By MA
Scholars of the policy making process have employed different models to explain the factors that shape public policies. Pluralism recognizes coexisting interest groups as key actors. It assumes that the diverse interests benefit society, and the interaction of these interests through a democratic process yields policies that are, for the most part, acceptable to society as a whole.
Using the U.S. political system as an example, the lead précis discusses the influence of power wielded by wealthy individuals who can contribute large sums to political campaigns to promote their private interests. In The Policy Paradox, Deborah Stone proposes two solutions to reshape a political landscape that is dominated by private interests; change the composition of the electorate or change the identity of representatives. This essay will expand on Stone’s first proposed solution by showing that greater political participation would change the electorate to counteract concentrated power in public debate.
The lead précis notes that less than one percent of U.S. residents make financial contributions of $200 or more to political campaigns. And the small number of donors who do contribute $200 or more account for more than 70 percent of political donations. This is true, but a financial contribution is just one avenue for engaging in the policy process. It’s also important to consider patterns of political engagement.
Earlier this year, a Pew Research Center report estimated that slightly more than half (53.4%) of adults cast a vote in the 2012 presidential election. (DeSilver, 2016) A separate Pew survey measured individuals’ knowledge about political issues and level of participation in the policy process. (Pew Research Center, 2014) The study found a positive correlation between alignment with a political party and likelihood of political engagement. Respondents who identified closely with a political party were most likely to engage in political activity such as directly contacting an elected official, while those who described themselves as skeptical were least likely. In a micro sense, by not participating in the process, a skeptical citizen’s views are not considered at all, giving additional weight to those who choose to engage in the process. In a macro sense, bringing additional voices into the process facilitates consideration of broader interests in political debate.
Related to the first point about the number of people engaged in the process, policy change requires ongoing political engagement. While the fragmented U.S. political system can be seen as a barrier participation (DeSilver, 2016) pluralism asserts that fragmentation can be beneficial because it provides multiple levers for policy engagement. The public can use avenues other than making political contributions or voting, such as engaging in the regulatory process. Multi-faceted political engagement is used by private interests, but these strategies are available to all.
In Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It, Wilson examines regulatory agencies and argues that context shapes agency behavior. An industry that is likely to bear the cost of regulation while the benefits will be widespread has incentive to organize and lobby against the agency’s action. Wilson argues that this type of agency is vulnerable to capture if public attention to the issues that gave rise to the agency wanes. But ongoing engagement from the public can have the opposite effect.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a modern example. The CFPB was formed by legislation signed by President Obama in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. (Kirsch and Mayer, 2013) Consumer, civil rights, labor and fair lending advocates mobilized successfully to push for this independent agency to take on abusive lending practices and neglect from regulatory agencies despite strong opposition from the financial services industry.
Earlier this year, CFPB proposed regulations to rein in abusive practices of payday lenders. Before proposing the payday loan rule, CFPB held a series of town hall meetings where the public was invited to share their views. These events were purposefully held in geographic areas with a large concentration of payday loan borrowers and lenders. The public was also invited to submit testimony and comments directly to the agency at each stage of the rule-making process.
The payday loan industry has been heavily involved, contributing testimony and garnering support from members of congress to put external pressure on CFPB. Congresswoman and former Chair of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman-Schultz proposed legislation to weaken the CFPB’s proposed rule and even circulated a letter among her colleagues urging their support for weaker, industry-friendly rules. (Carter, 2016) Wasserman-Schultz’ was joined by other members of congress from Florida, her home state. Florida is also home to several payday lenders who made political contributions to Wasserman-Schultz and other members of the Florida congressional delegation.
But consumer groups were also active, and had some success in countering the payday loan industry’s efforts. After months of public pressure, including activism from the same public interest groups who lobbied for creation of the CFPB, Wasserman-Schultz backed away from her opposition to consumer-friendly payday loan rules. Wasserman-Schultz’ pivot came after she faced protesters in Florida and at national events on behalf of the DNC. As Wilson notes, entrepreneurial policymakers are often willing to take up causes in the public interest. Consumer groups aligned with progressive Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who have long been supporters of financial reform. Sanders went so far as to pledge support to a candidate who opposed Wasserman-Schultz in the primary. (Pyke, 2016) It eventually became politically difficult for Wasserman-Schultz to continue supporting the industry, and ignore her Florida constituents and other consumers who had been harmed by using costly payday loans.
The payday loan issue affects a relatively small segment of the public. But the example provides lessons to show the benefits of pluralism and a fragmented political system. Engaged citizens took advantage of opportunities to participate at many levels. They enlisted members of congress to amplify their voices, countering the effects of payday loan lenders who had done the same. Though the final CFPB rule has not been issued, the agency has modified the proposed rule in response to concerns raised by the public. This example shows that public interests can counter private ones. They are most effective when their efforts are ongoing and multi-faceted, and some of the same strategies employed by private interest groups.
Additional Works Cited
Drew DeSilver, “U.S. Voter Turnout Trails Most Developed Countries” Pew Research Center (August 2, 2016) Retrieved from: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/08/02/u-s-voter-turnout-trails-most-developed-countries/
Larry Kirsch and Robert N. Mayer, Financial Justice: The People’s Campaign to Stop Lender Abuse, (ABC-CLIO, LLC: 2013)
Alan Pyke, “Predatory Payday Lenders’ Top Democratic Ally Flip Flops On New Rules” Think Progress (June 3, 2016) Retrieved from: https://thinkprogress.org/predatory-payday-lenders-top-democratic-ally-flip-flops-on-new-rules-4c4b106f0274#.vv5v41t12
Pew Research Center, “Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology. Section 10: Political Participation, Interest and Knowledge” (June 26, 2014) Retrieved from: http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/26/section-10-political-participation-interest-and-knowledge/
Scholars of the policy making process have employed different models to explain the factors that shape public policies. Pluralism recognizes coexisting interest groups as key actors. It assumes that the diverse interests benefit society, and the interaction of these interests through a democratic process yields policies that are, for the most part, acceptable to society as a whole.
Using the U.S. political system as an example, the lead précis discusses the influence of power wielded by wealthy individuals who can contribute large sums to political campaigns to promote their private interests. In The Policy Paradox, Deborah Stone proposes two solutions to reshape a political landscape that is dominated by private interests; change the composition of the electorate or change the identity of representatives. This essay will expand on Stone’s first proposed solution by showing that greater political participation would change the electorate to counteract concentrated power in public debate.
The lead précis notes that less than one percent of U.S. residents make financial contributions of $200 or more to political campaigns. And the small number of donors who do contribute $200 or more account for more than 70 percent of political donations. This is true, but a financial contribution is just one avenue for engaging in the policy process. It’s also important to consider patterns of political engagement.
Earlier this year, a Pew Research Center report estimated that slightly more than half (53.4%) of adults cast a vote in the 2012 presidential election. (DeSilver, 2016) A separate Pew survey measured individuals’ knowledge about political issues and level of participation in the policy process. (Pew Research Center, 2014) The study found a positive correlation between alignment with a political party and likelihood of political engagement. Respondents who identified closely with a political party were most likely to engage in political activity such as directly contacting an elected official, while those who described themselves as skeptical were least likely. In a micro sense, by not participating in the process, a skeptical citizen’s views are not considered at all, giving additional weight to those who choose to engage in the process. In a macro sense, bringing additional voices into the process facilitates consideration of broader interests in political debate.
Related to the first point about the number of people engaged in the process, policy change requires ongoing political engagement. While the fragmented U.S. political system can be seen as a barrier participation (DeSilver, 2016) pluralism asserts that fragmentation can be beneficial because it provides multiple levers for policy engagement. The public can use avenues other than making political contributions or voting, such as engaging in the regulatory process. Multi-faceted political engagement is used by private interests, but these strategies are available to all.
In Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It, Wilson examines regulatory agencies and argues that context shapes agency behavior. An industry that is likely to bear the cost of regulation while the benefits will be widespread has incentive to organize and lobby against the agency’s action. Wilson argues that this type of agency is vulnerable to capture if public attention to the issues that gave rise to the agency wanes. But ongoing engagement from the public can have the opposite effect.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a modern example. The CFPB was formed by legislation signed by President Obama in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. (Kirsch and Mayer, 2013) Consumer, civil rights, labor and fair lending advocates mobilized successfully to push for this independent agency to take on abusive lending practices and neglect from regulatory agencies despite strong opposition from the financial services industry.
Earlier this year, CFPB proposed regulations to rein in abusive practices of payday lenders. Before proposing the payday loan rule, CFPB held a series of town hall meetings where the public was invited to share their views. These events were purposefully held in geographic areas with a large concentration of payday loan borrowers and lenders. The public was also invited to submit testimony and comments directly to the agency at each stage of the rule-making process.
The payday loan industry has been heavily involved, contributing testimony and garnering support from members of congress to put external pressure on CFPB. Congresswoman and former Chair of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman-Schultz proposed legislation to weaken the CFPB’s proposed rule and even circulated a letter among her colleagues urging their support for weaker, industry-friendly rules. (Carter, 2016) Wasserman-Schultz’ was joined by other members of congress from Florida, her home state. Florida is also home to several payday lenders who made political contributions to Wasserman-Schultz and other members of the Florida congressional delegation.
But consumer groups were also active, and had some success in countering the payday loan industry’s efforts. After months of public pressure, including activism from the same public interest groups who lobbied for creation of the CFPB, Wasserman-Schultz backed away from her opposition to consumer-friendly payday loan rules. Wasserman-Schultz’ pivot came after she faced protesters in Florida and at national events on behalf of the DNC. As Wilson notes, entrepreneurial policymakers are often willing to take up causes in the public interest. Consumer groups aligned with progressive Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who have long been supporters of financial reform. Sanders went so far as to pledge support to a candidate who opposed Wasserman-Schultz in the primary. (Pyke, 2016) It eventually became politically difficult for Wasserman-Schultz to continue supporting the industry, and ignore her Florida constituents and other consumers who had been harmed by using costly payday loans.
The payday loan issue affects a relatively small segment of the public. But the example provides lessons to show the benefits of pluralism and a fragmented political system. Engaged citizens took advantage of opportunities to participate at many levels. They enlisted members of congress to amplify their voices, countering the effects of payday loan lenders who had done the same. Though the final CFPB rule has not been issued, the agency has modified the proposed rule in response to concerns raised by the public. This example shows that public interests can counter private ones. They are most effective when their efforts are ongoing and multi-faceted, and some of the same strategies employed by private interest groups.
Additional Works Cited
Drew DeSilver, “U.S. Voter Turnout Trails Most Developed Countries” Pew Research Center (August 2, 2016) Retrieved from: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/08/02/u-s-voter-turnout-trails-most-developed-countries/
Larry Kirsch and Robert N. Mayer, Financial Justice: The People’s Campaign to Stop Lender Abuse, (ABC-CLIO, LLC: 2013)
Alan Pyke, “Predatory Payday Lenders’ Top Democratic Ally Flip Flops On New Rules” Think Progress (June 3, 2016) Retrieved from: https://thinkprogress.org/predatory-payday-lenders-top-democratic-ally-flip-flops-on-new-rules-4c4b106f0274#.vv5v41t12
Pew Research Center, “Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology. Section 10: Political Participation, Interest and Knowledge” (June 26, 2014) Retrieved from: http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/26/section-10-political-participation-interest-and-knowledge/