An interest group is an organization whose members share common concerns, and try to influence government policies that impact those concerns. Show Elected officials frequently complain about the influence of "special interests" on American politics. The fact is, however, that interest groups work closely with members of Congress and the administration to draft legislation and policy initiatives, provide information both to government and the public on a broad range of topical issues, and contribute significantly to political campaigns. The number of interest groups has grown dramatically in recent years, and it is difficult to think of a segment of American society that is not represented by one. Interest groups can be classified as to the groups that they represent. Examples of economic interest groups include the following:
The goal of these groups is to protect the economic well-being of their clients or members. The AMA, for instance, long opposed Medicare and the development of health maintenance organizations (HMOs) as "socialized medicine" in favor of traditional fee-for-service. Journal Information Public Administration Review has been the premier journal in the field of public administration research and theory for more than 75 years, and is the only journal in public administration that serves academics, practitioners, and students interested in the public sector and public sector management. Articles identify and analyze current trends, provide a factual basis for decision making, stimulate discussion, and make the leading literature in the field available in an easily accessible format. Publisher Information Wiley is a global provider of content and content-enabled workflow solutions in areas of scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly research; professional development; and education. Our core businesses produce scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly journals, reference works, books, database services, and advertising; professional books, subscription products, certification and training services and online applications; and education content and services including integrated online teaching and learning resources for undergraduate and graduate students and lifelong learners. Founded in 1807, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. has been a valued source of information and understanding for more than 200 years, helping people around the world meet their needs and fulfill their aspirations. Wiley has published the works of more than 450 Nobel laureates in all categories: Literature, Economics, Physiology or Medicine, Physics, Chemistry, and Peace. Wiley has partnerships with many of the world’s leading societies and publishes over 1,500 peer-reviewed journals and 1,500+ new books annually in print and online, as well as databases, major reference works and laboratory protocols in STMS subjects. With a growing open access offering, Wiley is committed to the widest possible dissemination of and access to the content we publish and supports all sustainable models of access. Our online platform, Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) is one of the world’s most extensive multidisciplinary collections of online resources, covering life, health, social and physical sciences, and humanities. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
Abstract In this Article, Einer Elhauge analyzes whether interest group theory justifies various proposals to change constitutional review, antitrust law, or statutory interpretation in order to make courts less deferential to the political process. He begins by demonstrating that interest group theory cannot identify instances where interest group influence is disproportionate without using implicit normative baselines that reflect substantive conclusions about the merits of political outcomes. Because such substantive conclusions are contestable, he concludes that interest group theory can provide no reliable grounds for collective condemnation of the political process. He then argues that, even if one stipulates a normative baseline, interest group theory does not demonstrate that the litigation process has a comparative advantage over the political process. Nor can one justify more intrusive judicial review on the ground that it increases the transaction costs of interest group capture. More intrusive judicial review can sometimes decrease such transaction costs, and increasing transaction costs can perversely encourage interest group activity, increase the relative advantage of interest groups, and retard legal changes that benefit the general public. In a final section, the Article offers parallel reasons for rejecting the claim that decision theory also justifies more intrusive judicial review. Journal Information The Yale Law Journal publishes original scholarly work in all fields of law and legal study. The journal contains articles, essays, and book reviews written by professors and legal practitioners throughout the world, and slightly shorter notes and comments written by individual journal staff members. The journal is published monthly from October through June with the exception of February. Publisher Information For over a century, the Yale Law Journal has been at the forefront of legal scholarship, sparking conversation and encouraging reflection among scholars and students, as well as practicing lawyers and sitting judges and Justices. The Journal strives to shape discussion of the most important and relevant legal issues through a rigorous scholarship selection and editing process. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. How do interest groups influence federal judges quizlet?Interest groups in the American judicial system seek out litigants whose cases seem particularly strong or they also may support them with amicus curiae briefs which attempt to influence the Court's decision, raise additional point of view, and present information it contained in the briefs.
What ways do interest groups try to influence the government quizlet?Terms in this set (4). Lobbying. When a representative of an interest group tries to influence the government by communicating with those in government.. Litigation. Lawsuits.. Mobilizing public opinion. Institutional advertising, protests and demonstrations, and grassroot mobilizations.. Using electoral politics.. How do interest groups try to influence the courts quizlet?Interest groups lobby the courts by filing amicus curiae briefs in cases that go before the U.S. Supreme Court. Interest groups try to influence who is nominated to the federal courts.
What do interest groups do effectively quizlet?Interest groups are best able to represent geographic interests. Interest groups allow individuals to elect candidates to state office efficiently. Interest groups help to inform and organize the most interested citizens. Interest groups minimize competition in policy making.
|
In which of the following ways can interest groups most effectively exercise influence over the federal courts?
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 WIKIFI Inc.
