Businesses Don't Own Congress, But Work Hard to Get What They Need
According to this research out of Penn State, our common assumption that big business owns our Congress and the Federal agencies that regulate them with the result that they're calling the shots. . . is wrong.
In fact, they don't get always what they want despite busloads of lobbyists and truckloads of cash. However, they are somewhat successful in getting what they need. It all depends on opposition from citizen's action groups. No opposition, they get what they want. Opposition, business often looses the battle - but with deep pockets they are often able to win the war.
This may seem like quibbling over terms.
As with many assumptions, this report points out that the situation in Washington, D.C. is far less clear, far more complicated and more hazily defined.
How does this impact the writer? As in any topic whether fiction or non-fiction, reality is always far more nuanced than appears on the surface. With the growing importance of getting your science right in both the publishing and filmmaking industries, understanding the fine points of your subject may be the difference between a sale and a rejection letter. (Remember, research shows the human mind is programmed to say no.) Both industries are unbelievably competitive for any writer in any genre', so any advantage you can muster to put your work ahead of others is important.
Here's the story, as always with a link to the original research in the footnote.
* * * * *
Lobbying:Businesses don't always get what they want,
but try to get what they need
"Business may have a less dominant and more complicated
relationship with government than previously thought."
Although most citizens tend to believe that big business owns Washington, D.C., a team of researchers suggests that business may have a less dominant and more complicated relationship with government than previously thought.
Although most citizens tend to believe that big business owns Washington D.C., a team of researchers suggests that business may have a less dominant and more complicated relationship with government than previously thought.
In a study of randomly selected federal policy decisions between 1998 and 2002, the researchers found that when citizen interest groups and other competitors opposed businesses on policies,
- businesses had roughly an equal chance of success as the citizen group. When the researchers examined a shorter time period,
- businesses were only successful about a quarter of the time.
However, businesses may be better suited for certain types of legislative battles, according to the researchers, who report their findings in the forthcoming issue of Interest Groups and Advocacy, available online now.
|Critical Fictions: |
The Politics of
Edited by: Philomena Mariani
A Village Voice Best Book
Click on image to order
For example, Hojnacki noted that when business interests back specific, more technical projects, such as funding for the Army's CH-47 helicopter, they draw little opposition and have a better chance at success.
Lobbyists for businesses also have the resources to outlast citizen groups and pursue a variety of policy changes simultaneously. Because citizen groups often lack resources, they tend to focus their influence on the biggest and most contentious issues.
"Businesses are much better funded and staffed to be able to lose battles, but still win the war," said Hojnacki.
In a related finding, when business groups are unopposed, their success rate is greater than the rate of success enjoyed by other types of interests, according to the researchers. After four years, business has an 89 percent success rate, while the success of citizen groups is only 33 percent.
Citizen Action Groups are effective
The study suggests that some other cynical memes about politics -- that votes do not count, or that citizen action groups have limited effects -- may be incorrect.
"Businesses have a lot of money and can outgun citizen groups in terms of personnel, but that doesn't mean that people being part of interest groups and raising their voices is meaningless," said Hojnacki. "We see that it matters and these groups can contest the things that business puts forward."
She also added that the last two years of the study, when businesses were more successful, occurred during the more business-friendly era of the George W. Bush administration.
Hojnacki noted that the tendency to equate the legislative agendas of citizen groups with the will of the people is an over-generalization.
Citizen Action Groups may be at odds with what a majority of the citizens want
"They may be citizen groups and we think of them as representing citizen interests, but when you look at their positions, they may be at odds with what a majority of the citizens want," she said.
The researchers created case studies on 98 different issues in the U.S. Senate that were being pursued by randomly selected lobbyists. Initially, the researchers interviewed representatives from each organization to determine that group's legislative priorities and the types of opposition it was facing. They then interviewed opposition representatives. During the next four years, the researchers followed the progress of the cases to determine the success rates of the lobbyists.
"We emerged at the end of this period with a firm grasp on who got what they wanted and who did not on all 98 issues," the researchers said.
Story Source: Materials provided by Penn State. Marie Hojnacki, Kathleen M Marchetti, Frank R Baumgartner, Jeffrey M Berry, David C Kimball, Beth L Leech. Assessing business advantage in Washington lobbying. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 2015