Please assist with the following discussion questions for Texas Governement and Politics 2312-701. Each discussion response must be written in paragraph form, (well thought out), times new roman font

Unit 3

• Required Written Lecture: Political Participation

• Aggregate Participation

• Political participation can be defined as any method by which citizens represented by a government attempt to influence policies, policymakers, or policy outcomes.

• There are two types of participation - Individual and Aggregate.

• Individual participation refers to those actions that individuals undertake on their own rather than in a group. For example, while alot of people vote, it is an act that individuals do on their own- there is no one else with them in that voting booth when they cast their ballots. For the purpose of our discussions, there are four types of individual participation: voting, contacting, campaigning and running.

• Aggregate Participation refers to those actions that undertake in conjunction or at the encouragement of other individuals. The individual participant does not initiate the interaction and usually does not act alone- they work with others to achieve their goals of influencing the direction of public policies. There are two agents of aggregate participation: interest groups and political parties.

• We addressed individual participation in Unit 2- in this unit (Unit 3), we focus on aggregate participation.

• There are two types of aggregate participation in our system: interest groups and political parties. People join interest groups in order to join forces with others who have a similar policy interest and desire to influence policy. You can do more as a group than you can as an individual. In contrast to interest groups, political parties are primarily interested in getting members of their party elected. Interest group members are concerned about getting folks into office who agree with them, while political party leaders just want someone who shares their party label.

• In recent years, many politicians, journalists, and scholars have raised interest group and political party bashing to a national sport. Many people make the case that American politics is controlled by special interests and that interest groups and political action committees should be banished from the political process. Others suggest that our political system would be much better off if we got rid of the political parties and let candidates run on the issues and voters vote without regard to parties. Indeed, more Texans today claim to be independent of political party affiliation than are affiliated with either political party.

• However, take a careful look at those who argue for the elimination of these two means of aggregate participation. They are usually people or groups who have access to political power without them or perceive political parties and interest groups as a challenge to their own power. For example, if I had all of Ross Perot's money, I would oppose political action committees too, because PAC's allow people with little money to pool that money and influence politics. Likewise, the two political parties rejected Mr. Perot, so he opposed their existence.

• So, when you hear people calling for the end to political parties or interest groups, examine their motives closely and realize that parties and interest groups may be the only way that people like you and me can really influence the political process.

• While we will discuss Individual participation in this section of the course, we will examine political parties and interest groups in the next section (section 3).

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Interest Groups: Definition

• Lecture: AUDIO

• The images we have of an interest group or a lobbyist are seldom positive. We perceive an interest group as some big, rich machine that gets benefits that we are unable to get. The image of a lobbyist (the person that tries to influence government on behalf of an interest group) is probably even more negative. The stereotypical lobbyist is a "good old boy" with a three-piece suit, a cigar, lots of jewelry, and lots of money, who is smooth, savvy, and willing to spend money. While there may be a grain of truth in all of these stereotypes, the reality is that interest groups are necessary and, I would argue, a positive part of the political process.

• The four components that define an interest group include:

• composed of more than one person;

• organized for a common goal;

• joined by a common interest; and,

• interested in trying to influence policy. Nothing in this definition suggests trying to control or illegally manipulate policies.

• Further, nothing here precludes you from joining or starting your own group. In order for a group to be classified as an interest group, it must have all four of these qualities. It is not enough for it to be more than one person, organized with a common goal-that could define a baseball or football team, a fraternity or a sorority. This group must be interested in trying to influence public policy if it is to be considered an interest group.

• While all interest groups have several characteristics in common, as noted in the previous lecture, not all interest groups are alike. Some groups are large, others are small. Some represent individuals (like the National Rifle Association), others represent businesses or product producers (such as the Texas Beef Council), others represent governmental units (for example, the Texas Association of Regional Councils). Each of these groups has a common interest, is organized, and tries to influence policy. However, they may differ significantly in their membership, their budgets, their methods, and their levels of success.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Interest Groups: Additional Definitions

• In addition to understanding the four components of the definition of an interest group, it is also important that you understand the definitions of three other related terms: lobbyist, constituency, and Political Action Committee (PAC).

• A lobbyist is a person (usually paid) who is hired to represent an interest group in the political process. They are hired to go to the state capitol and build relationships with legislators, governors and other people involved in making policy. They are usually paid well for their services. You and I cannot take time to go to the capitol, but we can come together and hire a lobbyist to do that for us.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• The constituency is all of the people who are represented by the interest group and by the lobbyist, whether they are part of the interest group or not. For example, if you are over 55, but have not paid money to join AARP (the Association for the Advancement of Retired Persons), you still benefit from the work they do. If you are a coal miner, but not in the coal miners' union, you still benefit if the union gets better wages or working conditions for every miner. This creates something called the “free rider problem,” where people who do not financially support the interest group benefit from their work.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• The final definition I want you to know about is the political action committee or PAC. It is the financial arm of the interest group. It is responsible for raising, coordinating, and distributing campaign contributions on behalf of the interest group. You can have an interest group without a PAC (if it does not try to influence elections without money), but you cannot have a PAC that does not have an interest group.

• One problem created by the distinction between the constituency (all those that benefit from the work of a group) and the interest group (those who actually pay dues and work on behalf of the constituency) is the free rider problem. Free riders are those who do not join the group, pay dues, or work on behalf of the cause, but gain benefits from those who do. For example, even if you never join the National Rifle Association, you benefit from their efforts if they are able to keep gun control laws out of Texas.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Reasons for Joining Groups

• We in the United States and Texas are joiners. People in this country join groups more than any other country in the world. Look at your own life. I would bet that you are a member of several groups-perhaps a fraternity, a service organization (League of Women Voters, Lion's Club, Masons), a church, a sports club or league, an ethnically, or gender-based group (NAACP, LULAC, NOW), or a professional association (group of engineers, lawyers, teachers, etc.). We like to join groups!

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Generally, we divide the reasons that people join groups into three types. First, many people join for material benefits - they get stuff for joining. For example, if you join the National Rifle Association, you get a card, a magazine, and discounts at several hunting stores. If you join AARP, you get a card that entitles you to discounts at many restaurants and hotels.

• A second reason that people generally join groups is for the social or solidarity benefits – they get to associate with other people they like, admire, or need. For example, many people join a fraternity or a sorority for the parties or the networking or the future connections. Someone may join a particular group not so much because they like the issues they support, but because they like the other people in the group. This is often true of churches, social clubs, or service organizations like the Moose or Lion’s Club.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Finally, there are those who join groups, particularly political groups, because they want to make a difference in public policy - policy benefits. We join a group that believes in what we believe in, with the hope that by joining together, we can implement or influence policies relative to that issue. For example, if I am concerned about the environment, I might join the Sierra Club. If I am opposed to abortion, I may join “Right to Life.” My objective by joining and contributing my time and money is to make a difference in that policy area.

• Material and solidarity benefits can be limited to those who pay dues or actually join the group and can be used to address, at least to some degree, the free rider problem discussed above.

• If you are interested in some of the groups noted above, check out the websites below:

• NAACP

• LULAC

• NOW

• AARP

• League of Women Voters

• Masons

• Lion's Club

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• High Power Groups

• To paraphrase George Orwell's Animal Farm, "All interest groups are equal, but some are more equal than others!" The History of Texas suggests that some types of interest groups have done much better than others. The most successful groups in Texas have traditionally been business groups, religious groups, and Texas Trial Lawyers. Think about why these groups are powerful. First, business groups have traditionally controlled politics in Texas because that is part of the traditionalistic culture-business is assumed to be good. Further, they have a great deal of money and are able to contribute to political campaigns.

• Let's look at four types of groups, relative to power: traditionally strong groups, traditionally weak groups, rising groups, and declining groups.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Traditionally strong groups are those groups that have always, or it seems like they have always, done well in Texas politics. These groups include big businesses (General Business Organizations), professional organizations, andconservative religious groups. Conservative religious organizations and churches are strong because of the strong conservative bent of the state and the large numbers of active church members who vote, and vote regularly. Religion permeates society in Texas and throughout the South. Professional organizations are those groups that represent professional occupations (trial lawyers, doctors, insurance agents, etc.). These traditionally strong groups have access, money, and a very active (and large) membership. The Texas Trial Lawyers benefit also from significant money. But, also, they benefit from a large number of lawyers who hold office in the legislature.

• Your Text notes several Interest Groups that wield significant power in the state:

• Texans for Lawsuit Reform (TLR) - Formed in 1994 by key business leaders, this group has focused its efforts on making it more difficult for individuals to sue companies by altering the state's "tort" laws. Working closely with then Governor George W. Bush, the TLR got the legislature to pass and the governor to sign limits on "frivolous" law suits and limits on damages that companies would have to pay to victims. Since 2000, TLR has contributed more than $20 million to candidates for office in Texas.

• Texas Medical Association (TMA)- While most of us don't think of Doctors as business men and women, the health care industry makes up more than fifteen percent of the Texas economy. Regulations regarding care and lawsuits have a significant impact on what doctors can do and earn, so doctors try to have significant influence over those laws. It contributed almost $2 million in the 2008 election cycle alone, mostly to Republican candidates who wanted to limit the amount of money that doctors would have to pay to harmed patients.

• The Christian Right/ Texas Tea Party- Social conservatives who dominate the Bible belt of the Southern United States have played a significant role in the rise of the Republican Party in Texas. They began to organize in the early 1980s to support Ronald Regan and made their presence known in Texas in 1994 by helping to elect Governor George W. Bush. They promote a strong social "family values" agenda that includes restricting abortion, opposing gay marriage and supporting prayers and vouchers in the schools. In 2009, a national movement arose to oppose the "liberal agenda" of newly elected President Obama that fit nicely with the Texas Christian Right- the Texas Tea Party has flexed its muscles in recent years and may continue to do so- time will tell!

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Low Power, Rising and Declining Groups

• Just as the balance of power changes in sports leagues, the balance of power among types of interest groups is not stagnant. While business groups and religious groups have tended to remain strong (much like certain sports teams tend to remain competitive over time), other have generally risen and fallen over time. What factors change over time that will alter this balance of power?

• On the other hand, some groups have historically been weak and continue to be so. These traditionally weak groupsare those that have limited influence or power. I would note two types of groups that have historically had little power in Texas: labor unions, environmental groups and public interest groups. Labor unions are groups that organize to represent the interest of the workers (textile workers, dishwashers, auto workers, etc.). Texas is one of the least unionized states in the country and these groups have limited access, funding or membership. Environmental groups often clash with economic and business interests which tend to be very important in Texas. Public Interest Groups are those groups that lobby on behalf of some group or cause they beleive is underrepresented or that would benefit everyone. They are interested in the public good. This may include groups like League of Women Voters, Common Cause or groups that try to make sure politicians don't screw up. While teachers are powerful players in most states that does not seem to be the case in Texas, where teachers tend to be much less organized than in other states, with several major unions all declining in membership. The largest Teachers union (Association of Texas Professional Educators) has just over 100,000 members.

• Next is those groups who have historically had limited power in Texas, but now are increasing in power - those that have traditionally not done well, but seem to be getting stronger. I would suggest that two such groups are racial/ ethnic minorities and single-issue groups. Minority groups have become more important because of 1) of their growing proportion in the population (esp. Latinos); 2) they have gotten more organized; and, 3) we are more aware of minority-oriented issues (affirmative action, ballot access, etc.). The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) is an increasingly powerful political force in Texas as Latinos increase in number they will become an increasingly important economic and political force in the state. While most Latinos tend to vote Democratic (especially in 2012), the election of Republican Ted Cruz as the state's first Latino US Senator might help the Republican party make inroads into this group. LULAC may not have lot of money, but they do have large numbers of active and organized members across the state.

• Single-issue groups refer to those groups that care about one issue-abortion, homosexual rights, gun control, etc. Those groups are becoming more important as our politics becomes more divisive and the Internet has given them a way to build, organize and coordinate their membership. One group noted in your book as strong in Texas, The Christian Right, would fit into that category.

• Finally, there is one group that I think is clearly on the decline in Texas: agricultural groups. For much of its history, agriculture (cotton, cattle, etc.) dominated the Texas economy. However, as that has changed, so has the power of agricultural groups. Historically, many of the legislators were from the rural parts of the state, but as the people have moved to the cities, so has political power. One might also include the oil, natural gas industry in this category. It is still important, but not nearly as strong as in the past.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• What Influences a Group's Power?

• As noted above, not all interest groups are equal when it comes to their ability to influence what lawmakers and the governor do. Some clearly have more power than others. Why? What do some groups (the influential ones) have that others (those with little influence) do not?

• Money: Probably the most common difference between the “haves” and the “have-nots” is money. Money matters because it can buy you most of the other things you need to be influential. It can hire the best lobbyist. It can purchase commercials and advertising to motivate folks and influence decision makers. It can hire staff to organize and motivate your members.

• Large Active Membership: An active membership can have a significant influence on policymakers by writing letters, knocking on doors, and visiting the policy makers. It is also a good source for money.

• Organization: It is not enough to have money and members. You must have an organization established to turn those resources into action. It takes organization to get people to write letters, to send e-mails, to send faxes, and to send text messages.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Reputation: Some groups have a lot of money and even a lot of members, but are still not that effective. Consider, for example, those in favor of legalizing prostitution. They could have a lot of money and a lot of members, but folks will not really listen. More seriously, the reputation of groups tends to go up and down-tobacco companies, used car dealers, and televangelists don’t have the best of reputations and that will affect their ability to influence policy. On the other hand, such groups as Mothers Against Drunk Driving and the League of Women Voters have very good reputations.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• An Effective Lobbyist: An effective lobbyist is one who has access to decision makers. They usually cost a lot of money, but are worth it. Former legislators and former legislative staff members tend to be very effective lobbyists because they have access to policy makers.

• A Geographically Diverse Membership: While a large membership is important, it is even more important that the membership be spread across the state. A large membership limited to the Dallas or Houston areas will have little influence on policy makers from the rest of the state.

• It is not necessary that a group have all of these assets, but you do need to have some of them if you want to have influence.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Methods of Influencing Policy

• When most people think of interest groups trying to influence policy, they get one of two pictures. First they may think of a lobbyist "buying" a legislator with an expensive dinner or a trip to the Bahamas to "talk politics." The second picture is of some political action committee giving millions of dollars to a political campaign, usually under the table with little public knowledge.

• The reality is much different from this fairytale. First, in Texas, as in most other states now, lobbyists are very restricted in the kinds of gifts they can give politicians. The Texas house rules provide a good example of these limitations. Further, with all of the investigative media running around (a politician's worst nightmare is Mike Wallace of "60 Minutes" showing up at your office!), most politicians are scared to accept even legal gifts.

• Further, all campaign contributions must be reported to the Texas Ethics Commission and violations of those rules can result in severe penalties for the group and the candidate. Any group that intends to lobby the legislature must sign with the Texas Ethics Commission and report its activity. The days of lobbyists controlling the legislature with liquor and money are, for the most part, gone. Today's lobbyists must rely on other techniques, such as grassroots lobbying and public relations campaigns to influence politics.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Methods of Influencing Policy, continued

• Let’s look at the four primary methods that interest groups use to influence public policy:

• Direct Lobbying: This method is just what its name implies. The lobbyist works directly with the policymaker in an effort to influence what he or she does. This is what you traditionally think of when you think of lobbying - a lobbyist takes a policy maker to lunch or dinner or to a ballgame or to the races. It involves the relationship between the lobbyist and the legislator. While the short-term objective here is to get the legislator to do what he or she wants, the more significant objective of direct lobbying is to establish a friendly yet professional rapport with the policy makers such that they will automatically support the lobbyist's position unless given a compelling reason not to do so. To do this, the lobbyist must be willing to lose a vote if it is not in the best interest of the policymaker-they will repay that trust in kind.

• According to a recent study found that during the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, lobbyists spent more than $6 million on direct lobbying activities. Not suprisingly, the biggest chunk of that ($4.7 million) went toward providing wining and dining legislators either individually or at receptions for groups of legislators. Another $850,000 was spent on "entertainment." and more than $500,000 on gifts for legislators. While these expenditures may not buy votes, they do buy access- while dining with a legislator, a lobbyist has his or her undivided attention for an extended period of time.

• Lobby Spending, 2013-2014

• Who did they spend it on?	Total
  Senators	$396,314.34
  Representatives	$1,531,748.08
  Other elected/appointed state officers	$83,144.16
  Legislative branch employees	$2,476,216.08
  Executive agency employees	$475,318.33
  Immediate family of legislative and executive branch members	$441,781.75
  All legislators invited	$1,602,818.50
  Guests	$446,508.45
  Total	$7,453,849.69*
  What did they spend it on?	Total
  Transportation and lodging	$264,115.21
  Food and Beverage	$4,703,298.96
  Entertainment	$846,001.04
  Gifts	$564,508.92
  Awards & Mementos	$38,964.92
  Political chairities & fundraisers	$136,864.75
  Mass media communications	$477,689.86
  	$7,031,443.66*

• * Difference in totals reflects different queries of the online TEC database.

• Indirect (Grassroots) Lobbying: This method involves the lobbyist organizing the members of the interest group and having them contact the policy maker. It is called indirect lobbying because the lobbyist contacts the policy maker indirectly, through the members of the interest group. The lobbyist has them write letters, send e-mails, visit hearings, stop by legislative offices-anything to try to get them to move in the direction that he or she wants. This approach is most useful for groups that have a large number of active members. The lobbyist's goal with indirect lobbying is to get the members of his or her group to exert influence on the policy makers.

• Public Relations: If the other two methods have not worked, the lobbyist may turn to public relations-efforts to move the public to like, or at least not hate him or her. The lobbyist is not trying to get members of the public to all call their legislators, but rather to alter public perception about his or her cause. This is particularly useful for wealthy companies or industries that have a negative image (oil and gas industry, tobacco, alcohol, etc.).

• Campaign Activity: Finally, when most of us think of efforts to influence public policy, we think of campaign activity: offering support (time, money, resources) to the efforts of a candidate or a political party to get elected to an office. Interest groups and their political action committees do take a very active role in supporting the campaigns of candidates they believe will be supportive of their causes.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Types of Lobbyists

• Lobbyists, those people who represent interest groups in Austin which are charged with monitoring and trying to influence the activities of the government, are one of the most interesting components of the political process in Texas. During the 78th session of the Texas Legislature (2003), there were 1,288 registered lobbyists. While there are a few lobbyists today who meet the old stereotype of the rich, fat white guy with the chains and the three piece suit, more and more lobbyists are trained professionals who are as likely to be female as male.

• Let's look at five different types of lobbyists:

• While many do represent a wide variety of clients (the contract lobbyist), the majority represent a single industry (in-house lobbyist) or a government agency (government lobbyist). However, there are also lobbyists who are not professional (at least in terms of pay), but lobby because they firmly believe in their efforts-we call them hobbyists and cause lobbyists. Let's take a look at all five types.

• In-House Lobbyist. The most common type of lobbyist in the Texas Legislature is the In-House Lobbyist- a person that works for just one company or one industry and no one else. For example, Exxon has several lobbyists in Texas and they only work for Exxon. Likewise, the American Medical Association has one or two lobbyists that work only for them. These lobbyists have the advantage of being recognized as lobbyists for this one cause and they usually have an expertise in their field that makes them effective. Almost half of all lobbyists fall into this category. These are the most effective lobbyists because they have more time to get to know the legislators.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• When most of us think of a lobbyist, we think of the traditional contract lobbyist as someone who is hired by many companies to represent them. Sometimes he or she may be hired to work a particular bill or to work for a particular session. The lobbyist will have many clients and is paid by each one.

• Third, private businesses are not the only groups to hire lobbyists. Government agencies also have people who are hired to make their case to the legislators-these are known as government lobbyists. They are just like an in-house lobbyist, except that they lobby on behalf of government agencies. For example, the Texas Department of education has several people who provide information and support for legislators in hopes of getting favorable treatment for education policy.

• Not all lobbyists are in it for the money-some are in it because they believe deeply in a cause and may even work for free. These are called cause (or single issue) lobbyists. They lobby on behalf of something-often ideological, religious or philosophical-that may not directly benefit them, but they believe is right. Examples of such lobbyists are those who lobby for or against abortion rights, school prayer, homosexual rights or drug legalization. It also will include folks like Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

• Finally, a very small group of people lobby for some cause with little or no support behind them. I call these folks thehobbyists. They are like Don Quixote tilting at windmills-working alone and usually for a lost cause. They tend to like being around the capitol and will often do strange things to bring attention to their cause-like the person who lobbied for seatbelts by wearing a belt made out of a seatbelt!

• Changes in ethical standards and regulations have significantly altered the nature of direct lobbying in the Texas as well as other states. Contract lobbyists are on the decline, while in-house, ideological, and government lobbyists are on the rise. Given their propensity to defy odds, the hobbyist is likely to remain a small but interesting part of the lobbying landscape!

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Keys to Effective Lobbying

• The key to effective lobbying is relationships. Effective lobbyists are those who can build a strong, positive relationship with members of the legislature. Money does matter. Campaign support does matter. However, nothing is more important for the lobbyist than his or her relationship with the individuals in the legislature. If the legislator or the governor likes the lobbyist and trusts him or her, then it will be much easier to persuade that policy maker to act.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• There are four keys to being an effective lobbyist:

• Be Selective: Don’t try to get something every day. Know that on some issues it is better to walk away than to always be asking for something. If you are always asking for something, the legislators will never know when you really do need something.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Be Honest: You always hear about dishonesty in politics. While this may be true in campaigns, it is not true in the halls of the legislature. Lobbyists must be honest and tell legislators the true facts about the consequences of his or her position or the lobbyist will find themselves out of a job, or at least without any influence.

• Be Brief: Policymakers are busy people and don’t have a lot of time to sit around and chat. It is very important for lobbyists to recognize the value of a legislator's time and be prepared to make their case and get out. If the legislator wants to spend more time, it is up to that legislator.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Be Understanding: Understand and accept when a legislator cannot support you on a particular issue. Harass the legislator when it is clear that voting as you wish will cause the legislator significant personal or political harm.

• As noted earlier, some interest groups are more effective and more influential than others. One of the biggest factors in the success or failure of an interest group is the quality and experience of the lobbyist. During 2016, there were 1,639 individuals registered as lobbyists with the Texas Ethics Commission. It is safe to assume that some of those lobbyists were more effective than the others. The most effective lobbyists are those who have learned the informal rules discussed in this lecture.

• Rather than go over the informal rules for success, think about some of the people who might possess those characteristics. Perhaps the most effective legislative lobbyists are former legislators. Not only do they know the system, they also know the legislators. For example, former House Speaker Gib Lewis was the lobbyist for DFW Airport.

• Another good lobbyist is a former staff person. They will have the knowledge and the contacts, although the contacts will be less important than the knowledge. Finally, experts in a particular policy area make good lobbyists. It is hard for a legislator to argue about the importance of biomedical research with a biomedical researcher, however, make sure that the expert is as well versed in the informal and formal rules of the legislature as he or she is in the finer points of biomedical engineering!

• Lobbyists in Texas can make great money. As you read/listen to this lecture, think about how you might become a lobbyist if that is a career objective in which you might have an interest. What knowledge or skills will you need? How can you get them?

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Indirect Lobbying

• As direct lobbying has come under suspicion by the public and the media, indirect or grassroots lobbying has become an increasingly significant part of the lobbying landscape. Grassroots lobbying includes any effort to influence the opinion of the politician by getting members of the public or the interest group to contact them. It may include phones, faxes, e-mails, marches, or personal visits.

• Let's look at three types of grassroots lobbying: coordinated individual contact, coordinated public demonstration, and coordinated civil disobedience.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Coordinated Individual Contact: This is perhaps the most common form of indirect lobbying. The lobbyist contacts the members of the interest group and organizes them to contact the legislator with phone calls, faxes, letters, text messages, or visits. The purpose is to make clear to the legislator just how much support there is for this action and that not doing something might cause them political harm.

• Coordinated Public Demonstrations: Sometimes it is not enough to have members send letters, cards, faxes, etc. The lobbyist needs something bigger. In that case, he or she might organize the group to ascend on the capitol in mass and offer some public demonstration to bring attention to the cause. Perhaps everyone in the group boards a bus and goes, or as farmers all ride tractors, or truckers all ride their eighteen wheelers. The lobbyist is trying to change policy by bringing public attention to that policy.

• Civil Disobedience: A third kind of indirect lobbying is a bit more extreme-coordinated civil disobedience. This means getting people to break the law to bring attention to the law. For example, some groups against the use of animal furs throw paint on those who wear them. Some people against cruelty to animals will trash labs where new products are tested on animals. Obviously, this is a very risky approach! You may make more enemies than friends if you are not careful. One such successful effort was the civil rights movement of the 1960s when African-American's defied clearly racist laws.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Certain types of lobbying groups, particularly those with a large number of active and involved members, are likely to engage in this activity. This method does not require a great deal of money. Almost all groups with a substantial membership encourage their members to contact the legislature to promote their ideas and issues. They will organize members to act, send members packets of information for effective grassroots lobbying, and provide them with links and contacts on their Web site. For a good example, see the Web page of the Latin American League of United Citizens (LULAC) It explains the positions of the group as well as methods by which members can contact public officials. The Web page of the National Rifle Association encourages similar action on its behalf.

• Indirect lobbying has increased for several reasons. First, there are more groups that have a large population base, but limited access or financial resources (ethnic and gender-based groups did not really have much influence until recent years). Second, increased political competition has made politicians more likely to listen to such action. Finally, advances in modern technology (e-mail, cable television, the Internet) have increased the ability of groups to reach their members, and of their members to reach the politicians.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Types of Direct Lobbying

• There are four distinct types of direct lobbying employed by lobbyists: one-one-one visits, speaking at hearings, casework assistance, and wining and dining.

• One-on-One Visits to the Office: The type of direct lobbying we are most familiar with is one-on-one visits to the office of the legislator. Lobbyists are called lobbyists because they spend most of their time hanging out in the lobbies of legislative offices waiting to get in. Once in the door, they have the opportunity to make their case to the legislator on whatever issue is of importance to them. They have the undivided attention of the policy maker.

• Presentations at Hearings and Meetings: While it is preferential to make your case before an individual legislator, time does not always make it possible. Often times lobbyists make their case before an entire group of legislators, usually in a public hearing or committee meeting. Each lobbyist will get a certain amount of time to make his or her case and, perhaps, answer some questions.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Constituent Casework: As noted above, the primary objective of a lobbyist is to build a good relationship with the policy maker and one very good way to do that is to help him or her with a problem. Constituents, people who live in a legislator's district, are always having problems with companies or government agencies and if a lobbyist can help take care of that, then the legislator will owe him or her for the favor.

• Wining and Dining. The mental image that many of you have of a lobbyist is someone who is sitting at a table with a legislator, plying them with wine and expensive food. This does take place-lobbyists do take legislators out to eat in some states and even take them on trips. However, due to new regulations, this does not take place nearly as much as it did in the past.

• The nature of direct lobbying has changed dramatically over the last few decades. While lobbyists do still take legislators out to dinner and wine and dine them, there are so many restrictions on such activity, and the public has grown so disgusted with it, that most politicians and lobbyists alike are scared to engage in it on a grand scale. Indeed, to avoid even the appearance of undue influence by lobbyists, Texas leaders have banned interest group parties and functions during the last few weeks of the session when most of the legislative business is being conducted.

• Now, most of direct, or personal, lobbying is done out in the open, rather than behind the closed door of a bar or restaurant. Every bill in the legislature is required to have a public hearing and lobbyists are wise to make their case at that hearing. This allows them to make their case to the legislators, but also to show the members of their interest group that they are actively working. Smart lobbyists are also willing to help legislators with problems on behalf of constituents, but again, many legislators are becoming wary of such help because it may give the appearance of favoritism ("you help me and I will help you").

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Public Relations

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Only in the last few years have interest groups learned what advertisers have known for a long time: the public can be persuaded by commercials and public relations campaigns. Further, if people like an organization or a group, they are less likely to let the government place negative laws, regulations, or taxes on that group. Some groups are so popular that they have to engage in very little PR (public relations) activity.

• For example, Mothers Against Drunk Driving does not need to advertise to gain public support. However, public relations campaigns are imperative for the survival of other groups. For example, in light of recent outbreaks of violence in the public schools, the National Rifle Association is having to mount a vigorous campaign about its education and training programs in order to fend off significant action in Congress and the state legislatures. Why else would they hire a national figure like Charleton Heston as their spokesperson and emphasize their educational programs, efforts to protect women and children, and support of the Special Olympics?

• There are really three types of public relations activities: advertising campaigns, sponsored research, andsponsoring events.

• With advertising campaigns, various industries are trying to make their image more positive so that the policy makers won't attack them or tax them. This is particularly true of products or industries that are unpopular (tobacco, insurance, energy, etc.). The intent of the public relations campaigns is to make it clear that a particular industry or product is not one of the bad guys and make it less likely that they will be targeted by politicians.

• Provide Studies or Publications. Another way that groups try to persuade the public is by providing data and information that supports their cause. The insurance industry provides studies that show that they are not to blame for rising medical costs; the tobacco industry releases studies minimizing the evidence that smoking causes cancer; and energy companies release studies suggesting global warming is not a significant problem or, if it is, they did not cause it. Finally, many companies also get a great deal of popular support by sponsoring events.

• For example, for centuries, RJ Reynolds sponsored Winston Cup Racing and Virginia Slims cigarettes sponsored women’s tennis tournaments. More recently, groups like the National Rifle Association have been sponsoring the Special Olympics. All of these sponsorships place the product or the industry in a more positive light, which is the objective of PR.

• Efforts to engage in such activity require a great deal of money. The money is necessary to buy media time and space to get the industry's message out. Further, it is necessary to hire a PR firm to develop and market the message, and to hire actors or directors to put together commercials. Recent successful efforts to shift public opinion on a particular matter include the health care debate in Washington (remember Louise and what's his name?) and the debate over telephone competition in Texas.

• Remember the objective of such campaigns: you don’t have to love us, just don’t hate us!

• Lecture: AUDIO

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Campaign Assistance

• Not surprisingly, assisting a politician in gaining his or her office is a very good way to influence the political process. No matter how popular, a politician cannot get elected without campaign assistance, including money and hands to put up signs and stuff envelopes. There are basically three types of campaign assistance: money, organization, and people.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Money is critically important for political campaigns, especially in races where candidates need to reach a significant number of voters. Campaign contributions are necessary if candidates are going to be successful in terms of organizing their campaigns, getting their message out, and reaching the voters. One of the most effective ways of getting money to candidates is via a process called bundling. Money has always been important in politics, but it has become even moreso in recent years as campaigns and elections have become more expensive. More than $80 million was spent by the two candidates for Texas Governor in 2014!

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Money is not the only resource that interest groups can provide. They can also provide organization - helping the candidate understand the district and run an effective campaign organization. This is particularly true of labor unions that often have worked a particular district or precinct for years. They can give you, especially if you are a new candidate, the benefit of their knowledge and experience.

• Finally, successful campaigns need people. While many statewide and Congressional campaigns rely on radio and television advertisements to get much of their message out, most legislative and local campaigns rely on people to make phone calls, put up yard signs, knock on doors, and stuff envelopes. This is particularly useful for interest groups with a large number of members.

• Financial contributions are a significant part of politics in Texas, especially for political action committees (PAC's; the financial arm of an interest group). While PAC's are limited as to how much they can give to candidates for national office (President, US Senate and Congress), there are no such limits on PAC's in Texas.

• The view in Texas is that rather than regulate campaign contributions, the people are better served if all contributions are made public and the voters can decide if a contribution is inappropriate or not. There are two problems with this approach. First, the final reports are not due until well after the election, so it is difficult to see how voters can use the information in making their decisions. Second, many PAC's fail to report and are seldom, if ever, punished, except that their names are made public. The role of money can be seen in the number of registered PAC's in Texas and the amount that some of them contributed.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Interest Groups- What Groups Matter?

• Number of Groups per Legislator and Most Influential Groups By State.

• As noted above,not all interest groups are created equal- by virtue of the number and geographic diversity of their members, the money they can spend, the experience of their lobbyist(s) and the nature of their issue, some groups are more powerful than others. The table below reveals the most important (influential) groups by state for all fifty states. Recall earlier in the notes when we talked about the types of groups likely to be influential in Texas, the first mentioned was "Business Groups." That is clearly indicated in the table below. According to the list below, compiled by The Center for Public Integrity, four of the five most influential interest groups in Texas are corporations, with the Texas Medical Association being the "lone man out." Perhaps even more telling is the fact that two of the four corporations are energy related- reminding us once again how important the energy industry is to the state of Texas. Further, this list of corporations makes it clear that money remains an important asset in influencing policy makers in the state- you will notice that all five of these groups are well funded! Money not only matters in Texas, but also in other states. You will note in the chart below that with the exception of a few Universities and Education Associations (who have large and geographically diverse memberships), all of these influential interest groups are well funded corporations who employ lot of people in their states.

• In addition to indicating which groups matter in the states, this study also ranks the states by the number of groups per legislator- sort of an indicator of where the groups spend their time effort and money. Not surprisingly, the top states (California New York, Florida, New Jersey and Texas) are all highly populated states. Interest groups tend to invest their resources where they will have the most impact and the states with the most people would obviously fit that bill!

• As you look at the data below, think about how the list of important and influential groups might be different if all of the states had publicly funded elections so that campaign contributions were not so important.

• State	Avg. entity to lawmaker ratio (2010-2014)	Top five entities (2010-2014)
  California	30	AT&T INC. EDISON INTERNATIONAL LOS ANGELES COUNTY COMCAST CORP. CITY OF LOS ANGELES
  Florida	25	AT&T INC. TECO ENERGY INC. THE WALT DISNEY CO. DOSAL TOBACCO CORP.FLORIDA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  New York	21	KPMG INTERNATIONAL NEW YORK UNIVERSITY NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC.
  New Jersey	19	COVANTA HOLDING CORP. FIRSTENERGY CORP. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC.PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL INC. CABLEVISION SYSTEMS CORP.
  Texas	16	ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS CORP. AT&T INC. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC.TEXAS MEDICAL ASSOCIATION ENTERGY CORP.
  Arizona	16	MARANA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT MARICOPA COUNTY PINNACLE WEST CAPITAL CORP. FREEPORT-MCMORAN INC. ARIZONA ASSOCIATION FOR JUSTICE
  Colorado	14	COLORADO CENTER ON LAW & POLICY CENTURYLINK INC. BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER & SCHRECK LLP COMCAST CORP. MILE HIGH RACING
  Ohio	13	AT&T INC. OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR WHOLESALE BEER & WINE ASSOCIATION OF OHIO FIRSTENERGY CORP. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
  Nebraska	11	AARP NEBRASKA STATE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION LEAGUE OF NEBRASKA MUNICIPALITIES MUELLER ROBAK LLC CENTER FOR RURAL AFFAIRS
  Missouri	11	AMEREN CORP. AT&T INC. MISSOURI HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION MISSOURI INSURANCE COALITION MISSOURI COUNCIL OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
  Illinois	11	AMEREN CORP. AT&T INC. EXELON CORP. SEIU HEALTHCARE ILLINOIS & INDIANACABLE TELEVISION & COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION OF ILLINOIS
  Utah	10	INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTHCARE INC. UTAH PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATIONSANDY CITY BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY UTAH BANKERS ASSOCIATION
  Michigan	10	HONIGMAN MILLER SCHWARTZ AND COHN LLP DTE ENERGY AT&T INC. BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MICHIGAN BANK OF AMERICA CORP.
  Louisiana	10	AT&T INC. BATON ROUGE AREA CHAMBER LOUISIANA OIL & GAS ASSOCIATIONCOALITION FOR COMMON SENSE CENTERPOINT ENERGY INC.
  Washington	9	WASHINGTON EDUCATION ASSOCIATION WASHINGTON STATE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COLUMBIA LEGAL SERVICES WASHINGTON STATE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION NORTHWEST OPEN ACCESS NETWORK
  Oregon	9	OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OREGON UNIVERSITY SYSTEM ASSOCIATION OF OREGON COUNTIES DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL
  Delaware	9	ARTESIAN RESOURCES CORP. LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF DELAWARE FIDELITY INVESTMENTS COMCAST CORP. REYBOLD GROUP
  Virginia	7	VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. VIRGINIA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION VIRGINIA HOSPITAL & HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATION AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER CO. VIRGINIA URANIUM INC.
  Minnesota	7	EDUCATION MINNESOTA XCEL ENERGY INC. ALLETE INC. AFSCME LEADERSHIP COUNCIL 5 FLINT HILLS RESOURCES
  Georgia	7	SOUTHERN CO. AT&T INC. METRO ATLANTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AGL RESOURCES INC. GEORGIA MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION
  Alaska	7	NORTHWEST ARCTIC BOROUGH GENERAL COMMUNICATION INC. PEBBLE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ALASKA PRIMARY CARE ASSOCIATION CONOCOPHILLIPS
  Wisconsin	6	AT&T INC. WISCONSIN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION COUNCIL WEC ENERGY GROUP INC. WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS & COMMERCE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE DISTRICT
  Tennessee	6	AT&T INC. TENNESSEE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION AARP TENNESSEE GROCERS & CONVENIENCE STORE ASSOCIATION TENNESSEE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY
  Oklahoma	6	AT&T INC. STATE CHAMBER OF OKLAHOMA TARRANT REGIONAL WATER DISTRICTOKLAHOMA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION ZURICH INSURANCE GROUP LTD.
  New Mexico	6	NEW MEXICO ASSOCIATION OF EDUCATIONAL RETIREES AARP NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION - NEW MEXICO LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF NEW MEXICO REALTORS ASSOCIATION OF NEW MEXICO
  Maryland	6	VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. PEPCO HOLDINGS INC. EXELON CORP.MARYLAND ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS XEROX CORP.
  Iowa	6	CITY OF DES MOINES IOWA ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRUSTEESIOWA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IOWA CITIZENS FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT IOWA HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATION - IOWA CENTER FOR ASSISTED LIVING
  Alabama	6	ALABAMA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION SOUTHERN CO. AT&T INC. BUSINESS COUNCIL OF ALABAMA BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF ALABAMA
  Pennsylvania	5	VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. FIRSTENERGY CORP. UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH MEDICAL CENTER UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA COMCAST CORP.
  North Carolina	5	WELLS FARGO & CO. NORTH CAROLINA JUSTICE CENTER NORTH CAROLINA HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION FIDELITY INVESTMENTS AT&T INC.
  Kentucky	5	KENTUCKIANS FOR THE COMMONWEALTH AT&T INC. KENTUCKY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION KENTUCKY ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERSCHURCHILL DOWNS INC.
  Kansas	5	KANSAS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS KANSAS HOSPITAL ASSOCIATIONKANSAS DENTAL ASSOCIATION KANSAS CABLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION AT&T INC.
  Indiana	5	BOSE MCKINNEY & EVANS LLP ICE MILLER LLP BARNES & THORNBURG LLP INDIANA FARM BUREAU AT&T INC.
  Idaho	5	WELLS FARGO & CO. FIDELITY INVESTMENTS BLUE CROSS OF IDAHO IDAHO FARM BUREAU FEDERATION IDAHO SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION
  Hawaii	5	HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATION OF HAWAII HAWAII ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS CASTLE & COOK INC. LEGAL AID SOCIETY OF HAWAII MONSANTO CO.
  Connecticut	5	UIL HOLDINGS CORP. AT&T INC. CONNECTICUT HOSPITAL ASSOCIATIONCONNECTICUT BUSINESS & INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION CONNECTICUT FUND FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
  West Virginia	4	INDEPENDENT OIL & GAS ASSOCIATION OF WEST VIRGINIA WEST VIRGINIA COAL ASSOCIATION WEST VIRGINIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WEST VIRGINIA HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION WEST VIRGINIA OLD AND NATURAL GAS ASSOCIATION
  Rhode Island	4	RHODE ISLAND STATE POLICE LIFESPAN CORP. RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CARE NEW ENGLAND HEALTH SYSTEM BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF RHODE ISLAND
  Mississippi	4	SOUTHERN CO. CAPITOL RESOURCES LLC AT&T INC. OFFICE OF THE GOVERNORBANK OF AMERICA CORP.
  Arkansas	4	ARKANSAS BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD USABLE CORP. ARKANSAS FARM BUREAU FEDERATION PINNACLE BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. THE STEPHENS GROUP
  Wyoming	3	FREMONT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT #24 AARP ALTRIA GROUP INC. COLORADO WYOMING PETROLEUM MARKETERS ASSOCIATION QEP RESOURCES INC.
  South Carolina	3	AT&T INC. SOUTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH CAROLINA DUKE ENERGY CORP. SCANA CORP.
  Montana	3	CITY OF BOZEMAN PLUM CREEK TIMBER CO. MONTANA HOSPITAL ASSOCIATIONYELLOWSTONE ENERGY LP ROSEBUD OPERATING SERVICES INC.
  Massachusetts	3	MASSACHUSETTS TEACHERS ASSOCIATION FIDELITY INVESTMENTS MASSACHUSETTS HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION MASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIATION OF HEALTH PLANSGREATER BOSTON LEGAL SERVICES
  Vermont	2	GAZ METRO VERMONT PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP VERMONT ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY INC. VERMONT STATE DENTAL SOCIETY VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC.
  South Dakota	2	SOUTH DAKOTA BOARD OF REGENTS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE SOUTH DAKOTA STATE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & REGULATION
  Nevada	2	NEVADA JUSTICE ASSOCIATION LAS VEGAS METRO CHAMBER OF COMMERCENEVADA RESORT ASSOCIATION NEVADA STATE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION NEVADA LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
  North Dakota	2	ALTRIA GROUP INC. NORTH DAKOTA VETERANS COORDINATING COUNCIL NORTH DAKOTA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES NORTH DAKOTA GRAIN DEALERS ASSOCIATION LINCOLN MUTUAL LIFE & CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.
  Maine	2	MAINE STATE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION LOCAL 1989 MAINE PULP & PAPER ASSOCIATION PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICAMAINE SCHOOL MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION CASELLA WASTE SYSTEMS INC.
  New Hampshire	1	NORTHEAST UTILITIES PLC COMCAST CORP. NEW HAMPSHIRE HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION SELECT MANAGEMENT RESOURCES REYNOLDS AMERICAN INC.

• Ashley Balcerzak, Liz Essley Whyte and Kytja Weir contributed reporting.

• Sources: Center for Public Integrity analysis of data from National Institute on Money in State Politics, National Conference of State Legislatures and state records.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Determinants of Group Power

• Interest groups are more important in Texas than in most other states. They play very significant roles in the election of politicians to office and then in the way those politicians decide their political positions on significant issues. There are four reasons that interest groups tend to be more important in Texas than other states.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• First, they influence elections a great deal because elections in Texas are expensive. Even a seat for the Texas Senate, which pays less than $8,000 a year, may cost in excess of a million dollars to win! Candidates have to get this money from somewhere and interest group PAC's are a legal, willing, and able source.

• Second, because pay is so little for legislators in Texas, they must work other jobs to make ends meet. They do not, therefore, have time to do a great deal of research or study the issues. The lobbyists become a convenient and natural source of information for legislators when they are deciding how to vote. Further, this limited pay may make legislators more susceptible to taking bribes.

• Third, because business and conservative groups tend to dominate Texas politics, the other groups do not get much opportunity to challenge them. Without true competition among groups, these groups control the process. Therefore, there are very few limits on what interest groups in Texas can do and they are not very highly regulated.

• Fourth, the state has historically not been very economically diverse. One or two industries have dominated the state’s economy and the state’s politics. If one group dominates everything, that group is very powerful.

• Finally, because the Texas government is so decentralized and fragmented across the three branches of government as well as state and local government, lobbyists can stop a bill at almost any stage, giving individual groups significant powers. There are so many places that a group or lobbyist can influence laws.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Are Interest Groups Good or Bad?

• Like most anything, from chocolate to physical exercise, interest groups in moderation and in a controlled setting are very good, but too many interest groups can be detrimental to democracy. Interest groups are positive when the system meets the four qualifications of pluralism (democracy by groups):

• There is a large number of active and organized interest groups.
  
  

• All sides of the debate are adequately represented, for example, if there is an abortion group, there needs to be an anti-abortion group.
  
  

• All groups have equal access to policy makers. This is where we have a problem. I don’t think all groups have equal access. Groups with more money, larger membership, better organization, and a better lobbyist, are likely to have more access.
  
  

• The leaders and lobbyists of those groups must operate in a democratic fashion, accepting the demands of their supporters, If they don’t listen to us, the system falls apart.
  
  

• The political leaders must respond to what the leaders of the group demand. If you have all of these things, but the political leaders don’t listen, none of this matters.

• To evaluate groups in Texas, let's look at how the state meets these five criteria. First, all sides are not adequately represented in most debates. Business groups are well represented, while labor groups have almost no voice. Wealthy groups have a voice, while poor groups seldom do.

• Second, the staff of the Texas legislature and the executive office are pretty good and can provide a strong counter to the information provided by biased groups.

• Third, the reporting requirements in Texas are pretty strong, although lobbyists must merely report their presence or intent to lobby in the legislature, not the specific bills which they seek to influence. The problems with the financial reporting requirements were outlined earlier.

• Finally, as a result of history and practice, some groups do tend to dominate debate in Texas and all groups do not start on a level playing field.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Are Interest Groups Good or Bad? continued

• This would suggest that our system is not pluralist. It is rather, an elitist system:

• There is a small, identifiable group of elites with common interests and characteristics.

• The attitudes and positions of this group consistently run contrary to the interests and positions of the general public.

• This group of elites wins the vast majority of the time.

• The elites will fake or allow “losses” every once in a while in order to stay in power.

• This approach suggests that while we have multiple and active interest groups, they do not really run the system. Instead, the political system is determined and controlled by an elite group of leaders, ignoring the will of most people-a few small interest groups, controlled by white, wealthy males tend to control the system. Historically, in Texas, this has been very true. It may be changing, but historically, it was clearly true. If you agree with this theory, then interest groups are not good.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• In short, interest groups may not be the devil of the system that many tend to believe today. In fact, they provide some good services. However, in Texas, the tendency of certain types of groups to have better resources and access does raise some concerns about their ability to influence the political system contrary to public opinion.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Interest Groups

• Comparison of Interest Groups and Political Parties

• In many ways, interest groups and political parties are very similar. They each are made up of citizens, usually voters, who are interested in trying to influence politics. They also provide an outlet for people to join others with similar positions. However, in the United States and Texas, there are significant differences between the two, particularly in terms of their objectives and structure.

• While both interest groups and political parties are active in trying to influence policy, their purpose and means of doing so are different. Interest groups are primarily interested in influencing the policy outcome important to their group. For example, members of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) want the Texas Legislature to protect the rights of a woman to have an abortion, and they don't really care which legislators do it or which party those legislators are in. On the other hand, while the Democratic Party of Texas may oppose limitations on abortion,they are more concerned with winning offices and controlling government-if that means electing a Democrat who is pro-life, then so be it.

• In short, the primary objective of most interest groups is to influence public policy in their direction, even if that means supporting candidates who may lose, but who agree with you. Political parties, however, are more interested in controlling the positions and powers of government, which means electing the most people, even if they do not really agree with the party's political position.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Political Parties: Definition

• Every country that holds elections, even unfair or undemocratic elections, has political parties. These groups, as noted earlier, are how we are organized to select our political leaders. Every country has political parties and a political party system. However, those political parties or political party systems vary considerably across countries. As noted in the lecture, parties in the United States and Texas are pragmatic, decentralized, two-party, and relatively powerless.

• On the other hand, parties in other countries may be very ideological, concerned much more with getting candidates who have their position then they are with winning. In most developed democratic countries, the central party controls everything that happens in the parties. While we have only two parties, many countries have ten, fifteen, etc., parties. Italy has more than a dozen parties in the government. Why are US parties so different?

• First, historically, we have had only two parties since the inception of parties in the early 1800's and it is hard to break that habit. Second, the parties are limited in power because we in the US, and particularly in Texas, believe that the individual is more important than a group. No political party will tell us what to do! Third, our rules are set up to discourage centralized parties or third parties. The two major parties (Democrats and Republicans) have all kinds of advantages that young third parties don't have. Other countries give votes to minor parties, but here, you only get power if you win, not if you come close.

• As you listen to this lecture, think about how things might be different in Texas or the United States if we had multiple parties (more than Democrats or Republicans) or strong political parties which control the election and nomination.

• See the next page to see how Texas compares!

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Three Components of Political Parties

• What is a political party? The answer to that question might be much like the three blindfolded men asked to describe an elephant by touch. One says it is like a tree, another like a wall, and the third like a long rope! What you find depends on where you look! Political parties are many things to many people, but political scientist V.O. Key, Jr., a famous scholar who died in the 1960s, suggested that political parties could be divided into three distinct, but interrelated parts: party in the electorate, party organization, and party in government.

• Party in the Electorate. When most folks think about political parties, such as Republican and Democratic parties, they generally think about the identification of members of the public with each party. Party in the electorate is the party in the minds, hearts, and votes of the public-the psychological attachment that you do or do not have toward a political party. People generally identify with one of the two political parties and their votes usually reflect that identification. Party in the electorate is not nearly so strong now in the United States as it has been in the past, with more than a third of the voters not identifying with either party. In Texas, party in the electorate has historically been quite strong, especially for Democrats (who controlled everything for so long), but it is weakening here as well.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• The second component is the party organization. This refers to the party officials (state chairman, state committee, precinct and district chairs, as well as hired staff) who are dedicated to the daily existence and operation of the political party. These folks, some paid and some not, are dedicated to seeing that the members of their party who are recruited to run for office are elected to office.

• The party organization is the party machine-it is made up of the most loyal and dedicated members of the party who want to see their candidates in office. This represents the linkage between the voters and the government. Interestingly, while the parties in Texas were strong in the electorate, they were traditionally weak in organization.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Three Components of Political Parties, continued

• Finally, the third perspective, party in government is related to what the elected officials of each party do once in office. If the party in government is strong, Democratic elected officials will vote together on one side and Republican elected officials will vote together on the other side. Historically in Texas, party in government has been weak.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• This was true when the Democrats controlled everything (1880s to 1950s)--- because everyone was a Democrat, party did not really matter. Once in office, elected officials voted according to ideology (conservative vs. moderate), region (West Texas vs. East Texas), or population density (city vs. country) rather than by party. I want to discuss the interaction of the three parts and how they work together when the party system acts responsibly.

• In theory, party in the electorate refers to the political party in the minds and attitudes of the voters. If individuals strongly identify with the positions and candidates of one of the two parties, then their vote for office will be based on those convictions. Party organizations, both permanent and temporary, will manage elections by appealing to those voters based on the positions they support. Finally, if the campaigns are run on issues and the voters vote based on issues, party officials in office (party in government) will be careful to keep those campaign promises and be expected to be rewarded for doing so.

• However, in Texas and the United States, these three components do not work together effectively. More voters are independents than Democrats or Republicans. Campaigns are run on personalities, not issues, and officials vote based on their current whims and needs rather than campaign promises. If you could get one of the three components (perhaps the party in government) to work responsibly, would it alter the other two? Would it change politics? Would it change policy?

• Historically, Democrats were strong in the electorate and weak in organization and government. Republicans were weak in all three. In the 1960s, Republicans began to gain strength in organization, which eventually led to strength in the electorate and government. Now, while both parties are relatively weak in the electorate, Republicans are in better shape than Democrats. Look at the 2006 election for governor-the winner was a Republican (Rick Perry), but his closest challenger was a Republican running as an independent (Rylander), not a Democrat (Bell). The Democratic candidate for governor has not gotten more than 45% of the vote in more than two decades.

• Currently, I would say that the Republican Party is strong in the electorate, strong in organization and relatively weak in government. When it comes to governing, the Republican party seems to be split between Bedroom Republicans/ Tea Party Republicans and Boardroom Republicans, so they don't hold together too well. On the other hand, I would say Texas Democrats are moderate in organization, weak in the electorate and a strong in government. While they are the minority party in governing, the do tend to stick together on key issues.

• Interestingly, the 2012 election showed some weakness in the Republican Party organization in Texas with Ted Cruz, a Tea Party candidate, defeating Lt. Governor David Dewhurst who was supported by the state party organization, to get the party nomination for the US Senate. The same split played out in the Repubican Priamary where Dewhurst was again defeated by Tea Party Candidate Dan Patrick.

• Summary of Party Strength in Texas:

• Pre 1960s 1960s-1990s 2000-Present

• Democrats Republicans Democrats Republicans Democrats Republicans

• Party in the Electorate Strong Weak Strong Moderate Weak Strong

• Party Organization Strong Weak Strong Strong Weak Strong

• Party in Government Weak Weak Weak Strong Strong Weak

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Characteristics of Political Parties

• Political parties in the United States and Texas are significantly different from political parties in the rest of the world. Let’s look at the characteristics of those parties to examine those differences. We will talk about four characteristics of political parties in Texas and the United States:

• Lecture: AUDIO

• First, they are pragmatic (practical) - as noted above, political parties in Texas and the US are more concerned about winning than they are about maintaining some type of ideological or philosophical purity. They would rather win with a candidate that believes half of the party's issues than lose with a candidate that believes all of them.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Second, they are decentralized - contrary to popular belief, America is not a two-party system. Instead, we are a 102-party system! There are the national Republican and Democratic parties, then Republican and Democratic parties in each of the fifty states. Each state party organization is organized separately and passes its one-party agenda and platform. A Republican in Texas is likely to be very different from a Republican in Massachusetts. Likewise, an Alabama Democrat may have more in common with a California Republican than a California Democrat. The national party cannot make a state or local political party do anything. A state party may nominate a candidate to run for office that party members in the rest of the country hate.

• Third, political parties in this country are generally very weak. The parties cannot control who gets the party’s nomination. They cannot control who wins the election and they cannot control what a candidate does when he or she gets elected to party office. If a member of the US Senate votes the opposite of the rest of his party, the party cannot kick him or her out. It can try to influence that person, but nothing more.

• Finally, we do have a two-party system. In Texas and the rest of the nation, there are just two political parties (Democrats and Republicans) which have a realistic chance of winning a given office. Of course, there are other parties and, once in a very great while, a third party will win a governorship, a Senate seat or a seat in the United States Congress. However, that is very rare. We are a two-party system, which is unique among most democracies in the world.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Characteristics of Political Parties, continued

• While the average person in this country, as well as many journalists and politicians, believes that political parties are not necessary, many political scientists suggest that our system would work much better with strong and "responsible" political parties. However, the key idea behind responsible parties is that candidates make promises, elected officials try to keep those promises, and voters hold officials responsible for trying to keep those promises during the next election. Clearly, this is not the case in Texas or the U.S. However, what if it were?

• Why do some people think we would be better off with stronger political parties? First, it would get us away from the politics and campaigns of personality. With truly responsible parties, campaigns and campaign commercials would be about issue positions rather than personalities. Second, if candidates actually kept their promises, voters might regain faith in the political process. Third, government officials would work together to help solve the problems of the country. If they do not solve the problems, the voters would kick out one party and replace it with the other one.

• Is this likely to happen? Probably not, because we tend to dislike the political parties and the rules are not set up for political parties to have the kind of control it would take to make this happen. Do you agree or disagree with the responsible political party's perspective? Are political parties good or bad?

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Functions of Political Parties (and the Component Most Responsible for it)

• Lecture: AUDIO

• 1. Candidate Recruitment (Party Organization): Political parties are primarily responsible for helping either recruit candidates for office or weeding out candidates so that when it comes time to hold the general election in the fall there are not 100 candidates, but one from each party. If there is no candidate from one of the major parties, it is up to the party leaders to find a candidate. This is done by the party organization.

• 2. Aggregate Interests (party in the Electorate): The two parties pull together the various opinions and attitudes of their voters. They take a variety of views on a variety of issues and merge them together into a general party ideology, instead of there being numerous coalitions of different groups trying to govern. Republicans generally hold a conservative philosophy and Democrats generally hold a more moderate philosophy-you can put yourself in one or the other of those camps. You may not agree with everything, but you can accept their philosophy. This is done by party in the electorate and party in government.

• 3. Mobilizing the Voters (Party Organizaton): One of the main reasons that people vote is that they trust and identify with one of the parties instead of the others. Parties, particularly the party organization, work very hard to mobilize voters and get them to go to the polls. They do this by running advertisements, sending letters, making phone calls, and even offering to take voters to the polls. Most people vote not because they know the candidates, but because they know they support one party and want it to win, or oppose the other party and don’t want it to win.

• 4. Contest the elections (party organization): Not only do political parties make sure there is a party candidate by managing the nomination process, they also make sure their candidate is able to run competitively in the general election. They provide for candidates by offering money, support, people, direction, and anything else that will help them be effective candidates. This includes the distribution of soft money from the parties to the candidates. There is no limit on how much soft money the parties can provide for the candidates, so interest groups and individuals will give money to the parties who will then provide unlimited money and support to the candidates.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Functions of Political Parties, continued

• 5. Organize Government (Party in Government): Once party candidates are elected to office, they are expected to organize government along party lines. The party that gets me most votes gets to organize the office. A Democratic governor gets to appoint Democrats to boards and commissions. If the Republicans gain a majority in the House and Senate, they get to elect the leader and run the committees. Voting on issues in government also tend to be organized around parties- Republicans tend to side with Republicans and Democrats tend to side with other Democrats.

• 6. Parties Coordinate Policy (Party in Government): Because we have three distinct branches of government, there needs to be some mechanism by which those branches can coordinate and, at least in theory, work together. Political parties can provide this mechanism. For example, Republicans in the state legislature may not always work with a Republican governor, but they will be predisposed to do that. The same is true for Republican judges and bureaucrats. On the other hand, Democrats in each branch will also tend to coordinate their activities so that there is some continuity across the three branches of government. When different parties control the branches of government, it makes for a more difficult time. This often leads to gridlock- where there is more conflict than cooperation.

• 7. Parties Provide Accountability (Party in the Electorate): Imagine how difficult it would be to decide who to blame if things go bad if there were no political parties. Do you blame the governor? The lieutenant governor? The Senate? The House? If they are all of the same party, you just blame that party and vote them out, expecting the other party to do better. This is a combination of party in government and party in the electorate.

• This list of functions is the ideal, however, we don’t always do them well. Historically, we have done almost none of them well. Now, we are doing pretty well on all of them except organizing government and coordinating policy, but these are improving as well.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: How We Become Democrats or Republicans- Political Socialization

• Contrary to what you might hear on talk radio or Fox News or MSNBC, people are not born Republicans or Democrats, Liberals or Conservatives. Those belief systems are learned through a process called political socialization, "the process by which we teach or learn our political knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and habits of behavior." There are several means, called "Agents of Socialization," by which this socialization occurs, two dominate our early life (family and schools) and two tend to have more influence on us as adults (media and evaluation/ experiences).

• Four Agents of Socialization

• Family is the first and most important agent of socialization because so much of our formative years are spent with our parents, our grandparents and our brothers and sisters. Parents in particular transfer their belief systems to their children by conversations, actions, etc. What we learn at our dinner table, as we ride with our parents in the car or on the bus or as we talk before going to bed sticks with us for a very long time. It is often said that "what is learned first is learned best" and this is very true for a basic attitude about the role of government. Therefore, it is very difficult to change those attitudes.

• Schools. While families have significant influence on who and what we become, they are not the only people that influence our early development (unless they home school you apart from others until your teenage years). Most of us spend a significant amount of our early years in schools (and child care centers and pre-school programs). Because we are involved in these institutions for extended periods of time (each day and over the years) during our formative years, they can have a significant impact on our views. While most children are in schools that hold views similar to those they hold, it is likely that schools may introduce children to alternative views of the world that will require the children rethink those initial approaches.

• If family and schools have such a significant influence on our political views, why is it that some siblings seem to be so different. I suspect we all know families where one sibling is conservative and the other liberal and perhaps you are part of such a family. The reason siblings can differ even if they have the same family members and attended the same schools is that political socialization does not stop when one turns eighteen. While family may be the most important agent of socialization, we do not stop learning once we leave home or schools. Two agents of socialization that tend to influence our adult lives are the media and evaluations based on our experiences.

• Media. It is often said that "we are what we eat." I would suggest a similar approach for our belief systems: "we are what we watch or listen to." The vast majority of people choose to consume sources of media that reinforce their belief systems. Conservatives tend to watch Fox News, listen to Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones and read Breitbart, the Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal. The Daily Wire. On the other hand, those with liberal views tend to watch MSNBC or CNN, listen to National Public Radio (NPR) and read the Daily Kos, Huffington Post and the New York Times.

• Evaluation/ Experiences. Finally, sometimes our deeply held beliefs as to how the world works maybe challenged when we have experiences that do not match with those deeply held beliefs. For example, if you are raised to believe that gays or lesbians are bad people and you go to college where you meet a lesbian who is smart, friendly and not a threat to you, you have to figure out how to deal with these contradictions. Likewise, if you are raised to believe that a woman should have the right to choose whether she should have an abortion or not, but meet someone who has had and regrets an abortion, that may change the way you view the world. If you are taught all conservatives are selfish and uncaring or that all liberals are evil, but meet individuals who contradict those stereotypes, you have to figure out how to deal with them.

• Let me serve as a real world example. I and a cousin were both raised in very similar families and went to the same primary, middle and high schools and held very similar views when we were eighteen. However, thirty years later, our world views could not be more different. I attribute this to our adult experiences. I went to college in North Carolina and then graduate school outside the state. I have traveled to almost every state and four contents. My cousin went to a local community college, has traveled little and still lives in the same community in which we were raised.

• What agents of political socialization have influenced you to this point and how will those be changed by your experiences in the future?

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Permanent Party Organization

• Both political parties in Texas are now organized across the entire state. There is a Democratic chair in each of the 254 counties. There is a Republican chairperson in each of the 254 counties. Further they have an executive committee and full-time staffs designed to help keep the party strong, recruit and train candidates, and get the party's message out to the voters. To see all that the modern political parties in Texas offer and do, take a look at the Web page of the Republican Party of Texas and the Democratic Party of Texas.

• Their purpose is to maintain the political party between elections so that during those elections, it will be viable. The permanent organization has staff people in charge of providing information to the party faithful throughout the state. They also have people in charge of raising money to keep the party going. Further, some people are in positions expressly in order to recruit potential candidates. Finally, others are mostly interested in recruiting potential supporters for votes or campaign contributions. The permanent party organization is always working to prepare the party for the next election. They work to see that there are candidates to run, money to campaign with, and voters to support the party come the next election.

• For the most part, these are volunteer positions – almost none of those who hold party positions (state chair, executive committee, etc.) are paid for their time and effort. Let's look at those positions now. You can view the party organization here as a pyramid. At the top of that pyramid is the state party chairperson (and vice-chair) – the man or woman elected by his or her respective party to be the main voice and face of the political party.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• He or she is responsible for speaking on behalf of the party, raising money for the party, recruiting candidates for the party, and generally getting the voters fired up about the party’s chances of winning elections. Just below the state chairperson and vice-chair, is the state executive committee. There is not a lot of power in this position and it is usually given to people who have been active in the political party. There are sixty-four men and women on the executive committee of each of the political parties. They do help select the chair and develop the state party platform and issue positions.

• Below the committee is the county party chair. This job can be very important and it is only as important as you make it. Democrats have had chairs in all 254 counties, but Republicans did not meet that level of organization until 1994. The county chair can do all of the things that the state chair in his or her county does for the state–the amount of effort the county chair puts into this job is really up to him or her. Again, it is voluntary. The county chair presides over meetings of the party and other things, but that is up to each chair. His or her job is to keep the party alive between elections.

• Finally, at the very bottom of the pyramid is the precinct chair. Each county is divided into electoral precincts, and county chairs try to recruit chairs in each precinct. Again, this position is what the chair makes of it. There are many precincts with no chairs and some in which chairs do absolutely nothing.

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties in the Electorate

• Historical Distribution of Parties in the Electorate in Texas

• Lecture: AUDIO

• The history of party politics in Texas can be divided into four periods- one party Democratic (1870s–1950s), modified one-party Democrat (1960s – 1970s), two party balance (1970s–1990s) and one-party Republican control (Late 1990- Present).

• 1870s - 1950s: One Party Democratic Control

• During the first era, for more than eighty years following the Civil War (1870s to 1950s), politics in Texas could be described in one word: Democrat. Every elected official and almost all white voters claimed an affiliation with the Democratic Party. The reasons for this were many, but initially were rooted in the Civil War and Reconstruction. Texans and other Southerners associated all of the bad aspects of the Civil War and its aftermath with the national Republican administration of Abraham Lincoln and the Texas administration of Governor E.J. Davis.

• For decades to come, Democratic leaders would fuel those fires to help keep the Republican Party small and ineffective. By the 1930s, the democratic hold was beginning to loosen. However, the Depression and the efforts of Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt increased the loyalty of many to the Democratic Party.

• Did this one-party status among the electorate hurt the state? Hurt the voters? Most would argue that a state with one party does not serve the needs of the voters very well. Think about it in the same manner that you would a town with only one grocery store. If there is only one store, that store can provide very poor service, very high prices, and very low quality goods because the "consumers" have nowhere else to go. Likewise, in a state with only one political party, that party can provide limited services or corrupt government because the voters have no alternative. Further, in a one-party state, voters lose interest in politics and quit voting because with only one party, their votes make no difference anyway!

• The one party status of the Texas electorate in the early part of the century resulted in very poor government services, very high government corruption, and very low political participation. Now that we have two active and viable parties, do you see changes in these things?

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties in the Electorate

• Historical Distribution of Political Parties in Texas, continued

• 1950s-1960s: Modified One-Party Democratic

• The election of 1952 began to signal that democratic dominance might be weakening in Texas with the creation ofShivercrats – supporters of Democratic governor Alan Shivers who supported Republican Presidential candidate Dwight D. Eisenhower for President. These folks maintained their loyalty to the Democratic party for state and local office, but voted Republican in the national election for President.

• In 1961, John Tower was elected as a Republican to replace Lyndon Johnson in the United States Senate-the first statewide elected Republican since 1874. This election set in motion the second era, modified one-party Democrat. Democrats won most of the time, but Republicans could win under the right conditions or with the right candidate.

• 1970s to 1990s: Two Party Balance

• Finally, the election of Republican Bill Clements as governor in 1978 signaled the end of the second era and the beginning of a period where either party could (and did) win office on a regular basis. This era is one of two-party balance or competitive two party system and lasted from 1978 until the late 1990s. During this period, Republicans held the governorship for twelve years and Democrats for eight. Democrats controlled the Texas House and Senate, but their majorities were increasingly smaller.

• Late 1990s to Present: One-Party Republican

• Since the early 2000's, the balance has shifted even further to the Republican party and the state might be rightly classified as One-Party Republican. Republicans now hold all statewide offices, except a few judicial positions, as well as majorities in the Texas Legislature and the Texas Congressional delegation. In 2010, no Democrat for statewide executive offices got more than 45% of the vote. 2014 results were even worse for Democrats who thought that ticket with a female candidate for Governor (Wendy Davis) and a Hispanic female for Lt. Governor (Leticia van de Putte) might improve their chances. Instead, no Democratic candidate for statewide office got more than 40 percent of the vote. However, Demographic trends and the growing Latino population suggest Democratic prospects may be looking up in the future with the Republican Party becoming increasingly white and the state increasingly diverse. Let's wait and see what happens!!

• 

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Temporary Party Organization

• Every other year, the party organization gets much larger and much more active for a few months as the general election approaches. The temporary party organizations, namely precinct, district, state, and national party conventions, exist to get the party voters organized and fired up for the coming election.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• The precinct convention is held on the evening of the party primary. If you voted in the party primary and got your registration stamped to show you voted, you can attend your party precinct convention that night. At the precinct convention, you elect folks to go to the county/ district convention and you propose ideas for the party platform (party agenda). One week after the precinct convention, the county/district convention is held. At this convention, you elect people to go to the state convention, then you decide which of the issue proposals from the precinct conventions are good enough to go to the state convention.

• Finally, the state convention meets to write party platform and, in presidential years, determine who will go the national party convention. The state party writes the state party platform, a list of proposals and ideas that the party generally supports. However, many candidates will ignore the party platform if they do not agree with key parts of it. The platforms generally play little role in the elections.

• Party conventions were once much more than large, partisan, media orchestrated pep rallies. Before candidates were chosen in primaries, they were chosen at conventions. The party leaders would get together and discuss who the party's nominee for a particular office would be. Then, they would vote and choose that nominee, considering the likelihood that they would win the election, as well as the loyalty of the person to the party leaders and the party views. The convention also wrote the party platform and established the principles on which the campaigns would be conducted.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• The modern conventions are little more than media-orchestrated cheerleading sessions. The party nominees are known long before the convention. The party principles and platforms are written by the convention then generally ignored by the candidates. The speakers make their speeches to the television audience rather than the convention delegates. These conventions are designed to get campaign volunteers fired up for the election.

• Party organizations, both temporary and permanent, are now stronger then they have ever been. While the chairs and committee members are not paid, each party has more than two dozen paid staff persons and that number swells during the election season.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation - Political Parties

• Party in Government

• Lecture: AUDIO

• The final component of political parties is the party in government. Once the voters have cast their ballots and the candidates have been elected to office, those winners become part of the party in government. How do they behave once in office? To refresh your memory, in responsible parties, candidates once elected would support the party positions and support other members of their party on key issues. But historically, they did not. Legislators were more likely to vote because of where they were from (region of the state) or what beliefs they held (ideology) than because of party. There are several reasons for this:

• First, the separation of powers: The executive branch, the judicial branch, and the legislative branch (both chambers) have their own power base. The leaders of each are elected by the voters and are NOT answerable to leaders of the other branches. Texas Senators would be more likely to work with leaders of the Senate than with the governor, even if they are of the same party, for example. A second reason for this was that Democrats controlled all of the offices so that party competition meant nothing.

• Lecture: AUDIO

• Therefore, there was no incentive for members of the party to work together. Even if Democrats did not work together, they still won. Even if Republicans did work together, they still lost. Finally, the role and influence of lobbyists, interest groups, and political consultants in campaigns contributes to limited party government. It is difficult for the party to instill loyalty in its members by threatening to keep them out of office because interest groups and their money control that more than the parties.

• See the next page to see how Texas compares!

• 

• Required Written Lecture: Aggregate Participation- Political Parties

• Party in Government: Partisan Distribution of the State Legislatures, 2017

• One of the key elements of political parties is their distribution within governing bodies. It is reasonable to expect different types of policies from a state that has a Democratic majority in both chambers of the legislature than from a Republican controlled state. In 2017, the Texas legislature is unified: the Republicans control the Texas Senate and the Texas House by very large margins. Following the 2016, Republicans controlled both chambers in 33 states Democrats controlled both chambers in 14 states and there was a split in 2 states (remember that Nebraska is nonpartisan). The Republican majority that was elected in 1996 was the first Republican majority in the Texas legislature since 1871!!! However, Republicans have now held both chambers of the Texas Legislature since 2022 and seem in solid control at least until 2020. How does the party balance in the legislature effect what the governor can or cannot do?

• State	House Democrats	House Republicans	Senate Democrats	Senate Republicans
  Alabama	32	72	6	26
  Alaska	17	21	6	14
  Arizona	25	35	13	17
  Arkansas	24	76	9	26
  California	55	25	27	13
  Colorado	37	28	17	18