" (Tripathi, Ansolabehere, and Snyder, 2002)
Additionally, groups that place emphasis on lobbying tend to may more attention to the position of power that members hold inside Congress and pay less attention to the electoral circumstances of member than do other groups and as well groups that place emphasis on lobbying "also appear to be more bipartisan and less ideological than other groups, giving more equally to both parties and more broadly across the ideological spectrum." (Tripathi, Ansolabehere, and Snyder, 2002)
It was reported on December 11th 2008 in the work entitled: "Auto Industry Bailout: House Members Voting 'Yes' Received 65% More from Auto Industry Interest Groups than those Voting 'No'" that research had revealed that "over the past five years (January 2003-October 2008) auto manufacturers, auto dealers and labor unions gave an average of $74,100 in campaign contributions to each Representative voting in favor of the auto bailout, compared with an average of $45, 015 to each Representative voting against the bailout -- 65% more money, on average, given to those who voted Yes." (MapLight, 2008)
This analysis is state to have been inclusive of contributions provided by auto manufacturers and dealers, auto-related industries and labor unions, all groups that have expressed their support for this bill passing.
The executive director of MapLight, Daniel Newman, is noted as having stated "Big-money interest groups investing in political influence see sky-high returns while 'we the people' foot the bill. Votes in Congress once again align with the river of money that flows through our broken political system." (MapLight, 2008)
It is related that House Democrats "voting overwhelming in favor of this bill, 205 voting 'Yes' and 20 voting 'No'" while 11 did not vote. According to MapLight's report the Democrats that voted 'Yes' were on the receiving end of $74,846 each and this is approximately 19% more than those who voted 'No' had received which was stated an approximately $63,140. MapLight additionally reports that House Republicans were "more divided on this bill, 32 voting Yes and 150 voting No (16 not voting)." (2008) Republicans voting Yes are reported to have received approximately $69,323 each which is approximately 63% more received than those who voted No and who received approximately $42,598 each.
Figure 1
Average $ Give to Each Legislator and How Votes Total
House Members (All)
voted Yes
74,100
voted No
45,015
House Democrats
voted Yes
74,846
voted No
63,140
House Republicans
voted Yes
69,323
voted No
42,598
Source: MapLight (2008)
Figure 2
Average $ Give to Each Member
Voting Yes
Voting No
All interests in support
74,100
45,015
Labor unions
48,193
6,607
Auto dealers
15,297
30,243
Auto manufacturers
7,417
4,321
Truck/auto parts
2,673
2,813
Manufacturing trade groups
Source: MapLight (2008)
Over the past two years the largest three auto firms are stated to have spent $48,338,099 on lobbying according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Figure 3
Money Spent on Lobbying
Lobbying $
General Motors
24,061,000
Ford
12,894,000
Daimler/Chrysler
12,383,0000
Source: MapLight (2008)
Figure 4
Top Ten Recipients Funded by Manufacturing Unions
Recipient
Amount
John Kerry
$39,400
Nancy Pelosi
$28,500
Christopher Van Hollen
$23,700
Ciro Rodriguez
$22,500
Steny Hoyer
$22,500
Baron Hill
$22,300
John Barrow
$21,500
R. Miller
$20,000
Thomas Edwards
$19,000
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Source: MapLight (2008)
Figure 5
Top Ten Recipients Funded by Auto Manufacturers
Recipient
Amount
John Dingell
$276,600
Carl Levin
$123,499
Debbie Ann Stabenow
$83,950
Frederick Upton
$80,300
John McCain
$79,282
Michael Rogers
$75,850
Sander Levin
$69,550
Carolyn Kilpatrick
$66,150
David Camp
$64,250
John Kerry
$62,500
Source: MapLight (2008)
Figure 6
Top Ten Recipients Funded by Truck/Automotive Parts and Accessories
Recipient
Amount
John McCain
$117,371
Bob Corker
$47,960
George Voinovich
$44,150
John Dingell
$41,050
Christopher Bond
$39,950
Debbie Ann Stabenow
$37,250
Mike Pence
$35,910
Frank Pallone
$33,600
Michael Turner
$30,200
Lamar Alexander
$28,500
Source: MapLight (2008)
Figure 7
Top Ten Recipients Funded by Auto Dealers (New & Used)
Recipient
Amount
John McCain
$601,633
Vern Buchanan
$190,500
Mel Martinez
$152,350
John Cornyn
$132,091
John Kerry
$112,184
Bob Corker
$111,650
Jon Kyl
$101,050
John Thune
$97,948
Eric Cantor
$92,600
Kay Hutchison
$91,993
Source: MapLight (2008)
Figure 8
Top Ten Recipients Funded -- Fiscal and Tax Policy
Recipient
Amount
Michele Bachmann
$21,200
Erik Paulsen
$20,700
John Kerry
$6,750
John Ensign
$6,000
John Kline
$5,600
Jon Kyl
$5,400
Mike Pence
$5,000
Adam Smith
$5,000
Saxby Chambliss
$5,000
Bob Corker
$5,000
Source: MapLight (2008)
This bill was passed easily in the Senate, which was Republican-controlled and the House which was controlled by Democrats and was to take place within a year's time. However, the banking industry fearing the cost of enforcing this particular law is stated to have "dropped the hydrogen bomb of modern day lobbying, an effort whose firepower was awesome, whose carnage was staggering. In one fell swoop down went the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, down went the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, down went the Secretary of the Treasury, down went the present of the United States. Led by the American Bankers Association (ABA) and the U.S. League of Savings, the banking industry used newspaper advertisements, posters in branches, and most importantly, inserts in the monthly statements typically sent to all customers to encourage people to contact Congress in opposition to the new law. The effort, orchestrated by the Chicago advertising and public relations firm of Leo Burnett and Company, deluged Congress with more than twenty-two million constituent communications. Weeks later the House (382 to 41) and the Senate (94 to 5) reversed themselves and overwhelming repealed the withholding on interest and dividend income earned by individuals." (Goldstein, 1999)
This case is stated to illustrate how it is that "grass roots lobbying can be an effective tool for lobbyist to convey information." (Goldstein, 1999) Moreover, this case illustrates how legislators are signaled on the "electoral consequences of their actions and provides information to constituents that may reframe and issue and possibly change a mass opinion." (Goldstein, 1999)
The work entitled: "Biggest PAC Contributors Boost Spending" (2009) states that the "...corporations, unions and trade associations that represented the top 20 PAC contributors to federal candidates from both major parties last year poured a combined $22 million into lobbying efforts from January through March -- an increase of nearly 20% over the same period in 2008." (National Journal, 2009)
It is related that high-stakes legislation with the intent to "calm the roiling American economy and a proposed change to labor laws prompted the nation's most generous political contributors to redouble efforts to lobby the lawmakers whose elections they helped to finance" according to a CongressDaily analysis of the lobbying disclosure filings of the first quarter of 2009. This information is shown in the following chart.
Figure 9
Change in First Quarter Lobbying by the Top 20 PACS
Source: National Journal (2009)
It is related that the Center for Responsive Politics reported that the top 20 PAC donors to the House and Senate candidates in 2007 and 2008 is inclusive of the National Association of Realtors, Honeywell International, the Service Employees International Union and the National Beer Wholesales Association. The Realtor's PAC is stated to have been the "biggest donor to federal candidates in the last cycle" and that they spent approximately $5.7 million in efforts of lobbying during the first three months of 2009. That amount is stated to be an increase of 82% over the amount spent in the same period of last year.
SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
It is clear that the auto industry and associated industries contributed greatly through their PACs in the form of political contributions in order to influence the Congress, Senate and House in passing of HR7231. Lobbying and associated PAC activities are legal however, it appears that reform in Washington is greatly needed in this area as demonstrated by the amount of contributions and those who were on the receiving end of these large contributions. How one views lobbying efforts and activities is greatly dependent upon the view one holds of the American political system in its entirety. While pluralist theory views democracy and its preservation in a massive society of a complex nature as acceptable since memberships tend to overlap in what is a diverse collection of interest groups and the result is healthy competition other views view the American political system in a different light and this is not surprising since oftentimes the interests of the public are not well represented.
BIBILIOGRAPHY
Auto Industry Bailout: House Members Voting 'Yes' Received 65% More from Auto Industry Interest Groups than those Voting 'No'(2008) MapLight 11 Dec 2008. Online available at: http://maplight.org/node/55201
Goldstein, Kenneth M. (1999) Interest Groups, Lobbying and Participation in America. Arizona State University. Online available at: http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam032/98053581.pdf
Biggest PAC Contributors Boost Spending (2009) Under the Influence -- National Journal 23 April 2009. Online available at: http://undertheinfluence.nationaljournal.com/2009/04/biggest-pac-contributors-boost.php
Tripathi, Micky; Ansolabehere, Stephen; and Jr., James M. Snyder (2002) "Are PAC Contributions and Lobbying Linked? New Evidence from the 1995 Lobby Disclosure Act," Business and Politics: Vol. 4: Iss. 2, Article
Dye, Thomas R. (2008) Interest Groups: Getting Their Share and More. 2008. Politics in America. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Dye, Thomas R. (2008) Interest Groups: Getting Their Share and More. 2008. Politics in America. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
HR7231 (2008) 110th Congress 2D Session. To Authorize Financial Assistance to Eligible Automobile Manufacturers, and for Other Purposes. Online available at: http://www.rules.house.gov/110/text/110_hr7321.pdf
Ibid
Ibid
Dye, Thomas R. (2008) Interest Groups: Getting Their Share and More. 2008. Politics in America. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Tripathi, Micky; Ansolabehere, Stephen; and Jr., James M. Snyder (2002) "Are PAC Contributions and Lobbying Linked? New Evidence from the 1995 Lobby Disclosure Act," Business and Politics: Vol. 4: Iss. 2, Article
Ibid
Ibid
Auto Industry Bailout: House Members Voting 'Yes' Received 65% More from Auto…
Government Intervention in the Steel Industry The Bush administration announced the imposition of sweeping tariffs of up to 30% on steel imports to the United States for a period of 3 years in March 2002 purportedly to save the ailing steel industry from collapsing. Predictably, the action has invited particularly harsh criticism from the U.S. trade partners that have been directly affected by the tax, i.e., the European Union, Japan, and
2007 Economic Crisis on American Car market Effect of the 2008 global economic crisis on automotive industries Crisis in the United States Crisis in Canada Crisis in Russia Crisis in European markets Crisis in Asian markets Effects by other related crisis events In this paper, we will review the effects of 2008 global automotive crisis. Our main focus will be on the American car manufacturers and the negative impact they suffered due to the crisis. We will
In some ways, the AIG bailout is viewed more favorably -- bonuses not withstanding -- in part because of the ownership stake. With a substantial, profitable business the taxpayers may yet break even on AIG. With the automakers, taxpayer ire is higher because there is little chance that this will happen. The government has less control over the automakers, and as a result there is less likelihood that the
Still, the future stated goal of GM is to develop an electric or hybrid version in all of its existing brands lines -- Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick and GMC. Outcome of changes GM's most notable success has been overseas, where it is currently ahead of all of its competitors in the rapidly expanding Chinese market. "While GM is outpacing Ford in overseas competition, GM cannot solely depend on China for growth. While
Climate change is also described as global warming, the unnatural or manmade cause of the planet’s increase in temperature. Climate change is physically caused by the release of greenhouse gases which get trapped in the atmosphere, in turn trapping heat from the sun on the planet (Meyer & Roser, 2006). Other pollutants can cause problems for the environment as well, such as toxins released into the water from chemical plants,
The EVMI initiative will push the supply chain even more rigorously, requiring even greater financial investment. EVMI as a technology is an opportunity; the challenge for Chrysler is to transform their supply chain into a support infrastructure that can fully make this opportunity realizable. Additional opportunities for the company include the continual improvement of their quality management and compliance systems so they will be able to exceed CAFE requirement
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now