US Pressure Groups
Pressure groups play a significant role in the American political system due to the structure of the US federal system and the multiple access points it offers. Unlike the UK, where general elections and devolved or local assembly elections are the main democratic channels, the US provides many more opportunities for pressure groups to engage with and influence the political process. For instance, the US has a directly elected president, two separately elected chambers of Congress, House elections every two years, and one third of the Senate up for re election every cycle. Furthermore, direct primary elections are held for selecting party candidates, and every state elects its own governor. At the local level, there are over 19,000 directly elected mayors across the US. This wide range of elected positions allows pressure groups to campaign and exert influence at national, state, and local levels simultaneously.
In addition to this, the US uses mechanisms like ballot initiatives and referendums much more frequently than the UK. These direct democracy tools give pressure groups the chance to shape public policy by campaigning for their issues to be put on the ballot and voted on by the public. This has allowed pressure groups to drive policy on contentious issues such as marijuana legalisation, gun control, and same sex marriage. By contrast, the UK has only held 24 nationwide referendums in its history, meaning pressure groups in the UK have far fewer opportunities to campaign on direct policy decisions.
US pressure groups also benefit from far fewer restrictions on campaign financing than those in the UK. In the US, there is no upper limit on how much can be spent during elections by Political Action Committees (PACs) and Super PACs, as long as Super PACs do not coordinate directly with candidates. This has led to massive financial influence. In the 2020 presidential and congressional elections, PACs and Super PACs raised over $1.8 billion, allowing pressure groups and interest groups to flood the airwaves with advertisements and support candidates aligned with their goals. In contrast, pressure groups in the UK are subject to strict legal limits. Most are registered charities and cannot make political donations or directly endorse candidates. During a general election campaign, UK pressure groups can only spend around £319,800 nationally, significantly limiting their political impact compared to US groups.
The lobbying industry in the US is also much larger and more institutionalised. There are over 11,000 professional lobbyists operating in Washington D.C. alone, working on behalf of corporations, unions, advocacy groups, and think tanks. These lobbyists have significant access to lawmakers and government departments, and many former politicians and officials take up lobbying roles after leaving office a phenomenon known as the "revolving door." While the UK does have lobbyists and former ministers who become consultants or advisers, the scale of the industry is much smaller and more regulated.
Pressure groups in both the US and UK also use the courts to protect or expand civil rights, often focusing on religious freedoms, free speech, or anti-discrimination laws. A notable example in the US was the 2018 Supreme Court case Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, in which the Alliance Defending Freedom represented a Christian baker who refused to make a cake celebrating a same-sex marriage on religious grounds. The court ruled in favour of the baker, citing religious liberty. A similar case occurred in the UK: Lee v. Ashers Baking Company, in which the Christian Institute supported a Northern Irish bakery that declined to make a cake with a message supporting same sex marriage. The UK Supreme Court also ruled in favour of the baker, recognising the right to freedom of conscience and religious expression.
Overall pressure groups in the US have significantly more opportunities to influence government and society than their UK counterparts. The structure of the federal system, frequent elections, direct democracy mechanisms, and fewer restrictions on political spending all contribute to a political environment where pressure groups are powerful actors. However, this influence also raises concerns about unequal access and the dominance of wealthy interest groups, particularly those able to fund extensive lobbying operations or political advertising campaigns
© Copyright mypoliticsnotes