Why did only 50.7% of Americans vote?

Lack of Mobilization  , turnout in presidential elections averaged 80%  Now, 50.7% despite unprecedented GOTV  Decreasing party mobilization  Fewer competitive races for Congress  elections are less important

Systematic Explanations  Too many elections! 521,000 elected offices  hassle to vote in US  Registration  No compulsory voting  elections are held on Tuesdays

Voter Registration  Voting is a 2 step process; increases “costs” in time and information  Only 71% of citizens are registered to vote  Consequence-- skewed electorate; better educated, higher income, fewer minorities  Solutions-  Same day registration  Motor voter law  Who do non registered voters prefer?  43% Gore, 28% Bush

Costs v. Benefits of Voting  Costs  Registration  Hassles  Information ======== Solutions 1. Easier registration 2. E vote, mail in ballots 3. Group mobilization 4. Fewer elections  Benefits  Psychic  Policy Solutions 1. Minority voters 2. Conservatives in 98’ 3. Reduce cynicism about politics 4. Vote matters

Should we be concerned that only 50.7% of Americans voted?

low turnout NOT a problem  reflects contentment  George Will “As more people are nagged to the polls, the caliber of the electorate declines.  no difference between voters and non- voters preferences

Low Turnout IS a problem  Voting pool is unrepresentative of nation  HMO bill of rights vs uninsured  States with higher voter turnout have large and more comprehensive welfare

Mosley  America’s Youth: New Forms of Political Engagement ?  Are youth politically apathetic?  If they don’t vote, what do they do instead? Why?  Evidence? Plausibility? Who votes?  Cost-benefit analysis

Government is too beholden to special interests and does not listen to people like me. True or false?

Home Schooling Story  Although most citizens don’t participate actively in politics, many are associated with groups that are  mobilizing inactive citizens is an effective strategy of political influence  IG have adopted state of the art technologies to replace traditional strategies of lobbying and electing sympathetic candidates  elected officials are highly responsive to organized and aroused interests.

Definition of Interest Group  an organized body of individuals who share some goals and who try to influence public policy  Parties largely try to determine who occupies positions in government  interest groups primarily try to affect the decisions that others make

Evolution of IG  Tocqueville “Americans are forever forming associations”  Four Waves of IG Formation  broad based or peak organizations NAM, AMA  Narrow economic groups, American Soybean Association  public non profit groups US police Canine association  Ideological Groups NOW

Normative ?s about IG  Is this growth of interest groups a good thing?  What is the appropriate role of interest groups in a democracy?  Madison  Causes of Factions Are Sown Into the Nature of Man  Remedy is Worse Than the Disease

Pluralism  Politics is a struggle between groups  For every interest, there is a group  Policy reflects the balance of power between groups in society  Reflects the intensity of preferences as well as the direction  No permanent losers

Critiques of Pluralism  "The heavenly chorus of the interest group process sings with an upper-class accent."  Collective Action problem  Overcoming the free rider problem  Solidarity benefits  Material benefits  Purposive benefits

Goals of Interest Groups  Improve Probability that Their Interests Will Be Treated Favorably  Influence Policy-Making Process

Inside Game  Focus is on Governing Officials  Lobbying  Litigation  Electoral Politics  Political Action Committees (PAC’s)  BRIBERY IS NOT WIDESPREAD!!!

PACs– Good or Bad  PACs political action committees  Solicit $$ from members of group  Formal way for interest groups to get involved in politics  Do PACs exercise a corrupting influence on election and policy making process

"The Outside Game"  Focus is on shaping public opinion  Indirect influence  Publicity and Mass Appeal  Mass Mailing  Organize the District

Why Groups Use Different Tactics  group characteristics  Exxon vs. Greenpeace  situational characteristics  Outs vs. the Ins  Convergence between outside and inside strategies  MICROSOFT, The Empire Strikes Back

Interest Group Influence  empirical component  how powerful are they?  normative component  how powerful should they be?

Iron Triangles  Alliance of common interest between an interest group, a congressional committee, and a bureaucratic agency  Department of Defense/Pentagon- House and Senate Armed Services Committee—and Defense Contractors  interest groups play the dominant role  Outsiders are shut out  Lowi’s interest group liberalism

Issue Networks  larger and looser connection of interest groups, committees, and agencies in a particular policy area  Case of Tobacco Policy  More open and less stable than old triangles  More closely resembles that of pluralist doctrine

Hyperpluralism  Too many interest groups= Gridlock  3,400 lobbyists in 1975; 9,000 in 1990  608 PACs in 1975; 4,000+ in 1990  Example of health care reform  demosclerosis

Influence of IG is conditional  most influential  on low profile issues  In blocking actions; hard to originate  When unopposed by other groups  If they have plentiful resources