IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v114y2020i4p1117-1137_13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Polarized Pluralism: Organizational Preferences and Biases in the American Pressure System

Author

Listed:
  • CROSSON, JESSE M.
  • FURNAS, ALEXANDER C.
  • LORENZ, GEOFFREY M.

Abstract

For decades, critics of pluralism have argued that the American interest group system exhibits a significantly biased distribution of policy preferences. We evaluate this argument by measuring groups’ revealed preferences directly, developing a set of ideal point estimates, IGscores, for over 2,600 interest groups and 950 members of Congress on a common scale. We generate the scores by jointly scaling a large dataset of interest groups’ positions on congressional bills with roll-call votes on those same bills. Analyses of the scores uncover significant heterogeneity in the interest group system, with little conservative skew and notable inter-party differences in preference correspondence between legislators and ideologically similar groups. Conservative bias and homogeneity reappear, however, when weighting IGscores by groups’ PAC contributions and lobbying expenditures. These findings suggest that bias among interest groups depends on the extent to which activities like PAC contributions and lobbying influence policymakers’ perceptions about the preferences of organized interests.

Suggested Citation

  • Crosson, Jesse M. & Furnas, Alexander C. & Lorenz, Geoffrey M., 2020. "Polarized Pluralism: Organizational Preferences and Biases in the American Pressure System," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(4), pages 1117-1137, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:114:y:2020:i:4:p:1117-1137_13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055420000350/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:apsrev:v:114:y:2020:i:4:p:1117-1137_13. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.