The positive impact of pressure groups

                The entire debate concerning the various theoretical perspectives can be simplified into those which take a positive view of pressure groups, and those that take a more critical stance. Pluralism offers a positive perspective whereas all the other theories take a negative approach. As such, the debate concerning the various theoretical perspectives leads neatly onto a consideration of the impact of pressure groups upon the political process. When considering the following arguments, it is worth looking back to previous posts on the various theoretical perspectives available.

                It is also important to note that the debate concerning the positive or negative impact of such groups centers upon their actions, rather than their mere existence. Once we recognize this, it soon becomes clear that some pressure groups could be considered to have a negative impact. As with political parties, one cannot assume that the activities of pressure groups are an unqualified and universal positive.

                There are of course several positives one might associate with pressure groups. Perhaps the most significant is that they represent the demos. There are a huge variety of pressure groups available that citizens may join for a relatively small fee. Without representation via pressure groups, the US could hardly be described as a democratic society in any meaningful sense of the phrase. Pressure groups thereby give expression to the needs and concerns of the American people (Berry and Wilcox, 2007). In that sense at least, we can confidently state that pressure groups contribute something entirely positive towards the political process.

                 Another argument to suggest that pressure groups have a positive impact is that legislation is improved via consultation with various groups. In doing so, decision-makers can consider conflicting viewpoints and reach something of a compromise position. The argument that laws are improved via consultation with pressure groups stems from the pluralist perspective, which takes a positive view of the impact of such groups upon the broader political process.

                Thirdly, pressure groups represent those interests within society that might otherwise be marginalized. In the case of the US; the decision-making elite is overwhelmingly white, male and Protestant. Only 2 Presidents have derived from outside of the WASP demographic, only 2 women have ever been on a presidential ticket and the vast majority of law-makers are from a WASP background. In order to counter possible bias, pressure groups exist which seek to represent a wide gamut of minority groups. This may be based upon racial background (such as the National Council of La Raza or the Congress of Racial Equality), gender (such as the NOW) or sexuality (such as Queer Nation). Equally, there are pressure groups that seek to defend individual rights from the abuse of power by the official authorities. Prominent examples here include the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Americans for Democratic Action (ADA). Pressure groups who uphold and defend the rights of minority groups and those of the individual contribute could be said to contribute positively towards the democratic process. The only counter-argument to consider is that such actions might serve to exacerbate the interests of such groups at the expense of wider society. It may well lead to the views of minority groups being imposed upon society under the guise of liberal values such as tolerance and choice.

                The final argument to consider is that of advancing the cause of democracy. Many groups have, throughout their history; sought to promote democratic values within the states. Although it is politicians that ultimately make decisions and implement legislation, and it is judges that rule upon matters that may impact upon democratic values; pressure groups play a vital role in promoting a democratic cause. This argument applies to a surprisingly broad range of groups. Although liberal groups such as the aforementioned ADA immediately spring to mind, or those that protect and uphold the rights of minority groups; we must of course recognize those that champion conservative values too. For instance, the NRA helped to bring the case of DC v. Heller (2008) to the attention of the Supreme Court. The Heller judgment reaffirmed the right of the individual to own firearms, a judgment also supported in the context of the states by the McDonald v. Chicago (2010) ruling. There are of course many historical examples to consider of instances in which pressure groups have advanced the march of democracy. Of these, perhaps the most famous pertains to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) who sponsored the test case leading to the de-segregation of schools (Brown v. Board of Education (1954)). During the Bush administration, the ACLU brought the case of Ashcroft v. ACLU (2004) to the judicial bench over the use of wiretapping by the official authorities. They also won a case against the FBI on the basis that ‘fishing’ expeditions were in violation of the first and fourth amendments.