Affluence and Influence by Gilens Martin

Author:Gilens, Martin
Language: eng
Format: epub, pdf
Publisher: Princeton University Press
Published: 2012-04-28T16:00:00+00:00

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001

N indicates the number of proposed policy changes in dataset on which each organization took a position. Excludes the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, which took positions on fewer than twenty of the proposed policy changes.

The strongest positive associations between interest groups’ positions and the preferences of the less well-off are shown in the next two sections of table 5.7. The four unions in my expanded Power 25 list show consistently strong tendencies to share the preferences of low- and middle-income Americans, with much weaker (but still positive) associations with the preferences of the affluent. Unions tended to side with the poor and the middle class in opposing free-trade policies and cuts in capital gains and corporate income taxes, and in supporting increases in the minimum wage and the right to strike for groups like firefighters, police officers, and college teachers. Some of these favored changes were supported at lower levels by the affluent (like raising the minimum wage), while others had majorities of the well-off and the poor on opposite sides (like teachers’ right to strike).

Based on unions’ strong tendency to share the preferences of the less well-off and the large number of policy areas they are engaged in (the AFL-CIO in particular took positions on a large number of issues), unions would appear to be among the most promising interest group bases for strengthening the policy influence of America’s poor and middle class. Optimism in this regard must be tempered, however, by the steep decline in private-sector unionization rates over the past sixty years. In addition unions tend to be active on issues on which other powerful interest groups are aligned on the other side. Of the 1,357 proposed policy changes in my dataset on which at least one interest group took a position, interest groups were found on both sides of the issue only 30 percent of the time. In contrast, among the 311 proposed changes on which at least one union took a stand, interest groups were found on both sides 77 percent of the time. Because unions tend to be opposed by other interest groups far more frequently than the average for all interest groups, they are less likely to be able to prevail. Of course poor and middle-class Americans would be even less likely to find their preferences reflected in federal policy were it not for unions’ lobbying efforts. Other scholars have examined the obstacles and successes of unions’ political efforts in considerable detail.46 My data are consistent with much of this literature in suggesting both that unions are among the most important forces moving federal policy in a direction desired by the less well-off and that unions’ success in these efforts is likely to be fairly limited.

The third section of table 5.7 lists the four remaining interest groups that show strong positive associations with the preferences of the less well-off. The positions of the AARP in support of Medicare and Social Security are

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.