Unit III: Political Parties, Interest Groups and Media

10-20%Ch. 9, 11, 12

PARTIES: HERE AND ABROAD

A. Parties are groups of people who seek to control government through winning elections and holding public office.

B. Parties:1. provide a label in the minds of voters2. Choose a set of leaders in government3. Are organizations that recruit and campaign

C. US parties have weakened1. More independents2. Weaker organizations since the 1960s

D. Federal system decentralizes powerE. Parties regulated by state and federal law

I. Decentralization/Weakening of Parties

II. FUNCTIONS OF POLITICAL PARTIES

A. Nominate candidates1. Previously: party caucuses, nominating conventions,

Now: primary elections2. Expansion of primaries means this role is

seriously diminished Party leaders no longer control nominations; more

candidate-centered politics than party-centered politics

B. Raise and spend campaign funds (less so now)C. Register votersD. Simplify decisions for votersE. Unify diverse interests

1. FDR’s grand coalition2. Means parties must take more moderate positions

F. Act as moderating influence on government1. Nominate moderate candidates who appeal to

mainstream

G. Reduce diffusion of power in government1. Theory: unifying force to overcome separation of

powers/checks and balances2. Reality: divided government, split-ticket voting

(office-bloc ballot)

H. Provide patronage Most government jobs filled by Civil Service

I. Inform public: party platforms

J. Agents of political socialization

K. Linkage institution between people and government

RISE OF POLITICAL PARTIES

1. Dangers of “factions” mentioned by Madison in Federalist #10 and Washington’s warning about the “baneful effects of the spirit of the party”

Federalist #51: a geographically large republic reduces abuses of factions

2. Yet, parties became necessary to get things done.

3. Necessity of an institution that unifies gov in order to overcome the systems of separation of powers and checks/balances that divide gov

1. 1796-1820: 1st party system-Federalists vs. Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans

2. 1824-1856: Jacksonian Democrats v. Whigs

3. 1860-1892: Republican dominance as the party against slavery and the party that put the Union back together

4. 1896-1928: 2nd period of Republican dominance with its coalition of big business and the working classes against Democratic rural interests

5. 1932-1964: Democratic dominance under FDR and the New Deal. FDRs grand coalition included urban dwellers, labor unions, Catholics, Jews, the poor, Southerners, Blacks, farmers

I. Origins

Historical Development: the Six Party Systems in US History

6. 1968-PRESENT: ERA OF DIVIDED GOVERNMENT/DEALIGNMENTa) Split-ticket votingb) Presidents of one party (typically Republican) with Congresses

of the other party (typically Democratic)c) Era of party dealignment, as voters are increasingly becoming

independent (rejecting rather than changing party)d) Nixon and Reagan built a coalition of disenchanted

white suburban middle class, Southern white Protestants, big business

e) Clinton won twice-resurrected FDRs coalition and women voters

f) 2000-Bush did not win popular vote, 50-50 Senate, narrow Republican House majority

g) 2004: unified Republican governmenth) 2006: divided gov i) 2008: return to unified govj) 2010: divided gov – rise of Tea Party in 2009k) 2012: divided gov – 112th/113th the real “Do-Nothing

Congresses”l) 2014: ???

II. RELATIVE PARTY STRENGTHS

1. President: Democratic

2. House: (113th Congress 2013-15) 201 Dems, 233 Rep, 1 vacancy (Jul ‘13)

3. Senate (113th): 52 Dems, 46 Rep, 2 independent

4. Divided gov typical of the past few decades. The usual pattern has been Republican presidents and a Democratic Congress.

1. Governors: 19 Dems, 30 Rep., 1 Independent

2. State legislatures: Democrats control 18 states, Rep control 27 states, 5 are split or nonpartisan

A. National Gov B. State Gov

III. PARTY WEAKNESSESA. Parties lack strong rank-and-file members/grassroots organization

1. Anyone can join by registering

2. No duties or dues

3. Most activities only occur at election time

4. Most Americans are spectators in party activity

5. Small percentage of “strong Dems” or “strong Rep”

6. Increase in percentage of Independents (though most are “leaners”)

B. Many traditional functions of parties have been lost or weakened

1. Nomination of candidates Now by primary elections

2. Funding of campaigns Trend toward candidate-

centered campaigns (especially after FECA/BCRA)

3. Unifying gov We often have divided gov, and

intra-party conflict can be strong

4. Providing patronage Jobs now filled by Civil Service

(Pendleton Act, 1883)

1. Split-ticket voting

2. Few penalties for politicians who stray from party line

3. Candidates finance campaigns on their own

1. Between party regulars and candidate loyalists/issue advocates

2. Between Dem liberals and moderates

3. Between Rep conservatives vs. moderates

C. Weak Party Discipline D. Intra-Party Divisions

SPLIT DISTRICT OUTCOMES: PRESIDENTIAL AND HOUSE VOTING 1900-2000 (CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS CARRIED BY HOUSE AND PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES OF DIFFERENT PARTIES)

E. OTHER FACTORS1. Rise of campaign consultants

2. Distrust of government

3. Growth of interest groups

4. Development of mass media

5. Evidence of “dealignment:” growth of political independents

IV. NATIONAL PARTY STRUCTURE3 COMPONENTS OF PARTIES

Party leaders occupy positions in:

1. Presidency2. Congress3. State governors4. State legislatures5. Local governments

1. Registered Democrats

2. Democratic identifiers/leaners

3. Registered Republicans

4. Republican identifiers/leaners

A. Party-in-Government: B. Party-in-Electorate:

C. PARTY ORGANIZATIONS: PARTIES ARE DECENTRALIZED ALONG FEDERAL LINES

1. National level National Convention. National Committee. National Chairperson. Congressional Campaign Committee Senate Campaign Committee

2. State Committee

3. Local Committees:

4. Neither DNC nor RNC can “punish” state/local committees if they stray from the party line (decentralization)

V. NATIONAL CONVENTIONS Sets the number of delegates for each state and

rules for how those delegates shall be chosen Historically, party bosses and corrupt political

machines controlled nominations while the young, poor, and minorities were underrepresented

1. Progressive Era Reforms : Direct primary elections Nonpartisan elections at state and local level Civil Service expansion – Pendleton Act (1883) At State level, implementation of measures to increase

direct democracy: 1)_________, 2) __________ 3)_________ 17th Amendment: Hatch Act (1939):

REFORMS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SINCE 1970 (MCGOVERN-FRASER COMMISSION)

Prohibited unit rule at the convention Developed a “quota system” Superdelegates 1986 Fairness Commission:

PARTY RESURGENCE1. National party organizations are better

funded than in the past.2. Now raise more hard money3. Both parties, with better funding, hold

training sessions for candidates4. Very strong party unity scores within

Congress:5. strongest predictor of voting behavior:

_________

MINOR PARTIES

1. Ideological parties:

2. Issue-oriented party:

3. Economic protest parties:

4. Factional:

1. Raise issues that other parties must address, and often incorporate into their own party platforms

2. Voice for the fringe elements in society

3. Safety valve for discontent in society

A. Types B. Contributions

1. Rarely win elections

2. “spoiler role.”

1. 2-party tradition

2. Single-member, winner-take-all district system for congressional seats

3. Electoral college winner-take-all system

4. Getting candidates on ballot

5. Money

6. Media coverage

7. Exclusion from TV debates

C. Effects of Minor Parties D. Obstacles:

IMPACT OF PARTIES ON GOVERNMENT

Majority party has a majority on all committees and subcommittees

Majority party has chairmen on all committees Minority party has

“ranking member” Majority party controls

key leadership positions Staffers are partisan

1. Nearly all appointments to White House Office

2. Nearly all appointments to top positions in exec branch

3. Civil Service System has greatly reduced party influence

A. Congress B. Executive Branch

1. Nearly all appointments are partisan

1. Most state government positions are partisan

2. Many local government positions are nonpartisan

C. Judicial Branch D. State and local governments

CH. 11: INTEREST GROUPS

INTEREST GROUPS

1. Defined:

2. Madison (Federalist 10): Political factions were inevitable, but their

effects must be controlled. A geographically large republic is more likely to be able to cure the “mischief of faction.”

Pluralism:

REASONS FOR GROWTH1. The U.S. is a large, diverse nation with many kinds of cleavages

Americans are “joiners” (Tocqueville) Diversity of population:

2. Multiple points of access to the government Diffusion of power in government: When governments (bureaucracy) create agencies, it creates

entry point for interest groups

3. Development of non-profit organizations

4. Weakness of political parties: when parties are unable to get things done, interest groups have filled the power vacuum

5. Reforms of the 1970s:

6. Interest groups beget interest groups

7. Technology:

INTEREST GROUPS

Goal:

Types:

1. Agricultural

2. Labor

3. Business

4. Professional

Goal:

Examples:

1. NAACP

2. NOW

3. Sierra Club

4. NRA

5. MALDEF

6. ACT UP

A. Institutional: B. Membership:

TYPES OF INTEREST GROUPS

Goal:

Examples:

1. Right to Life League

2. NARAL

3. NRA

4. MADD

5. PETA

6. NORML

Goal:

Examples:

1. Common Cause:

2. Public Citizen:

3. League of Women Voters:

4. Various Environmental groups:

501(c)(3) groups:

C. Single Issue D. Public Interest

Goal:

Examples:

1. Christian Coalition, People for the American Way, ACLU

2. Think Tanks:

1. National League of Cities, National Association of Governors

G. PACs

E. Ideological F. Governmental

Reasons for Joining:

1. Single person may not make much difference

2. People likely to receive benefits from the group anyway “free rider” problem:

1. Solidary incentives2. Material incentives:3. Purposive incentives:

A. Irrationality of Joining: B. Types of Incentives:

TACTICS OF INTEREST GROUPS1. Use of mass media2. Grassroots mobilization3. Boycotting4. Litigation5. Use of amicus curiae briefs5. Campaign contributions6. Endorsement of candidates7. “targeting” of unfriendly candidates8. Issuing “report cards” to rate candidates/congressmen9. Initiative, referendum, and recall at state and local levels10. Lobbying11. Mass mailings.

FACTORS INFLUENCING INTEREST GROUP STRENGTH

I. Nature of membershipA. Size: More members=more money, more votes.B. Spread:C. Cohesiveness:D. LeadershipE. Resources:

LOBBYING

I. Defined: Attempting to influence government. Interest group lobbying is generally most effective on narrow, technical issues that are not well-publicized.

A.Iron triangle:B. These are sometimes known as issue

networks, policy networks, subgovernments

II. TYPES OF LOBBYING

1. Cooperative Lobbying:2. Grassroots lobbying:

GRASSROOTS MOBILIZATION: Building support among the public for social change or

to prevent change. May be leveraged into change at the legislature, in the courts, in the economic system, or other areas of society. It is developing awareness of an issue among large numbers of people in order to support an action.

Organizing lobbying efforts at the local level to put public pressure on government officials

3. “Netroots” lobbying:

1. Influence government

2. Provide information to government

3. Testify at hearings4. Help write

legislation

1. 1946 Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act:

Required registration and disclosure, but was full of loopholes

1. Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995: Tightened up registration and

disclosure requirements

1. Restrictions on gifts, meals, and expense paid travel that members of Congress may receive from lobbyists

2. Former agency employee must wait two years before lobbying that agency

III. Functions of lobbyists: IV. Regulation of Lobbying:

V. THE CASE FOR LOBBYISTS:

1. They provide useful information to the government

2. They provide a means of participation for the people

3. They provide a means of representation on the basis of interest rather than geography. A “linking mechanism” between the people and government. A “third house of Congress.”

4. 1st Amendment protection (assemble and petition)

5. Madison in Federalist 10: the “remedy” of curing evils of faction by eliminating their causes is worse than the disease. Potential loss of liberty is worse than the abuses of lobbyists.

VI. THE CASE AGAINST LOBBYISTS:

1. Rich and powerful interests are over-represented.

2. Average and poor people are under-represented

3. By safeguarding liberty, equality is sacrificed4. Single-issue lobbies, in particular, contribute

to political polarization5. Lobbies contribute even further to diffusion

of power, making it even more difficult for government to get things done

6. National interest is sacrificed for narrow interests

POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES

I. Explosive growth of PACs: groups that raise funds for favored candidates

A. In 1974, only 600 PACs existed. Now: more than 4,600

B. Reason: congressional legislation that had the intent of preventing a few wealthy campaign contributors from helping candidates “buy” elections. Instead, Congress wanted to “open up” campaign contributions to the masses, as represented by PACs

NUMBER OF PACS: 1974-2006

C. FECA OF 1974:

1. Individuals could contribute no more than $1,000 (now $2,600 for 2013-14)

2. Individuals could also, however, contribute $1,000 to a PAC with no limit on the number of PACs they could contribute to

3. PACs could contribute 5x (now ~2x) what an individual could contribute, and there is no limit on the total amount that a PAC can contribute in any one year

4. In addition, there is no limit on the amount of independent expenditures that a PAC can make

PAC CONTRIBUTIONS 1980-2004 (MILLIONS OF DOLLARS)

II. EXPLOSIVE GROWTH OF PAC CONTRIBUTIONS

1. In 1972, PAC contributions to congressional races totaled only $8.5mn. By 2004, that figure was $384mn.

2. 50 House candidates raised > $500,000 each from PACs in 1998 (only 4 lost)

3. 38 Senate candidates raised > $500,000 each from PACs in 1998 (7 lost)

4. PACs even donate to candidates facing no opposition at all. Why?

5. Perspective: most congressional campaign money comes from individual contributions.

PAC CONTRIBUTIONS TO HOUSE & SENATE CANDIDATES (1984-2004)

III. PAC STRATEGIES

1. Incumbents

2. Winners

3. Those who share a similar philosophy

4. Those who are likely to grant access

5. Those in positions of special influence

6. PAC money makes up a higher % of congressional campaign funds than presidential campaign funds.

B. Voter education projects

C. Independent expenditures, issue advocacy ads

D. “bundling”

E. 527 groups:1. Run issue advocacy ads2. Not regulated by the FEC3. Not subject to contribution

limits as PACs; many are run by interest groups to get around limits/regulations

A. Campaign Contributions (Factors Affecting Who Gets PAC Money)

1. Corporations: ~50% of all PACs. Largest growth in these since 1970s.

2. ideological organizations

3. Professional/trade/health associations

4. Labor unions

5. Leadership PACs: formed by congressional leaders

1. Ethical concerns: does a contribution “buy” anything?

2. Special access of PACs that the average person lacks

3. Drives up the cost of campaigning; more time spent by Congress on fundraising

4. Over-representation of those wealthy enough to have PAC representation

5. Under-representation of those who lack it

6. Further incumbency advantage

IV. Who has PACs? V. Dangers of PACs:

VI. IN DEFENSE OF PACS

1. Provide a means of participation and representation for the average person (linkage institution)

2. Without PACS, maybe only the wealthy could afford to run for office

3. 1st Amendment right to petition the government

4. Contributions are nonpartisan

5. No conclusive evidence that PACs change congressional votes. More likely to make a difference in obscure issues with little public awareness than in issues of major importance with much public awareness

6. Provide political education

7. Diversify political funding. With over 4,600 PACs, many interests are represented.

CH. 12: THE MEDIAWHO ARE THE MASS MEDIA?

A. Declining circulation of newspapers and news magazines

B. Trend towards mergers and consolidation means less competition

C. TV: Decline of 3 major networks with cable TV

A. Examples: Cable TV, the Internet:A. blogs, YouTube, CNN, FNC, The

O’Reilly Factor, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, Rush Limbaugh, talk radio…

B. Characteristics: More interactive More emphasis on entertainment

“infotainment” Personalized Emotional Informal Opinionated topical

I. “Old” Media: II. The “new media”

EFFECTS OF THE MEDIA ON POLITICS

I. Symbiotic relationship between government and the press:

II. Roles of media:A. Gatekeeper:B. Scorekeeper: Emphasis on horse race element of elections

at expense of issues.A. Watchdog:

III. IMPACT OF NEWSPAPERSA. perception of liberal bias

B. Complaints from both liberals and conservatives:1. Conservatives claim that reporters are too liberal:2. Liberals claim that publishers are conservative and

therefore are more concerned with sales and profits than exposing social/political/economic evils.

C. Lack of competition:

D. Largest amount of presidential campaign coverage devoted to day-to-day campaign activities.

E. “horse race” coverage

IV. IMPACT OF TELEVISIONA. Most people now get their news and political info from TV.

Decline of substance in coverage and rise of image and slogans.

B. Concern that TV is allied with “big government:” use of TV as electronic throne of President

C. Concern that TV has fostered cynicism, distrust, and negativism towards government and politics

D. Concern that people look at politics through the “camera lens” rather than the “party lens”

THE MEDIA AND PUBLIC OPINION

Do the media influence public opinion? Mixed evidence.

A. Yes

1. TV “personalizes” candidates and elections

2. Media stress short-term elements of elections at expense of long-term

3. Those who “consume” media in turn influence others

4. Media help set national agenda

5. Rise of advocacy journalism/adversarial journalism rather than objective journalism.

6. Studies show that journalists are more liberal than public as a whole

7. Media are a primary linking mechanism between public and government

8. Profit motive, emphasis on boosting ratings, “trivialization” of news, people less informed on important issues

B. No.

1. Mass public pays little attention to the news and often forgets what it sees or reads

2. Selective attention:

3. Selective perception:

4. Media are only one source of influence-political socialization suggests importance of family, schools, peers, and other influences

5. People consume media for variety of reasons other than information: boredom, entertainment. These people are less likely to pay close attention to “hard” news and analysis

NATURE OF MEDIA INFLUENCES

A. Most influential at the agenda-setting phase of the policy making process

B. Issue framing:C. “sameness” of coverageD. Media companies are businesses, objective:

make moneyE. Forum for building candidate imagesF. Linking mechanism between government

and people1. Past: people-parties-government2. Now: people-media-government

G. Contribute to higher cost of campaigningH. Contribute to candidate-centered campaignsI. Increase the role of campaign consultants. J. White House manipulation of media (electronic

throne)1. Photo ops2. Sound bites3. Spin control4. Staged events5. Trial balloons6. “going public” when president takes case directly to

the people

K. Negative coverage of Congress. Congress seen as obstructionist foil to president.

L. Emphasis on sensationalism and scandal: “feeding frenzy”

M. Far less coverage of SCOTUS than of Congress and president

N. Media most influential1. In primary elections2. On undecided voters

O. Increasing importance of Internet (“net roots”)1. Fundraising2. Communicating with public: websites, YouTube,

MySpace, Facebook, Twitter