Drawing on data from a survey of 595 state interest representatives this article asks: Is policy conflict widespread in state interest communities or is it rare due to the isolation of interest organizations in relatively placid niches? Two contending perspectives frame the current debate on this issue. Whereas Browne maintains that balkanization characterizes interest communities, Salisbury and his colleagues suggest that many policy domains feature substantial intergroup interaction, conflict, and cooperation. In all, the data witness relatively high levels of conflict among groups and between groups and other political actors and thus confound the expectations of Browne's niche theory. Nevertheless, the data do not invalidate niche theory. Rather, they suggest that some policy domains are more likely to be characterized by niche politics than others and that the federal government provides more incentives than state governments for groups to seek niches.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Berry, J.
(1977). The interest group society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
2.
Browne, W. P.
(1985). Variations in the behavior and style of state lobbyists and interest groups. Journal of Politics, 47(2), 450-469.
3.
Browne, W. P.
(1988). Private interests and public policy. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
4.
Browne, W. P.
(1990). Organized interests and their issue niches: A search for pluralism in a policy domain. Journal of Politics, 52(2), 477-509.
5.
Browne, W. P.
(1995). Cultivating Congress: Constituents, issues, and interests in agricultural policymaking. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
6.
Browne, W. P.
, & Ringquist, D. J. (1993). Michigan: Diversity and professionalism in a partisan environment. In R. J. Hrebenar & C. Thomas (Eds.), Interest group politics in the midwestern states (pp. 117-144). Ames: Iowa State University Press.
7.
Burns, R. E.
, & Cheever, H. E. (1993). South Dakota: Conflict and cooperation among conservatives. In R. J. Hrebenar & C. Thomas (Eds.), Interest group politics in midwestern states (pp. 285-304). Ames: Iowa State University Press.
8.
Cater, D.
(1964). Power in Washington. New York: Vintage Books.
9.
Elazar, D.
(1966). American federalism: A view from the states. New York: Thomas Crowell.
10.
Freeman, J. L.
(1965). The political process: Executive bureau-legislative committee relations (rev. ed.). New York: Random House.
11.
Gray, V.
, & Lowery, D. (1996). The population ecology of interest representation: Lobbying communities in the American states. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
12.
Haider-Markel, D. P.
, & Meier, K. (1996). The politics of gay and lesbian rights: Expanding the scope of conflict. Journal of Politics, 58(2), 332-349.
13.
Hayes, M.
(1980). Lobbyists and legislators. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
14.
Heinz, J. P.
, Laumann, E., Nelson, R. L., & Salisbury, R. H. (1993). The hollow core: Private interests in national policy making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
Hrebenar, R. J.
, & Thomas, C. (Eds.). (1993). Interest group politics in the midwestern states. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
16.
Kurtz, K.
(1992). Understanding the diversity of American state legislatures. APSA Legislative Studies Section Newsletter, 15(1), 2-5.
17.
Lowi, T.
(1969). The end of liberalism. New York: Norton.
18.
McCool, D.
(1988). Subgovernments and the impact of policy fragmentation and accommodation. Policy Studies Review, 8(4), 264-287.
19.
Ripley, R. B.
, & Franklin, G. A. (1984). Congress, the bureaucracy, and public policy (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
20.
Rosenthal, A.
(1993). The third house: Lobbyists and lobbying in the states. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
21.
Salisbury, R.
, Heinz, J. P., Laumann, E. O., & Nelson, R. (1987). Who works with whom? Interest group alliances and opposition. American Political Science Review, 81(4), 1217-1235.
22.
Schlozman, K. L.
, & Tierney, J. T. (1986). Organized interests and American democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
23.
Smith, M. J.
(1993). Power, pressure, and policy: State autonomy and policy networks in Britain and the United States. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
24.
Squire, P.
(1993). Professionalization and public opinion of state legislatures. Journal of Politics, 55(2), 479-490.
25.
Thomas, C. S.
, & Hrebenar, R. J. (1990a). Nationalization of interest groups and lobbying in the states. In A. J. Cigler & B. A. Loomis (Eds.), Interest group politics (3rd ed.; pp. 63-80). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
26.
Thomas, C. S.
, & Hrebenar, R. J. (1990b). Interest groups in the states. In V. Gray, H. Jacob, & R. B. Albritton (Eds.), Politics in the American states (5th ed.; pp. 123-158). Glenview, IL: Little, Brown.
27.
Thomas, C. S.
, & Hrebenar, R. J. (1992). Changing patterns of interest group activity: A regional perspective. In M. P. Petracca (Ed.), The politics of interests (pp. 150-174). Boulder, CO: Westview.
28.
Wiggins, C. W.
, & Browne, W. P. (1982). Interest groups and public policy within a state legislative setting. Polity, 14(3), 548-558.
29.
Wiggins, C.
, Hamm, K., & Bell, C. (1992). Interest group and party influence agents in the legislative process: A comparative state analysis. Journal of Politics, 54(1), 82-100.
30.
Wilson, J. Q.
(1973). Political organizations. New York: Basic Books.
