‘’Membership size is the crucial factor in determining the impact of pressure groups’’ Discuss

A pressure group can be defined as a number of people who work together to make their concerns known tho those in government and to influence the passage of legislation. In the USA pressure groups fulfil the role of representation and participation for people who may not necessarily have been active in pressure groups before. There are a number of factors which influence the impact of pressure groups in the United States, and membership size can be seen to be a crucial one of them

In Gun control, the NRA, a wealthy group of 4 million people, is clearly the dominant force in comparison to the much smaller, weaker, gun control groups like Handgun Control Inc. This is one main reason why the second amendment is still so rigidly enforced, because one of the most powerful pressure groups in the USA continues to campaign for this approach. Similarly, the influence of industry against the influence of environmental campaign groups is clearly unequal and unfair. Again this shows that it is the elite of USA who hold power - the influential pressure groups, the legislature, the bureaucrats, and so on. Small scale pressure groups with little funding find it extremely difficult to be listened to by those in power. For example in 2013 the top U.S. gun lobby rejected Obama administration proposals to reduce gun violence saying it expected to have enough support in Congress to fend off bans on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines and stricter background checks on gun buyers. President Barack Obama has pushed reducing gun violence to the top of his domestic agenda following the shooting of 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut school with a legally purchased high-powered rifle. The National Rifle Association and other pro-gun groups met with Biden, and the NRA emerged with its objections to any gun restrictions intact. The group wanted to have an armed security officer in every school in the country instead. Obama could have used his executive powers to act alone on some gun measures, but his options on the proposals opposed by the NRA are limited without Congress' co-operation. Fierce opposition by the powerful National Rifle Association led a backlash by conservative Republicans and a few Democrats from pro-gun states that doomed key proposals in the gun package, even after they had been watered down to try to satisfy opponents. Therefore linked with the factor of membership size is the factor of popularity and support. Politicians will try to gauge how electorally costly it might be to ignore a group’s views. The more popular the issue, the more pressure groups can put on government.

Large membership groups and the money brought from it from membership fees also gives them the access to lobbyists, ability to advertise and make campaign donations . The AARP takes in tens of millions of dollars in federal grants annually as a registered nonprofit. It’s 40,000,000 membership gives them great influence by the number alone. They use millions of dollars from member dues to heavily lobby Congress on seniors issues like Social security and healthcare. When President George W. Bush attempted to reform Social Security with personally owned accounts (a freedom concept), the AARP ran national television ads to frighten seniors that these accounts were "risky." They convinced seniors and the majority of Americans that it was safer to spend Social Security taxes than to save them (the federal government now spend every dime of Social Security taxes). The AARP have done various things to ensure that the voices of members are heard. The influence of the AARP on the fiscal cliff deal included important provisions for older Americans and their families such as the agreement delays for another year a drastic pay cut for Medicare doctors and the extension of benefits that were given for the long-term unemployed. In 2013 the AARP New York successfully pushed for a bill to give 25,000 New Yorkers a better chance of keeping their homes. This demonstrates the impact of membership size not only on national issues but also in individual states.

However some groups such as AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) may be seen to be successful despite lack of numbers. AIPAC have only over 100,000 members however AIPAC has been compared to banking, defence, and energy lobbies as long being a feature of politics in Washington. The New York Times has described AIPAC as "a major force in shaping United States policy in the Middle East," which is able to push numerous bills through Congress. Typically these pass by unanimous votes.A House of Representatives resolution condemning the UN Goldstone Reporton human rights violations by Israel in Gaza, for example, passed 344 to 36 in 2009. AIPAC also lobbies for financial aid from the United States to Israel, helping to procure up to three billion in aid yearly, making Israel the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II. AIPAC have also successfully lobbied the U.S. government to adopt crippling economic sanctions on Iran, including trying to cut off Iran’s oil exports, despite the fact that these sanctions raise the price of gas and threaten the U.S. economy. This shows that membership size is a factor in determining the impact of a pressure group but can’t necessarily be described as a crucial one. As with the example of AIPAC, it is clear that the context or rather the cause of the pressure group has a substantial effect on it’s impact.

There are a number of factors in determining the impact of pressure groups other than membership size and cause. The scale of the opposition. This idea relates to more than the money available to the other side and the resources at their disposal.Gun ownership is regarded as a basic civil right and that is an essential part of US culture. The same might be said about the scale and importance of religion. The fact is that the USA is different from most European countries. The Newtown massacre has had an impact in increasing support for gun controls. Gabrielle Giffords, the Congresswoman who was shot in Arizona in 2011, when launching a new group, Americans for Responsible Solutions, designed to raise money for politicians who back gun control, stated that she had no intention of wanting to amend the second amendment. These factors collectively would suggest then that once the public outcry has settled, gun reforms are likely to stop a long way short of reform of the second amendment. The ban on the sale of assault weapons and high capacity magazines and the introduction of background checks for guns purchased at gun shows might be the best that will be achieved. Ironically, the massacre led to a dramatic increase in the sale of guns and assault weapons as people anticipated there might be the introduction of further controls. Certainly with over 250m guns in the USA, the issue is unlikely to subside in the near future. This demonstrates how a small opposition can also lead to a success in pressure groups.

The Supreme Court is an access point for groups who lack a large membership. Pressure groups often sponsor cases and also effective in blocking nominations which they disapprove. For example the case of Time vs Warner involving over twenty putative class actions all alleging that television studios, television production companies, and talent agencies systematically discriminate against television writers older than age 40 was supported by AARP and eventually warner had to pay a sum of $75 million. This shows another important figure in determining the impact of pressure groups, and a number of other cases have also proven that supreme court influence can also be an impact despite membership size.

Although membership size has been demonstrated to be a significant role in determining the impact of pressure groups, other factors such as money, public opinion and the scale of the opposition are also factors that should be highly regarded. A number of members comprises a group but that group is non-infuential without these other important factors. Also, it has also been shown that pressure groups that do not have a large amount of members are still flourishing and influencing congress and the supreme court. It can therefore be concluded that membership is not a crucial factor.