ipl-logo

Arguments Against Interest Groups

957 Words4 Pages

Interest groups are “organizations whose members have a common cause for which they seek to influence public policy.” The larger interest groups are listened to, according to Scott Reeder of the Times, not only because of campaign contributions but also because interest groups are “organized, passionate groups of ordinary people who speak out.” The role of interest groups in policy is questionable as there are many arguments for and against them. One critical case defending the role of interest groups in government is that interest groups are a vital element of democratic politics and allow citizens to involve themselves further in their government. However, interest groups are also a type of faction warned about by James Madison in Federalist 10 as it may represent interests at odds with the public good. …show more content…

Pluralist theory states that “a multitude of groups, not the people as a whole, govern the United States,” or that many special interest groups all participate as the smallest unit of American democracy. The theory of collective action, on the other hand, states that “large groups of people will organize only if they have some particular incentive: many will simply ‘free-ride’ on the efforts of others.” Basically, in this context, the pluralist theory argues that interest groups are a necessity, raising awareness and joining “different coalitions depending on the specific issues… based in economic… or in other interests,” whereas Olson’s theory of collective action states that “people do not automatically work together to promote their collective interests… so one should expect varying levels of collective action” resulting in the “free-rider problem,” wherein “a person can enjoy the benefits of the good without having to pay for

Open Document