Final Exam Study Guide
Conventional “Wisdom” on PACs * Conventional wisdom says money buys votes * Suggests that PACs will give money to enemies rather than friends * Logic says this is a bad investment * Groups would give to people who are against them in the hope that suddenly they’ll change their minds about certain issues and their constituents will forgive them for changing their policies * Money buys access, not votes * Campaign contributions establish relationships, which give you a “foot in the door” * You as a PAC are going to donate money to your allies, to establish strong ties to your friends * Access provides the opportunity to share expertise and to mobilize support * Hall and Wayman”Mobilization of bias” * Bias in itself is not necessarily bad thing * Committees are “preference outliers” because the median preference on a committee differs substantially from the median in chamber * Ex. Agriculture committee membersprefer higher level of farm subsidies * When committee members have a strong preference, they are more easily mobilized into action; they have greater enthusiasm * Committees are where the real work goers on! * Where the bills are shaped * Hypothesis- will PAC $ influence members of Congress to participate more in their committee activity * Dependent variable? Participation * Measurement>different indicators of participation * Voting * Attendance * Discussion * Scale: attendance is lowest form, amendment is highest form * Independent variables? * PAC $ * District opinion * Proximity of election (especially in Senate) * Partisanship * Majority Party Status * Seniority * Committee Chair * Margin of victory * Issue salience * Hypothesis- demobilization: by giving money, you lessen the intensity of opposition * Looked at: * Committee of agriculture * Found support for both mobilization and demobilization * Committee of Education and Labor * Mobilization: Yes, Demobilization: No, not significant * Committee of Commerce and Energy * Mobilization: Yes, Demobilization: opposite direction, significant * Are PACs a problem? * If they enhance expertise, no * If there is a systematic bias in group participation then yes * i.e. wealthy groups have too much influence on a single side of the issue * E.E. Schatteschneider”The flaw in the pluralist heaven is that the heavenly chorus sings with a strong upper-class accent”
Rossiter 1956: Roles of President “Chief Legislator”? * Recommends legislationsets the agenda * Threat of a veto is a tool to pressure Congress
NeustadtPresidential Power is “Power to Persuade” Bargaining Theory * N. observed that constitutional powers are quite limitedpower derives primarily from political realities today rather than from constitution * Presidential power derives from his advantageous bargaining position-single, unitary actor w/ national constituencylegitimacy and press attraction
Persuasive powers derive from 2 characteristics: 1. Professional Reputation-= qualifications, experience, reputation 2. Public Prestige- popularity, approval ratings a. Foreign crises enhance pop. Of president b. Speeches and public appearances”Going Public”
Real power is in persuading Congresstools for persuasion?
Administrative Presidency * As chief exec, president can use executive orders and other unilateral powers to get what he wants * This can pressure Congress for a permanent solution
Cox and McCubbins- “Procedural Cartel Theory”…