Post by benson on Dec 28, 2016 12:53:42 GMT
A Revolving Door or Vicious Circle?
Andrew Bailie explores the Power of the Insiders in American Politics
To provide effective representation, governments must be receptive to the will of its people. By allowing interest groups to influence the legislature on behalf of citizens, lobbying, in theory, creates a link between citizens and the state beyond the polls. However, politicians are being over-reliant on funding by interest groups and by participating in what is sometimes called ‘revolving door’ phenomena, referring to the movement of people between legislative roles and influence groups[1]. Today, thousands of special interest groups exist, advocating everything from dehydrated onion and garlic to reptile keepers[2]. The Founding Fathers hoped competing interests would further enhance a system of checks and balances, allowing for true representation. In reality, a minority of groups have managed to infiltrate the corridors of power, whilst the vast majority of citizens and their views are being effectively quieted.
Lobbying has formed part of the US’s political landscape since the formation of the Republic. Traces of these groups can be seen in the Federalists Papers; in No. 10 of the series, author and soon-to-be President, James Madison, warned against “organised groups of citizens (…) united by some common impulse of passion, or of interest” and their threat to democracy[3]. Madison’s trepidations turned out to be justified, as problems arose with these groups as early as 1875, when Sam Ward was convicted for bribery. Today known as “The King of the Lobby”, Ward, a flamboyant businessman, held extravagant dinner parties at which his clients could mingle with specially requested Congressmen, allowing for money to infiltrate the political system over a bottle of champagne, eerily similar to the political fundraisers that are seen today[4].
Money has undoubtedly become the pivot of political success in the USA. Due to the Citizens United Case of 2010, in which campaign donations from individuals and corporations became unlimited under the law, fundraising has become an indispensable part of the election process[5]. Lobbying groups have stepped into this funding ‘arms race’, either with direct donations to campaigns or via political action committees, which can actually launch ads and hold rallies and so forth for candidates as long as they are not formally affiliated with the campaign[6].
Such money is a huge bargaining chip for interests groups, corporations, and wealthy individuals. This can be seen quite clearly with oil subsidies. Last year, oil and gas interests groups spent $363m on political donations, thereby acquiring $5.2 billion of governmental subsidies. In contrast, groups representing renewable energy, which is very popular among the American public, spent $28 million, yielding only $2.2 billion of subsidies[7]. Coincidence? Probably not, as this has been a trend, at times much more extreme than now, since 1979[8]. As journalist Jim Rutenberg put it, Citizens United has allowed these interest groups to “start what are in essence their own political parties, built around pet causes or industries and backing politicians uniquely answerable to them.”[9]
These interests groups are given a place and voice in government, and often interests groups directly link themselves to inside the government via the revolving door. Many former government employees are recruited after the end of their political careers to join interest groups, often tempted by high salaries[10]. This financial capacity to lure ex-Congressmen into lobbying positions is a key weapon for corporations seeking legislative power. To further illustrate the lobbies’ stranglehold on US politics I will examine two powerful groups, with different aims but similarly alarming degrees of power.