What is the relationship between the ideological positions of state legislatures and interest groups in that same state, assuming there is one? Using data on the counts of group populations along with data on the ideological leanings of state legislative majority parties, I find that while variation in group populations does not affect legislative ideology, the ideological positions of legislative majority parties does influence group numbers, though the relationship is nonlinear. Liberal legislatures are particularly influential on the number of groups in a state. It also turns out that legislative party ideology has a conditional effect on the number of cause-oriented advocacy groups and business-oriented associations in a state, mitigating the effect of associations on advocacy groups while enhancing the effect of advocacy groups by business associations. Overall, though, the data show that it is legislative parties that influence group population sizes and compositions, not the other way around.
AnziaS. F. (2011). Election timing and the electoral influence of interest groups. The Journal of Politics, 73(2), 412–427. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381611000028
2.
AnziaS. F.MoeT. M. (2015). Public sector unions and the costs of government. The Journal of Politics, 77(1), 114–127. https://doi.org/10.1086/678311
3.
BaumgartnerF. R.GrayV.LoweryD. (2009). Federal policy activity and the mobilization of State lobbying organizations. Political Research Quarterly, 62(3), 552–567. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912908322407
4.
BawnK.CohenM.KarolD.MasketS.NoelH.ZallerJ. (2012). A theory of political parties: Groups, Policy demands, and nominations in American politics. Perspectives on Politics, 10(3), 571–797. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592712001624
5.
BerryJ. M. (1977). Lobbying for the people: Brookings Institution Press.
6.
BerryJ. M. (1999). The new liberalism: The rising power of citizen groups: Brookings Institution Press.
CoxG. W.KousserT.McCubbinsM. D. (2010). Party power or preferences? quasi-experimental evidence from American state legislatures. The Journal of Politics, 72(2), 799–811. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381610000174
9.
CoxG. W.McCubbinsM. D. (2007). Legislative leviathan: Party government in the house (2nd ed.): Cambridge University Press.
10.
DrutmanL. (2016). The business of America is lobbying: Oxford University Press.
11.
EllingR. C. (2006). Administering state programs: Performance and politics. In GrayV.RussellL.Hanson (Eds.), Politics in the American states: A comparative analysis (pp. 261–289): CQ Press.
12.
FaganE. J.McGeeZ. A.ThomasH. F. (2021). The power of the party: Conflict expansion and the agenda diversity of interest groups. Political Research Quarterly, 74(1), 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912919867142
13.
FranciaP. L. (2016). “Organized labor: Adaptive strategies in challenging times”. In Interest group politics,9th ed., eds. CiglerA. J.LoomisB. A.NownesA. J.. : Congressional Quarterly Press, 37-53.
GarlickA. (2022). Interest group lobbying and partisan polarization in the United States: 1999-2016. Political Science Research and Methods, 10(3), 488–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2021.5
16.
GrayV.CluveriusJ.HardinJ. J.ShorB.LoweryD. (2015). Party competition, party polarization, and the changing demand for lobbying in the American States. American Politics Research, 43(1), 175–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X14547678
17.
GreenstoneJ. D. (1977). Labor in American politics: University of Chicago Press.
18.
GrossmannM.HopkinsD. A. (2016). Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group interest Democrats: Oxford University Press.
19.
HansenJ. M. (1991). Gaining access: Congress and the farm lobby, 1919-1981: University of Chicago Press.
20.
HartneyM. T. (2022). How policies make interest groups: Governments, unions, and American education: University of Chicago Press.
21.
HeaneyM. T. (2010). “Linking political parties and interest groups”. In The Oxford handbook of American political parties and interest groups, eds. MaiselL. S.BerryJ. M.. : Oxford University Press, 568-589.
22.
HeaneyM. T.RojasF. (2015). Party in the street: The anti-war movement and the democratic Party after 9/11: Cambridge University Press.
23.
HolyokeT. T. (2019). Dynamic state interest group systems: A new look with new data. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 8(4), 449–518. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41309-019-00058-9
24.
HolyokeT. T.CumminsJ. (2020). Interest groups and political party influence on growth in state spending and debt. American Politics Research, 48(3), 455–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x19875695
25.
JackmanM. C. (2013). Parties, median legislators, and agenda setting: How legislative institutions matter. The Journal of Politics, 76(4), 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381613001291
26.
KaiserR. G. (2009). So damn much money: The triumph of lobbying and the corrosion of American government: Vintage Books.
27.
LagodnyJ.JonesR.KochJ.EnnsP. K. (2023). A validation and extension of state-level public policy mood: 1956-2020. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 23(4), 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1017/spq.2021.26
28.
LeechB. L.BaumgartnerF. R.LaPiraT. M.SemankoN. A. (2005). Drawing lobbyists to Washington: Government activity and the demand for advocacy. Political Research Quarterly, 58(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591290505800102
29.
LoweryD.GrayV. (1993). The density of State Interest Group systems. The Journal of Politics, 55(1), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.2307/2132236
30.
LoweryD.GrayV.CluveriusJ. (2015). Temporal change in the density of state interest communities: 1980 to 2007. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 15(2), 263–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532440015574477
31.
MasketS.ShorB. (2015). Polarization without parties: Term limits and legislative partisanship in nebraska’s unicameral legislature. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 15(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532440014564984
32.
McFarlandA. S. (1984). Common cause. Chatham. Chatham House.
33.
McFarlandA. S.CostainA. N. (1998). Social movements and American political institutions: Rowman and Littlefield.
O’ConnorK.McFallB. S. (1992). Conservative interest Group litigation in the reagan era and beyond. In PetraccaM. P. (Ed.), The politics of interests (pp. 263–281): Westview Press.
36.
Rabe-HeskethS.SkrondalA. (2012). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using stata, volume I (3rd ed.): Stata Press.
37.
RogersS. (2017). Electoral accountability for State legislative roll calls and ideological representation. American Political Science Review, 111(3), 555–571. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055417000156
38.
SalamonL. M. (1995). Partners in public service: Government-nonprofit relations in the modern welfare state: Johns Hopkins University Press.
39.
SchnakenbergK. E. (2017). Informational lobbying and legislative voting. American Journal of Political ScienceJournal of Political Science, 61(1), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12249
40.
SellingN. (2023). Either with us or against Us: Business power and campaign contributions in an age of hyper-partisanship. Political Research Quarterly, 76(4), 106591292311768. https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231176820
41.
ShorB.McCartyN. (2011). The ideological mapping of American legislatures. American Political Science Review, 105(3), 530–551. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055411000153
42.
ShorB.McCartyN. (2022). Two decades of polarization in American state legislatures. Journal of Political Institutions and Political Economy, 3(3), 343–370. https://doi.org/10.1561/113.00000063
43.
SkocpolT. (2002). Diminished democracy: University of Oklahoma Press.
44.
SmithS. R.LipskyM. (1993). Nonprofits for hire: The welfare State in the age of contracting: Harvard University Press.
45.
StricklandJ. M. (2020). A quiet revolution in state lobbying: Government growth and interest populations. Political Research Quarterly, 74(4), 1181–1196. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912920975490
46.
TillyC. (1978). From mobilization to revolution: Addison-Wesley.
47.
WaterhouseB. C. (2015). Lobbying America: The politics of business from nixon to NAFTA: Princeton University Press.
48.
WeiL. (2010). CURVEFIT: Stata module to produce curve estimation regression statistics and related plots between two variables for alternative curve estimation regression models. Boston College Department of Economics. https://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s457136.html
49.
WilcoxC.RobinsonC. (2010). Onward Christian soldiers? The religious right in American politics (4th ed.): Routledge.
50.
XiaoJ.KaraviasY.JuodisA.SarafidisV.DitzenJ. (2023). Improved tests for granger noncausality in panel data. The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata, 23(1), 230–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867x231162034
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
