Author
Abstract
Objective Lobbying by nonprofits is a relatively new topic that has drawn attention from political science scholars and nonprofit managers. Several studies have demonstrated there to be lobbying inequalities among nonprofits, but few have compared lobbying expenditures across groups and none have taken into account how well groups have mobilized. Methods Examining 227 groups that issue legislative “scorecards†over six terms of Congress (1999–2010), the author uses a mix of analysis of variance and regression analysis to determine whether groups with different missions lobby at different levels and whether mobilization factors, such as revenue and membership, can help explain these differences. Results The author finds that organizational revenue and membership predict how much most groups spend on lobbying. However, this finding does not apply to all groups. Public interest nonprofits lobby at higher levels as both their revenues and memberships increase. But business associations lobby at significantly high levels regardless of how well they mobilize. Conclusions These results suggest that business associations view lobbying as a more necessary activity for completion of their missions than other tax†exempt organizations. Many of the most active groups in Washington are small business associations representing “niche†interests. If public interest groups formed around broader social interests are less represented in Washington, as these results suggest, then the voices of large sectors of society, and not just public interest group members, are lost in the policy discussion.
Suggested Citation
Daniel E. Chand, 2017.
"Lobbying and Nonprofits: Money and Membership Matter—But Not for All,"
Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1296-1312, November.
Handle:
RePEc:bla:socsci:v:98:y:2017:i:5:p:1296-1312
DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12386
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:98:y:2017:i:5:p:1296-1312. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.