• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

US pressures groups are undemocratic, discuss

Extracts from this document...


US Pressure Groups are Undemocratic, Discuss A pressure group is an organised interest group in which members hold similar beliefs and actively pursue ways to influence government. Unlike political parties, which seek to win control of government, pressure groups are principally interested in influencing those who determine policy. Pressure groups in the US operate at all levels of government be it federal, state and local and seek to bring their influence to bear on all three branches of government. There are wide ranges of views amongst the pressure groups that operate in the US. Many tend to hold firm beliefs that they are somewhat effective in disabling political dominance of all three branches of government. Others however, see them as adding to the splintering and atomisation of US society, employing different techniques that make them largely undemocratic. Nevertheless, pressure groups, whether in the US or the UK are regarded as having important implications for a modern democracy. The arguments in favour of them tend to follow the functions they may usefully perform. Though them, citizens can participate in the political process between elections. Groups such as the National Organisation for Women (NOW) ...read more.


Again, it is apparent that pressure groups are a cause to the shattering of democracy in the US. Furthermore, many people may see them as representing public interest, but other subscribe to the fact that in the long run they are only really representing their own special interests. This can be in two different ways, firstly, through iron triangles and then through other methods. In terms of iron triangles, the term is used to describe the strong relationship between pressure groups, congressional committees and the relevant government department. All these three bind together in such as strong way that they guarantee the policy outcomes to befit all three parties involved. Many argue that obviously they develop such wall of resistance in order to benefit themselves and their members, abusing the triangle in reality. In short, people claim that they build relations with the congressional committees and departments to further pursue their own needs. The existence of these iron triangles raises the question of whether pressure group activities are compatible with a pluralist society. A pluralist society, as expressed by Robert Dahl, is one in which political resources such as money, expertise and access to both government and the mass media are spread widely and are in the hands of many diverse individuals and groups. ...read more.


These often have a major effect on elections. Moral Majority used 527 groups to attack liberal Senators through negative ads during the 1980 Congressional Elections. These attacks managed to unseat all those targeted, including Senator McGovern (D-SD), and replaced them with conservatives in the "Reagan Sweep". Negative advertising often doesn't portray the truth about candidates, constructing the language in a way to make them seem like they've said or done something they haven't, in no way does this positively contribute to the decisions of the electorate or to democracy in general. Pressure groups are an essential dimension of any democracy, yet they can endanger democracy if interest groups undermine the public interest or if the methods they use are corrupt or intimidating. In a democratic society, different forms of lobbying are essential to protect sections of society. The problem arises where greed and self-interest affects the rights of the public as a whole. To reach a firm conclusion, it is clear that pressure groups are to a degree very undemocratic, namely because of the methods they undertake. Yet, it must be made clear that they do perform key roles that seem to strengthen democracy rather than weaken it, and as long as power is not abused, pressure groups do not undermine the democratic process of the US. ?? ?? ?? ?? Francesca Cifaldi ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level United States section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level United States essays

  1. Peer reviewed

    Money and Media dominate modern day politics " how far do you agree?

    4 star(s)

    There is however, a much heavier influence coming from the press sector of the media in Britain.

  2. Consider whether the activities of pressure groups help or hinder the operation of a ...

    However, just like every other democratic institution, there are flaws. And like many flaws in American politics, it mostly comes down to manpower and money.

  1. Consider whether the activities of pressure groups help or hinder the operation of a ...

    The result of which is the large and varied number of interest groups which operate in the US, ranging from the veritable behemoth of the American Association of Retired People (AARP) with it's 35m members to the more obscure Sons of Norway.

  2. To what extent is it fair to say America is a land of 100 ...

    This dominance is exacerbated by the electoral system. Also, both parties encompass such a wide range of views that they are in effect all inclusive. The most extreme left or right wingers are members of either party. Also, successful candidates will move on policy and their beliefs to ensure the concept of being all inclusive.

  1. presidential power how far does it go

    In fact, I would consider that the true ideal of the United States is that it has a system of laws based on checks and balances this balance of the rights of the few vs. the rights of the many can maintain an equilibrium.

  2. '9 politicians sitting on a bench.' Critically evaluate this description of the US Supreme ...

    for Topeka (1954), the court ruled that the earlier case of Plessy v Ferguson was unconstitutional, and therefore made segregation in public places illegal. A judicially restrained judge may have decided that it was up to congress to make segregation unconstitutional, but these judicially activist judges decided that it was

  1. Critically analyse the appointment and confirmation process for nominees in the US Supreme Court

    However the US Supreme Court being very diverse a desirable result of the process. In 1916, Louis Brande became the first Jew to be appointed to the Court and in 1967 Thurgood Marhsall became the first Black Supreme Court Justice. Furthermore currently three women sit on the Supreme Court bench.

  2. Recent reforms have brought the UK and US closer constitutionally. Discuss.

    Overall, we can see this change is leadership style particularly with Blair and Thatcher, who both exerted a strong and charismatic style of leadership as PMs which was reflected in their approach to their Cabinet Governments. Their extensive use of bilateral meetings and personal advisors, such as Blair?s use of

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work