legislative decisions that affect them, so they take to lobbying and joining interest groups. This often provides them with an atmosphere of individuals who think like they do, while also allowing them to play more of a role than just voting for a few people to represent them. Lobbying and interest groups also allow for issues to be brought to the attention of the legislature and provide a way for these groups to talk to the legislators, whether it is over dinner or at a concert. By voicing their opinions and placing pressures on the legislation, these groups have become successful in fighting for their passions and their views on important

Interest groups and advocacy groups have an undeniably strong influence in Washington, and while the results of lobbying efforts are not often touted, they sway policy in areas like energy, housing, public finance, education, gun control and many more. These interest groups may represent parochial interests, but there is surely an area of policy that matches most splintered-off factions. While they’ve been portrayed as shadowy forces in lawmaking, “Interest Group Influence on US Policy Change: An Assessment Based on Policy History” by Matt Grossmann attempts to quantify and

Among the three theories of pluralism, elitism, and hyper-virtualism, In my opinion, the theory of elitism and super-pluralism are both fit the reality in the U.S., but the description of these two theories is not completely cover all the situations. Elite theory is consistent with reality, and the interest groups usually represent the interests of a few elites. Through political donations and lobbying, they influence government policies and allow interest groups to gain more. However, in the Internet age, the elite group can affect the government, but can not control more of the operation of society. Many people and vulnerable groups can use the power of the network affect the government's decision-making such as a number of environmental