Structural:
- UK pressure groups already have the opportunity to lobby government/executive
- USA pressure groups have more chance to lobby because there are more congressional and elections in general. Power lies with Congress so pressure groups lobby the legislature.
Determining
The Success of PG:
- Size of membership, amount of money available, position in the political system, attitude of administration, ability to access to the media and people.
- “Pressure groups are successful largely to the extent that those who control the authority of the state allow them to be successful” – Malcom Wales 1988.
- In both countries, power does not reside with PG. The success of them depends on the ability of the government to stand up to them.
- PGs aren’t too powerful, they’re only powerful because structurally the government allows them to.
Electioneering
& Endorsing:
- More elective posts in the USA than in the UK therefore there are greater opportunities to lobby.
- Mainly lobby and endorse the two main parties but can lobby at state level not just at a federal level.
- More chances to lobby due to structural reasons
Trade
Unions & Businesses:
- Structural as well as cultural.
- Cultural & Structural: Trade unions in the UK are a part of history e.g Labour party forming out of unions.
- Cultural: Business groups maintain strong links with the Conservative party
- Structural: USA has high levels of incumbency therefore pressure groups give their money to incumbents and not to challengers.
- In 2012, 91% of senators and 90% of representatives who sought re-election won.
- Culturally: Membership of trade unions is down in the USA. But this is also decreasing in the UK.
- 26% of people in the UK are members of a trade union, that number is 13% in the USA.
Lobbying
The Legislature:
- Structural: Parliament is heavily controlled by the party [whips] therefore pressure groups don’t have a chance to lobby
- Congress is less disciplined. “Most pressure groups have learnt that the surest route to the heart of Congress is through their constituents” – Martin Harrop.
- UK: Parliament is not a happy hunting ground for pressure groups.
- In recent years, pressure groups have attempted to lobby the Lords as peers are not whipped to toe the party line.
Lobbying
The Executive:
- PG focus on the executive in the UK as this is where power lies.
- Policy specific groups tend to focus their efforts on the relevant governmental department e.g NEU to Damian Hinds.
- Structural: The separation of powers as opposed to the fusion of powers and the dominance of the government in the UK is the most important factor that affects the different ways pressure groups operate in the two countries.
Lobbying
The Judiciary:
- Difference between lobbying in both countries as they have different political important in each country.
- “In countries in which the Constitution provides the courts with a formal role of judicial review, activists will use the courts more readily” – Watts 2008
- Structurally this method of lobbying is much more established in the USA than in the UK
- In the USA groups spend vast amounts of time and money to lobby the judiciary.
- Culturally: PGs have a long history of lobbying the Supreme Court and has been a key player in landmark decisions.
- Structurally: In the UK, Parliament is sovereign so there is no such thing as lobbying the judiciary even with the introduction of the new Supreme Court.
- This may change in the future as opportunities arise but the UK court lacks the same political clout of names in Washington. The balance will therefore remain the same.
Grassroots
Activity:
- Important in both countries.
- Seek to influence in the media and to use celebrity endorsement where possible.
- Structurally: In the UK political parties are seen as more disciplined so PG focus their attention on the two main parties.
- Structurally: In the USA, parties are looser federation of state parties so influence will be aimed more at the branches of government themselves.