To what extent is citizen political participation, such as electronic or personal contact with members of Congress, stimulated by membership in organized interest groups? I use data from a nationwide survey conducted by Zogby in 2007 to assess the extent to which Americans contact congressional offices, and whether membership in more activist-oriented groups, such as citizen groups, stimulates greater rates of contact than membership in professional associations or no group membership at all. I also examine whether this group ‘effect’ on participation breaks down by the method used, low-effort electronic contact (mail, email, web-based contact pages, on-line petitions) versus high-effort contact such as personal meetings with lawmakers. I find that the role played by interest groups in facilitating communication can be substantial. In the case of members from lower socio-economic backgrounds in particular, membership in a citizen group helps compensate for lack of knowledge and resources regarding how to contact Congress.
AyalaLJ (2000) Trained for democracy: The differing effects of voluntary and involuntary organizations on political participation. Political Research Quarterly53(1): 99–115.
2.
BaumgartnerFRLeechBL (1998) Basic Interests: The Importance of Interest Groups in Political Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
BaumgartnerFRLeechBL (2001) Interest niches and policy bandwagons: Patterns of interest group involvement in national politics. Journal of Politics63(4): 1191–1213.
4.
BaumgartnerFRWalkerJL (1988) Survey research and membership in voluntary associations. American Journal of Political Science32(4): 908–928.
5.
BennettSE (1986) Apathy in America, 1960–1984. Dobbs Ferry: Transnational Publishers.
6.
BerryJM (1999) The New Liberalism: The Rising Power of Citizen Groups. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
7.
BradyHEVerbaSSchlozmanKL (1995) Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review89(2): 271–294.
8.
BradyHESchlozmanKLVerbaS (1999) Prospecting for Participants: Rational expectations and the recruitment of political activists. American Political Science Review93(1): 153–168.
9.
BurdenC (2007) 2007 Golden Mouse Report: Lessons from the Best Websites on Capitol Hill. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Management Foundation.
10.
CampbellAConversePEMillerWEStokesDE (1960) The American Voter. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
11.
CiglerAJNownesA (1995) Public interest entrepreneurs and group patrons. In: CiglerAJLoomisBA (eds) Interest Group Politics. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.
12.
FitchBGoldschmidtK (2005) Communicating with Congress: How Capitol Hill is Coping with the Surge in Citizen Advocacy. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Management Foundation.
13.
FowlerLLShaikoRG (1987) The grass roots connection: Environmental activists and Senate roll calls. American Journal of Political Science31(3): 484–510.
14.
GodwinRK (1988) One Billion Dollars of Influence: The Direct Marketing of Politics. Chatham: Chatham House Publishers.
15.
GoldschmidtKOchreiterL (2008) Communicating with Congress: How the Internet has Changed Citizen Engagement. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Management Foundation.
16.
GoldsteinKM (1999) Interest Groups, Lobbying, and Participation in America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
17.
KingDCWalkerJL (1991) The origin and maintenance of groups. In: Mobilizing Interest Groups in America. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
18.
KnokeD (1986) Associations and interest groups. Annual Review of Sociology12: 1–12.
19.
KnokeD (1988) Incentives in collective action organizations. American Sociological Review53(2): 311–329.
20.
LeighleyJ (1996) Group membership and the mobilization of political participation. Journal of Politics58(2): 447–463.
21.
McAdamD (1982) Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930–1970. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
22.
McFarlandAS (1984) Common Cause. Chatham: Chatham House Publishers.
23.
MillerMK (2010) Membership has its privileges: How voluntary groups exacerbate the participatory bias. Political Research Quarterly63(2): 356–372.
24.
MillerWE (1980) Disinterest, disaffection, and participation in presidential elections. Political Behavior2(4): 7–32.
25.
MoeTM (1980) The Organization of Interests. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
26.
OlsonM (1965) The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27.
PollockPH (1982) Organizations as agents of mobilization: How does group activity affect political participation?American Journal of Political Science26(3): 485–503.
28.
PutnamRD (2001) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
29.
RainieL (2007) The Internet and Politics 2007. Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
30.
RosenstoneSJHansenJM (1993) Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.
31.
SabatoLJ (1984) PAC Power. New York: W. W. Norton.
32.
SchattschneiderEE (1951) The Semisovereign People. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
33.
SchlozmanKLTierneyJT (1986) Organized Interests and American Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
34.
SchlozmanKLVerbaSBradyHE (1995) Participation’s not a paradox: The view from American activists. British Journal of Political Science25(1): 1–36.
35.
SkocpolT (2004) Diminished Democracy: From Membership to Management in American Civic Life. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
36.
StrolovitchDZ (2007) Affirmative Advocacy: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
37.
VerbaSNieNH (1972) Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Inequality. New York: Harper and Row.
38.
WalkerJLJr (1991) Mobilizing Interest Groups in America. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
39.
WilsonJQ (1973) Political Organizations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
