Interest groups are private organizations and voluntary associations whose members share certain views and ideology. They work together to shape public policy, or goals of the government. Interest groups try to work within the government structure and use several techniques, such as lobbying, to achieve their goal. These groups spend a great deal of money and put a lot of effort into persuading government officials to support bills or policies they feel would be beneficial. There are two viewpoints on the impact of interest groups. One side views them as factions that are serving their own purpose with disregard to society or community as a whole. On the other side, interest groups serve as a necessary device in democracy and work for the public interest.
James Madison viewed interest groups as evil factions; special interest groups that only cared about their own agenda and not the common good. Madison wanted both liberty and order and believed political factions were inevitable and the government needed to control their effects. According to Madison, granting people the freedom to form groups and express their opinion could sabotage the hope for a manageable society. The separation of powers plus the checks and balances system of government help to keep one group from becoming too powerful. It also enables many avenues and levels that allow even the small groups a chance to be heard. (pg. 220-221)
Pluralists believe that interest groups enhance democracy. They are argue that interest group politics was a considerable power in American government and society. According to pluralism theory, all groups should be free to vie for influence in the government. Interest groups represent many diverse parts of society and provide exp...
... middle of paper ...
... There has even been an effort to regulate campaign financing and contributions.
Since the majority of lobbyist represent business interests and better educated and wealthier Americans are more active in interest group politics, many interests at the bottom of the economic spectrum enjoy minimal or no representation at all. Many interest groups are formed when interests are threatened. This is known as the disturbance theory. Interest groups are not political parties therefore they do no nominate candidates, are only concerned with a few specific issues, do not worry about others with different opinions and are organized based on a shared values and not geographic location. Because of their narrow fields, lobbyist, regardless of the interest group, need to develop long term relationships with officials and/or their staff members to make an impact on policy making.
In today 's government political parties are a large part of government operations and how decisions are made in the government. In Madison 's The Federalist, No.10 Madison talked about how factions can control and cause harm to the government. A solution to this control was the use of a republic in order to limit the power of factions and keep them from having complete control. In our government however, factions have become a major part of the government system with political parties having complete control over the different branches of government. The use of this two political party system creates many problems within our government as the two parties fight for control over legislature and control over the government. Despite using a republic system as Madison mentions in his paper, factions continue to control and affect our government today. Madison 's views on government branches also affects our government today. Our government being in branches does help our government from being affected by corruption by each branch being independent from each other. These independent branches help prevent corruption by each branch having independent leadership and control and not being affected by the views of each other. At the same time these branches having unique views and control can lead to problems as the branches of government may not be able to interact properly with
In Federalist 10 James Madison argued that while factions are inevitable, they might have interests adverse to the rights of other citizens. Madison’s solution was the implementation of a Democratic form of government. He felt that majority rule would not eliminate factions, but it would not allow them to be as powerful as they were. With majority rule this would force all parties affiliate and all social classes from the rich white to the poor minorities to work together and for everyone’s opinion and views to be heard.
Madison begins perhaps the most famous of the Federalist papers by stating that one of the strongest arguments in favor of the Constitution is the fact that it establishes a government capable of controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. Madison defines that factions are groups of people who gather together to protect and promote their special economic interests and political opinions. Although these factions are at odds with each other, they frequently work against the public interests, and infringe upon the rights of others.
James Madison, an American statesman and political theorist that was present at the constitutional convention. Many of the ideas proposed by Madison are part of the reason that the Constitution has withstood the test of time. Madison was ultimately prepared to deal with one of the biggest problems this new government would face in his eyes, factions. Factions, which as defined by Madison are “a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community” (Madison 156). Madison addresses various ways that he sees factions can be cured of its mischiefs such as removing a faction’s causes and also controlling their effects. Madison points out that this is would potentially create an even bigger problem than the factions themselves by stating, “Liberty is to faction, what air is to fire, an ailment, without which it instantly expires” (Madison 156) Madison also stated that the way for a government to remove the cause of faction was either to destroy the liberty that causes factions to exist in the first place or to give every citizen the same beliefs and opinions. Madison deemed this impractical, because it is nearly impossible to give everyone in a given place the same opinions and destroying the liberty would take away the very thing that the colonies fought for 4 years earlier. The fact is Madison knew that the country wouldn’t be able to count on a well-educated statesman to be there any time a faction gets out of hand. Madison knew the only viable way to keep factions under control is not to get rid of factions entirely but to set a r...
In Federalist Paper Number 10, Madison sees Factions as being inevitable. Humans hold differing opinions and are all living under different circumstances, and are likely to group together with those most like themselves. Some groups of people will attempt to work together to benefit themselves even if it goes against public interests and even if it infringes upon the rights of others. In the Federalist Paper Number 10, Madison feared that Factions could be detrimental to the common good and in order to minimize the effects and control the effects of Factions, the best form of government would be a large republic. According to Madison, to minimize the negative consequences of Factions, they must either be controlled or the causes of Factions must be removed. Since he describes the causes of Factions being the different interests and living conditions between individuals, it can be argued that this solution is not very feasible. It would be impossible to make sure every single person makes the same amount of money, has the same goals, and even goes through similar life experiences. The greatest source of Factions, the deepest and biggest cause of Factions, according to Madison, is the unequal distribution of property. The acquisition of property or lack of property creates class divisions the foster differing interests. Since it is not possible to
The dangers of faction can somewhat outweigh the good. The framers of the American Constitution feared the power that could possibly come about by organized interest groups. Madison wrote "The public good is disregarded in the conflict of rival factions citizens who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." However, the framers believed that interest groups thrived because of freedom, the same privilege that Americans utilize to express their views. Madison saw direct democracy as a danger to individual rights and advocated a representative democracy to protect individual liberty, and the general public from the effects of such inequality in society. Madison says "A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischief's of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
Next, Madison explains the reasons why unequal distribution of property leads to factions. Under the liberal society, people can freely practice their own faculties and experiment of life. Because people make decisions based on their reasoning and self-interest, they will focus on what is beneficial to them. When a group of people come together because they have the same interest, it becomes a faction. According to Madison’s writing “By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion or of interest… (Page 63)” He believes the unequal distribution of property will divide people into different group and eventually lead citizens to factions. Moreover, because faction is made by people who hold sim...
In discussing the problems surrounding the issue of factionalism in American society, James Madison concluded in Federalist #10, "The inference to which we are brought is that the causes of cannot be removed and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects." (Federalist Papers 1999, 75) In many ways, the nature of American politics has revolved around this question since our country's birth. What is the relationship between parties and government? Should the party serve as an intermediary between the populace and government, and how should a government respond to disparate ideas espoused by the factions inherent to a free society. This paper will discuss the political evolution that has revolved around this question, examining different "regimes" and how they attempted to reconcile the relationship between power and the corresponding role of the people. Beginning with the Federalists themselves, we will trace this evolution until we reach the contemporary period, where we find a political climate described as "interest-group liberalism." Eventually this paper will seek to determine which has been the most beneficial, and which is ultimately preferable.
Twyman, D., & Whitney, C. (2009, September 1). Interest Groups in American Politics. Retrieved from The American Citizen: http://www.twyman- whitney.com/americancitizen/links/lobbies.htm
James Madison was a very intelligent man and was one of the forefathers for our country. In Madison’s Federalist Paper Number 10 he describes the need to control factions in the United States and how the government is to do so. The Federalist papers are a key point in describing how to control “factions” that are so dangerous to the young government, or so Madison feels. In Madison’s paper he clearly lays out his idea on the sources of factions, his feelings on democracy versus a republic, and how to control factions.
Citizens can join any interests group that center their goals and concern; no matter how specific they may be. For example, the National Women Organization, which fight for equal rights for women. There are different types of interest groups such as business, labor and public interest groups (Hays, 2001). Each interest group’s goals are different, but have the same general idea. Their goal is to influence the public policy for their interest group. Direct strategies of a interest group are lobbying, evaluating government officials, building connections, and offering campaign assistance. Indirect strategies of a interest group would be precipitating public pressure, using elector as lobbyists, and public protest demonstrations. For example, Angelina Jolie lobby for United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees(Berry&Wilcox,
The “advocacy explosion” in the United States in the 20th century has been caused by the extreme increase in the number of interest groups in the United States. The general public views the increase and the groups themselves as a cancer that has come to the body of American politics and is spreading. The explosion in the number of interest groups and interest group members and finances has had an effect on the decline of the American political party and partisanship, the effect on democracy and the public interest, and the bias that has come with interest group competition.
The republic should be able to, “guard the society against the oppression of its rulers,” but also “guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part.” If a nation is not primarily run by the people, then the government has the ability to oppress them by implementing taxes and laws and revoking basic rights without their consent (as witnessed in the events preceding the Revolutionary War). The separate state governments did not allow every person to have a voice for their country even though “A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government.” However, if too much authority is in the hands of the citizens, then, “the rights of the minority will be insecure,” because majority groups will be, “united by a common interest.” One analysis of these rights states that the “community will” (good intention of the government) is, “independent of the simple majority,” and that a government placing “power behind a group in society working against the public good” would be detrimental. Madison’s intention discussing factions is that we must strike a balance between representing the common interests of the people while not excluding minorities and placing trust in an unjust popular interest. The government of today takes into account Madison’s extensive concept of factionalism which includes the Republican, Democratic, and
James Madison wrote The Federalist No. 10 to inform the people about the problems and possible solutions for the formation of factions. Through multiple statements concerning the dangers of factions and the benefits of a republic, Madison’s major argument was in favor of the United States Constitution. Madison defined a faction as "A number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion or interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." (Madison p. 1) Factions can be compared to the modern day lobby group; or as groups of people with a common self-interest. These groups are only involved for their own benefit and would be indifferent to the individual rights of other citizens as a whole, only hoping to further their own ideas. Madison believes that factions are inherent to human nature, making it unavoidable that people are living under a state of liberty. Madison argues that "the most common and durable source of factions has been the...
Initially, when we read James Madison we learn the nature of factions. Factions play an important role in human nature because they are vessels of opinions. The opinion of one individual is not enough to cause change. Factions solve this by uniting people with similar opinions and allowing them to urge for change. Madison realized the unrelenting force of a faction left to grow without restraint. They were dangerous because they were often violent and disruptive often being called the “weakness of popular government”. At worst, they lead to civil war and at the least the inhibited the execution of public policy. While he acknowledge that the easiest way to remove a faction was to destroy their liberties, he knew that this would mean to declare a war on human nature. He also understood that removing their liberty would mean removing the liberty of others, which he did not want. Instead, he suggested controlling the effects of majority faction...