Resources and agendas: combining Walker’s insights with new data sources to chart a path ahead

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Laws that require interests to register both their activity and valence on specific bills before the legislature.

References

  1. Bawn, Kathleen, Martin Cohen, David Karol, Seth Masket, Hans Noel, and John Zaller. 2012. A theory of political parties: Groups, policy demands and nominations in American politics. Perspectives on Politics 10(3): 571–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bergan, Daniel E. 2009. Does grassroots lobbying work? A field experiment measuring the effects of an e-mail lobbying campaign on legislative behavior. American Politics Research 37(2), 327–352.

  3. Blanes-i-Vidal, Jordi, Mirko Draca, and Christian Fons-Rosen. 2012. Revolving door lobbyists. The American Economic Review 102(7): 3731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chin, Michelle L., Jon R. Bond, and Nehemia Geva. 2000. A foot in the door: An experimental study of PAC and constituency effects on access. Journal of Politics 62(2): 534–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Crosson, Jesse M, Alexander C. Furnas, and Geoffrey M. Lorenz. 2020. Polarized Pluralism Organizational Preferences and Biases in the American Pressure System. American Political Science Review 114(4): 1117–1137.

  6. Grossmann, Matt. 2012. The not-so-special interests: Interest groups, public representation, and American governance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

  7. Grossmann, Matt, and David A. Hopkins. 2016. Asymmetric politics: Ideological Republicans and group interest Democrats. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hall, Richard L., and Alan V. Deardorff. 2006. Lobbying as legislative subsidy. American Political Science Review 100(1): 69–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Han, Hahrie. 2016. The organizational roots of political activism: Field experiments on creating a relational context. American Political Science Review 110(2): 296–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kalla, Joshua L., and David E. Broockman. 2016. Campaign contributions facilitate access to congressional officials: A randomized field experiment. American Journal of Political Science 60(3): 545–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Krimmel, Katherine. 2017. The efficiencies and pathologies of special interest partisanship. Studies in American Political Development 31(2): 149–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. LaPira, Timothy M., and Herschel F. Thomas. 2017. Revolving door lobbying: Public service, private influence, and the unequal representation of interests. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lee, Frances E. 2016. Insecure majorities: Congress and the perpetual campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lorenz, Geoffrey M., Alexander C. Furnas, and Jesse M. Crosson. 2020. Large-N bill positions data from maplight.org: What can we learn from interest groups’ publicly observable legislative positions? Interest Groups and Advocacy 9: 342–360.

  15. McCrain, Joshua. 2018. Revolving door Lobbyists and the value of congressional staff connections. The Journal of Politics 80 (4): 1369–1383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Pierson, Paul, and Eric Schickler. 2019. Madison's constitution under stress: A developmental analysis of political polarization. Annual Review of Political Science 23: 37–58.

  17. Schlozman, Kay Lehman, Sidney Verba, and Henry E. Brady. 2013. The unheavenly chorus: Unequal political voice and the broken promise of American democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  18. Thieme, S. 2020. Moderation or Strategy? Political Giving by Corporations and Trade Groups. The Journal of Politics 82(3): 1171–1175.

  19. Walker, Jack L. 1991. Mobilizing interest groups in America: Patrons, professions, and social movements. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zoorob, Michael. 2019. Blue endorsements matter: How the fraternal order of police contributed to donald trump’s victory. PS: Political Science and Politics 52(2): 243–250.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander C. Furnas.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Crosson, J.M., Furnas, A.C. & Lorenz, G.M. Resources and agendas: combining Walker’s insights with new data sources to chart a path ahead. Int Groups Adv 10, 85–90 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41309-021-00113-4

Download citation