Political Science 313

Interest Groups

Course Syllabus

Fall 2006

MWF 9:00 - 9:50 a.m. in 346 MARB

Instructor: Jay Goodliffe

Office: 752 SWKT

Office Hours: MW 1-2 p.m., or by appointment

Phone: 422-9136

e-mail: goodliffe@byu.edu

Contents:

Home Page

Office Hours

Prerequisites

Objectives

Approach

Requirements

How to Succeed in this Course

Academic Honesty and Plagiarism

Discrimination

Readings

Schedule

Home Page

The home page for Political Science 313 is http://goodliffe.byu.edu/313/. Check the home page often for announcements, corrections, instructions for assignments, syllabus, etc. You should also check your email regularly.

Office Hours

I will hold office hours on Monday and Wednesday 1-2 p.m. I am also available at most other times if you make arrangements with me. Feel free to talk to me before classes, or to contact me by email or voice mail. I encourage you to come by to talk about assignments in the class, suggestions for improving the class, politics and current events, the perils of student life, or for any other reason.

Prerequisites

It is understood that students enrolled in this class will have taken at a minimum Political Science 110 (Introduction to American Politics) and Political Science 200 (Political Inquiry). Thus, I expect all students to have a working knowledge of American politics, and to know how to write an academic research paper. If you have not taken both of those courses, take this course after you have. Without these prerequisites, it will be more difficult to succeed in this course.

Objectives

This course is an introduction to interest groups and their role in American politics. It will consider ways to evaluate interest groups systematically and rigorously. The course will examine the following questions:

1. How do interest groups get started, and how do they maintain themselves?
2. Why do people join interest groups, and who is likely to be a member?
3. What do interest groups want?
4. How and when do interest groups lobby?
5. How does money affect public policy?
6. How do interest groups affect elections?
7. What are the effects of lobbying on public policy and democracy?
8. Are interest groups good or bad?

Approach

The course will be conducted as a seminar. Students will rotate presenting and leading the discussion of the readings. Students who are not presenting will be required to write a short response paper about the readings and participate actively. Therefore, it is incumbent that you have read the material to be discussed during each class period prior to the class. You should anticipate that the discussion leaders and I will call on you to contribute your opinion.

I actively encourage questions, interruptions, cries for help, protests of disbelief, etc. You will never be penalized for participating--even when this takes the form of vague complaints like, "I've got no clue why we are reading this stuff!" I urge--indeed, I expect--you to take advantage of the chance to talk with me during office hours.

Requirements

A Chinese proverb (supposedly) says, "I hear and I forget, I see and I remember, I do and I understand." This philosophy drives the requirements of the class.

Reading Responses	10%
Discussion Leading	10%
Class Participation	5%
Paper	30%
Midterm Exam	15%
Final Exam	30%

Readings

Most of the readings for the course are from professional research journals and academic books. We will generally be reading one article or chapter per class.

Reading Responses

Before each class, you are required to send me a short email (2-3 paragraphs) for the readings for that class. The email is due at 6 a.m. the day we discuss the material. The first one or two paragraphs should explicate the arguments of the readings, including such things as independent and dependent variables and causal mechanisms; and assess the evidence, summarizing what the data are and how well they support the authors' arguments. The last paragraph needs to show your independent, critical thought, and can take (at least) one of the following four forms (from Professor Nielson):

1. Intra-class connection. Example: Today's reading reminded me of the earlier reading by.... The connection I see is.... Today's author reads the evidence differently because…
2. Cross-curriculum connections. Example: Today's reading got me thinking about a similar problem in my economics class....
3. Data connections. Example: Today's reading implied that all politicians are corrupt, yet The New York Times today carried a story about a Senator who was retiring to spend more time with her family, calling into question the author's initial assumption….
4. Puzzlement. Example: Today's reading discussed how special interests invest in incumbents. But we read something earlier by the same author that said that special interests were essentially uninterested in such behavior. How can these both be right?

Other means, beyond these four forms, of showing your independent thought and analysis will also be fine, provided your thoughts are organized and clearly expressed, and that you are making connections between ideas.

I will provide feedback on how you are doing on the emails at a few points in the term, but a far better way to have them evaluated is to print them, bring them to class, and use them as the basis for our discussions. In addition, they are also a chance to explore ideas without the pressure of expanding them into full papers, though it is likely that some arguments used in great papers will get their start as smart emails.

You should submit emails for each reading assignment every day that we have a reading assignment, except when you are leading class discussion. Each student can skip two emails without penalty. You should feel free to discuss the readings together before composing the emails. Collaboration and discussion is encouraged. However, you will be graded on your independence of thought in your analysis, so copying each other's work will be penalized severely.

Discussion Leading

Each student will have the opportunity to lead class discussion on the readings a few times during the term. ("I do and I understand.") In this discussion, you must use some sort of visual aid (e.g. poster, overhead slides, PowerPoint, etc.). ("I see and I remember.") Discussion-leading students may wish to meet with me before presenting their readings. You should plan to spend about 20 minutes leading discussion on a given chapter or article, spending much more time on analysis (15 minutes or so) than on summary (5 minutes). More details on what I expect in leading class discussion are found here. Feel free to apply the readings to the group you are researching.

Class Participation

Since this class is a seminar, students should be ready to engage one another in discussion. Of course, in order to participate, one needs to attend class. Participation consists of listening attentively, asking and responding to thought-provoking questions, connecting the readings to the interest group you are researching for your paper, and bringing up relevant points discussed in your reading response. Active, collaborative learning (i.e. learning by group participation) not only enhances your education, but is more interesting to both student and instructor.

You are responsible for any announcements made in class even if you did not attend. I suggest that you exchange phone numbers and/or e-mail addresses with other students in the class.

Paper

Students will write a paper (~20 pages) on an interest group that is actively participating in the 2006 elections. I am particularly interested in groups that are active in the Utah congressional elections. In consultation with the instructor, you will select the interest group; no two students may study the same group. You should develop detailed factual knowledge--the idea is to become an expert on your specific group. In particular, you should have details about how the organization recruits members, how the organization makes internal decisions, where it gets money, where it spent its money in previous elections, where it spends its money in 2006, etc. You may want to call or write the organization directly for information. You can find some questions to stimulate your research here (click on each chapter): Interest Group Questions.

To assist you in completing the assignment, you will submit preliminary assignments about the interest group due throughout the term. This preliminary material will constitute 10% of your total paper grade. Near the end of the term, you will combine the outlines and information into a coherent final paper about your group.

Fact Sheet

Students should submit a one-page fact sheet on the interest group of their choice. Facts might include the founding date, names of key leaders, requirements for membership, items on the group's agenda, or other things that the student judges to be important.

Paper Proposal

Students should submit a two-page paper proposal. The proposal should identify a specific interest group as the subject of the paper and identify questions or puzzles about the behavior of the group. Students should specify what kind of empirical evidence they expect to have available to during the project.

Progress Report

Students should prepare a two-page memo on the work they have (or have not) completed since the paper proposal was submitted. If any problems or roadblocks have been encountered, this is a good time to mention them. A student may suggest revisions to the initial proposal or may submit a new proposal at this time.

Peer Evaluation

Students will be assigned to a group of three. Each student in the group will distribute his or her paper to the other two students for peer evaluation. (Students will evaluate two peers' papers, and return each of them with an evaluation sheet. Peers will also give grades to the instructor only. Finally, authors will give grades to their peers on how well they were able to constructively criticize authors' arguments, and give specific suggestions on how to strengthen those arguments.) After incorporating the appropriate suggestions and criticisms, students will turn in their final paper. Authors will also grade the peer reviewers. Ten percent of your final paper grade is determined by your initial submission, and 10% of your final paper grade is determined by how well you evaluate your peers.

Final Paper

An excellent ("A") paper will apply theories we have discussed in class, point out strengths and shortcomings of the theories, suggest revisions of the theory based on the case studied, and integrate the case with the readings. A satisfactory ("C") paper will emphasize description of the group over application of the theories. As with all writing, I will also evaluate the logic and organization of the paper, as well as spelling and grammar. I strongly recommend that you consult with me through all phases of your research. Seventy percent of your final paper grade is determined by your final submission to me.

The paper is due at the beginning of the last day of class. If you cannot make it to class, please leave the assignment with the department secretaries (in the Political Science office--745 SWKT) before class begins. You may also submit your paper via email (as an attachment). I will deduct a 10 points per day (including weekends) for late papers (on a 100 point scale). That said, I am a reasonable person; if you anticipate a problem with submitting the paper when it is due, speak to me before the assignment is due so that we can try to work out an alternative arrangement. The papers may be picked up in the Political Science office (745 SWKT) after they are graded. The papers will be discarded at the end of the Winter 2007 semeester.

Exams

There will be one midterm exam taken in the Testing Center during the term that covers about 7 weeks' material, and a final examination that will be comprehensive. The final exam will be administered on Wednesday, December 20 in our classroom from 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. (as noted on the final exam schedule). Do not ask to take the final examination early. It is against university policy to give final examinations outside of the scheduled time. You should not make any plans that interfere with the final exam schedule. Please do not ask for exceptions. I am not authorized to grant them.

You may bring any notes that you have written yourself into the exams (i.e., you may not bring anyone else's notes, the text, or any articles). The exams will consist primarily of short-answer identification questions and essay questions that assess the skills listed in Objectives. The examinations will be difficult. I expect you to be able to apply the material that we have covered in class and to explain various concepts. You will have the opportunity to suggest questions for the exams (midterm and final). The final exams may be picked up in the Political Science office (745 SWKT) after they are graded. All exams will be discarded at the end of the Winter 2007 semester.

How to Succeed in this Course

I do not grade on a curve.

I include the following information from the BYU 2006-2007 Undergraduate Catalog which guides how I grade and determine workload:

"The grade given in a course is the teacher's evaluation of the student's performance, achievement, and understanding in that subject as covered in the class. The following adjectives indicate the meaning of the letter grades:

A	Excellent
B	Good
C	Satisfactory
D	Minimum passing
E	Unacceptable

"Hence, the grade A means that the student's performance, achievement, and understanding were excellent in the portion of the subject covered in the class.

"There are prerequisites that qualify students to be admitted to the more advanced classes offered by a department. A senior has added experience, understanding, and preparation and, consequently, progresses in courses that would have been impossible when the student was a freshman. The level of performance, achievement, and understanding required to qualify for each grade that carries credit (any grade other than E, UW, I, IE, or WE) is higher in a more advanced class than in those classes that precede it, and the student is prepared to work at this higher level" (p. 58).

"The expectation for undergraduate courses is three hours of work per week per credit hour for the average student who is appropriately prepared; much more time may be required to achieve excellence" (p. 56).

Putting these statements together, the university expects an "average student" to work "much more" than 9 hours a week to receive an 'A' (= "excellence") in a 3 credit-hour course. This is my expectation as well.

This workload has been affirmed by President Bateman in his devotional addresses. On 7 September 1999, he stated, "It takes approximately three hours of study outside class for every hour in the classroom. If you take 15 hours of credit, you should allocate upward of 45 hours for study per week." On 19 September 2000, he advised, "Study daily--at least three hours for every hour in class."

Students who have succeeded in this course have the following characteristics. They

• Always read before coming to class.
• Study in groups to make sure they understand the material.
• Come to class with questions.
• Understand why it is important to know the theories, and how to apply those theories.
• Write multiple drafts.
• Seek feedback on their writing from others.

Academic Honesty and Plagiarism

From the Academic Honesty section of the BYU Honor Code: "The first injunction of the BYU Honor Code is the call to `be honest.' Students come to the university not only to improve their minds, gain knowledge, and develop skills that will assist them in their life's work, but also to build character. `President David O. McKay taught that character is the highest aim of education' (The Aims of a BYU Education, p. 6). It is the purpose of the BYU Academic Honesty Policy to assist in fulfilling that aim.

"BYU students should seek to be totally honest in their dealings with others. They should complete their own work and be evaluated based upon that work. They should avoid academic dishonesty and misconduct in all its forms, including but not limited to plagiarism, fabrication or falsification, cheating, and other academic misconduct." Read the full version here, and specific parts here (parts attached to the original paper syllabus).

A colleague (Mitch Sanders, formerly of Notre Dame) has already explicated these issues specifically for political science. Please read here (also attached to the original paper syllabus).

If you write a paper for another course (past or present) that uses the same topic as a paper for this course, you need to approve it with me first, and then you must turn in to me a copy of the paper from your other course.

Discrimination

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex discrimination against any participant in an educational program or activity that receives federal funds. The act is intended to eliminate sex discrimination in education. Title IX covers discrimination in programs, admissions, activities, and student-to-student sexual harassment. BYU's policy against sexual harassment extends not only to employees of the university but to students as well. If you encounter unlawful sexual harassment or gender based discrimination, please talk to your professor; contact the Equal Employment Office at 422-5895 or 367-5689 (24-hours); or contact the Honor Code Office at 422-2847.

Brigham Young University is committed to providing a working and learning atmosphere which reasonably accommodates qualified persons with disabilities. If you have any disability which may impair your ability to complete this course successfully, please contact the University Accessibility Center (422-2767). Reasonable academic accommodations are reviewed for all students who have qualified documented disabilities. Services are coordinated with the student and instructor by the UAC office. If you need assistance or if you feel you have been unlawfully discriminated against on the basis of disability, you may seek resolution through established grievance policy and procedures. You should contact the Equal Employment Office at 422-5895, D-282 ASB.

Readings

It is essential that you keep up with the reading. Indeed, I expect you to have completed reading assignments before the class in which we discuss it (thus, the reading responses). The exams draw directly on the required readings: I have the right to ask about things on the exams that were only covered in the readings.

Some of readings are from the texts (available in the bookstore); copies of the books are also on reserve at the Lee Library:

• Mancur Olson, Jr. 1971 [1965]. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN: 0674537513.
• Lawrence Rothenberg. 1992. Linking Citizens to Government: Interest Group Politics at Common Cause. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 0521425778.
• John R. Wright. 2003 [1995]. Interest Groups and Congress: Lobbying, Contributions, and Influence. New York: Longman. ISBN: 0321121872 [0024303011].

(You can also obtain these books through an on-line bookstore. The following website searches out several bookstores simultaneously: BooksPrice.com.)

Most of the other readings are journal articles and book chapters. These readings may be accessed through the internet via links provided below. For some readings, you will have to enter a user ID and password, provided separately. For other readings, you may have to enter your Route Y ID and password if you are accessing the readings off campus. To view or print most documents, the computer must have the Adobe Reader (downloadable free here). If necessary, I can also make the readings are available for checkout in the Department of Political Science office (745 SWKT) one reading at a time. Please let me know if you want this option.

You should read a national newspaper daily. Knowledge of current events will help you in your exams, paper, and active participation in class. I suggest subscribing to a national paper, or at the very least, reading on the web the national news of The New York Times (free with registration), The Washington Post (free with registration), or The Los Angeles Times (free with registration).

I may add or subtract readings during the term, as the campaign finance terrain is constantly shifting in the United States, and relevant academic studies may be published after the course has started. If I find something that provides greater insight or additional knowledge to our subject, I will add or substitute the reading.

Themes (September 6 - 11)

• James Madison. 1787. "Federalist No. 10." The Federalist Papers.
• David B. Truman. 1971. "Group Politics and Representative Democracy." In The Governmental Process: Political Interests and Public Opinion, 2nd ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf [Chapter 16].
• E.E. Schattschneider. 1960. "The Scope and Bias of the Pressure System." In The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston [Chapter 2].

Collective Action Problem (September 13 - 20)

• Olson: Introduction, Chapters 1 (skim 23-33), 2, 6
• Robert H. Salisbury. 1969. "An Exchange Theory of Interest Groups." Midwest Journal of Political Science 13(1): 1-32.
• Jack L. Walker. 1983. "The Origins and Maintenance of Interest Groups in America." American Political Science Review 77(2): 390-406.

Internal Dynamics (September 22 - 25)

• Albert O. Hirschman. 1986. "Exit and Voice: An Expanding Sphere of Influence." In Rival Views of Market Society and Other Recent Essays. New York: Viking [Chapter 4].
• Paul A. Sabatier and Susan M. McLaughlin. 1990. "Belief Congruence between Interest-Group Leaders and Members: An Empirical Analysis of Three Theories and a Suggested Synthesis." Journal of Politics 52(3): 914-935.

Universe (September 27 - October 6)

• Wright: Chapter 2
• Anthony J. Nownes. 2004. "The Population Ecology of Interest Group Formation: Mobilizing for Gay and Lesbian Rights in the United States, 1950–98." British Journal of Political Science 34(1): 49-67.
• Virginia Gray and David Lowery. 2001. "The Expression of Density Dependence in State Communities of Organized Interests." American Politics Research 29(4): 374-391. [Click on "Full-Text PDF" for the third article.]
• Frank R. Baumgartner and Beth L. Leech. 2001. "Interest Niches and Policy Bandwagons: Patterns of Interest Group Involvement in National Politics." Journal of Politics 63(4): 1191-1213.
• Virginia Gray and David Lowery. 2001. "The Institutionalization of State Communities of Organized Interests." Political Research Quarterly 54(2): 265-284.

Influencing the Legislature (October 9 - 25)

• Wright: Chapters 3, 4, 5.
• Thomas Stratmann. 2005. "Some Talk: Money in Politics. A (Partial) Review of the Literature." Public Choice 124(1): 135-156.
• Richard L. Hall and Alan V. Deardorff. 2006. "Lobbying as Legislative Subsidy." American Political Science Review 100(1): 69-84.
• Fred S. McChesney. 1997. "Observing Extortion: The Practice of Rent Extraction." In Money for Nothing: Politicians, Rent Extraction, and Political Extortion. Cambridge: Harvard Univerity Press [Chapter 3].
• Ernest Wittenberg and Elisabeth Wittenberg. 1994. How to Win in Washington: Very Practical Advice about Lobbying, the Grassroots, and the Media, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Blackwell [selections].
• Ronald J. Hrebenar, Melanee Cherry, and Kathanne Greene. 1987. "Utah: Church and Corporate Power in the Nation's Most Conservative State." In Interest Group Politics in the American West, eds. Ronald J. Hrebenar and Clive S. Thomas. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press [Chapter 12].

Influencing the Public (October 30 - November 13)

• William P. Browne. 1998. "Lobbying the Public: All-Directional Advocacy." In Interest Group Politics, 5th ed., eds. Allan J. Cigler and Burdett A. Loomis. Washington: CQ Press [Chapter 16].
• Beth L. Leech, Frank R. Baumgartner, Jeffrey M. Berry, Marie Hojnacki, and David C. Kimball. 2002. "Organized Interests and Issue Setting in Policy Debates." In Interest Group Politics, 6th ed., eds. Allan J. Cigler and Burdett A. Loomis. Washington: CQ Press [Chapter 13].
• Lucig H. Danielian and Benjamin I. Page. 1994. "The Heavenly Chorus: Interest Group Voices on TV News." American Journal of Political Science 38(4): 1056-1078.
• Mark J. Rozell, Clyde Wilcox, and David Madland. 2006. "Interest Groups and Political Parties" and "Interest Groups and Voters." In Interest Groups in American Campaigns: The New Face of Electioneering, 2nd ed. Washington: CQ Press [Chapters 2 and 4].
• Jay Goodliffe. 2000. "The 1998 Utah Second Congressional District Race." In Outside Money: Soft Money and Issue Advocacy in the 1998 Congressional Elections, ed. David B. Magleby. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers [Chapter 10].
• Arthur Lupia and John G. Matsusaka. 2004. "Direct Democracy: New Approaches to Old Questions." Annual Review of Political Science 7: 463-482.

Influencing the Executive Branch (November 15 - 21)

• Mark A. Peterson. 1992. "Interest Mobilization and the Presidency." In The Politics of Interests: Interest Groups Transformed, ed. Mark P. Petracca. Boulder: Westview Press [Chapter 10].
• George. J. Stigler. 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation." Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 2(1): 3-21.
• Mathew D. McCubbins and Thomas Schwartz. 1984. "Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols versus Fire Alarms." American Journal of Political Science 28(1): 165-179.
• Daniel P. Carpenter. 2002. "Groups, the Media, Agency Waiting Costs, and FDA Drug Approval." American Journal of Political Science 46(3): 490-505.

Influencing the Judiciary (November 27 - December 1)

• Lee Epstein and C. K. Rowland. 1991. "Debunking the Myth of Interest Group Invincibility in the Courts." American Political Science Review 85(1): 205-217.
• Gregory A. Caldeira and John R. Wright. 1988. "Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court." American Political Science Review 82(4): 1109-1127.
• James F. Spriggs, II, and Paul J. Wahlbeck. 1997. "Amicus Curiae and the Role of Information at the Supreme Court." Political Research Quarterly 50(2): 365-386.

Case Study: Common Cause (December 4 - 8)

• Rothenberg: all

Systemic Impact (December 11 - 13)

• Mancur Olson. 1982. "The Implications." In The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities. New Haven: Yale University Press [Chapter 3].
• Donald Wittman. 1989. "Why Democracies Produce Efficient Results." Journal of Political Economy 97(6): 1395-1424.
• Wright: Chapters 6, 7.

Schedule (subject to change)

References

Parts of this syllabus are drawn from the syllabi of Scott Ainsworth, Ken Godwin, Michael Heaney, David Lowery, Dan Nielson, and Larry Rothenberg.

Political Science 313 home page

Jay Goodliffe's home page

This page is http://goodliffe.byu.edu/313/syllabus.htm