A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS of INTEREST GROUP INFLUENCE in the 111Th CONGRESS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Kentucky UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--Political Science Political Science 2015 SOCIAL CAPITAL AT THE CAPITOL: A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF INTEREST GROUP INFLUENCE IN THE 111th CONGRESS Steven A. Martin University of Kentucky, [email protected] Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Martin, Steven A., "SOCIAL CAPITAL AT THE CAPITOL: A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF INTEREST GROUP INFLUENCE IN THE 111th CONGRESS" (2015). Theses and Dissertations--Political Science. 14. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/polysci_etds/14 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Political Science at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations--Political Science by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDENT AGREEMENT: I represent that my thesis or dissertation and abstract are my original work. Proper attribution has been given to all outside sources. I understand that I am solely responsible for obtaining any needed copyright permissions. I have obtained needed written permission statement(s) from the owner(s) of each third-party copyrighted matter to be included in my work, allowing electronic distribution (if such use is not permitted by the fair use doctrine) which will be submitted to UKnowledge as Additional File. I hereby grant to The University of Kentucky and its agents the irrevocable, non-exclusive, and royalty-free license to archive and make accessible my work in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I agree that the document mentioned above may be made available immediately for worldwide access unless an embargo applies. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of my work. I understand that I am free to register the copyright to my work. REVIEW, APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE The document mentioned above has been reviewed and accepted by the student’s advisor, on behalf of the advisory committee, and by the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS), on behalf of the program; we verify that this is the final, approved version of the student’s thesis including all changes required by the advisory committee. The undersigned agree to abide by the statements above. Steven A. Martin, Student Dr. Don Gross, Major Professor Dr. Clayton Thyne, Director of Graduate Studies SOCIAL CAPITAL AT THE CAPITOL: A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF INTEREST GROUP INFLUENCE IN THE 111th CONGRESS DISSERTATION A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science at the University of Kentucky. By Steven Andrew Martin Lexington, Kentucky Director: Dr. Don Gross, Professor of Political Science Lexington, KY 2015 Copyright © Steven Andrew Martin 2015 ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION SOCIAL CAPITAL AT THE CAPITOL: A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF INTEREST GROUP INFLUENCE IN THE 111th CONGRESS This dissertation builds on existing scholarship in political science and political sociology to explore the influence of interest groups in legislative action networks. The primary theoretical insight is that as the number of interest group affiliations between two members of Congress increases, so does the frequency with which they forge other sorts of social ties necessary to advance the interests of their interest group constituencies. In particular, the analysis looks at interest group donation strategies, legislative co-sponsorships, and roll-call votes during the 111th Congress (2009-2010). The analysis uses social network analysis methods to create network models of 19 different policy domains, as well as an aggregate model, for both the House and Senate. Legislator ideology, state, committee assignments, and experience have a generally significant impact on the number of interest group affiliations shared by each pair of legislators, whereas gender, race/ethnicity, office location and occupational history do not. The results show that interest groups do have consistent impact over co-sponsorships in the House, but somewhat more mixed influence in the Senate. In some instances, groups in the policy domain encourage policy change, and in other instances, status quo protection. The theory did not anticipate the latter effect, though it does make sense in context of other research findings. For roll-call votes, interest groups have a significant influence over some House policy domains but not many Senate policy domains. The increased polarization of the Senate, necessity of minority party discipline to maximize their leverage through use of the filibuster, and staggered nature of Senate elections makes interest group influence tougher to muster in the upper chamber of Congress. Key words: social networks, Congress, interest groups, co-sponsorships, roll-call votes SOCIAL CAPITAL AT THE CAPITOL: A SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF INTEREST GROUP INFLUENCE IN THE 111th CONGRESS By Andrew Martin Dr. Don Gross Director of Dissertation Dr. Clayton Thyne Director of Graduate Studies April 23, 2015 Date Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Don Gross, as well as Drs. Stephen Voss, Emily Beaulieu, and Tom Janoski, for agreeing to serve on my committee and providing me with guidance and feedback throughout the process of qualifying exams and the dissertation. Also, thanks to Dr. Richard Fording, now of the University of Alabama, for serving on my committee through my qualifying exams. I would like to thank the University of Kentucky’s Department of Political Science generally for funding my position for four years, offering me teaching opportunities, and granting me extensions while finishing the project. For their assistance with data requests, I would like to thank John Wilkerson of the Congressional Bills Project, Sara Bryner of the Center for Responsive Politics, and Zach Bogoshian of MapLight. Appreciation to Josh Sullivan for providing editorial feedback on early drafts of the project. Special thanks to Dr. Stephen Borgatti of the University’s Department of Management, for allowing me to audit his Social Network Analysis seminar, and for his assistance with some of the methodological aspects of this study. Thanks to family and friends who expressed confidence in my ability to complete this arduous yet rewarding task. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. iii Table of Tables ……………………………………………………….....................................vi Table of Figure ...................................................................................................................... vii Chapter 1. Social Capital at the Capitol ............................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Two Disciplines, Two Approaches .................................................................. 7 1.3 History of Campaign Finance in U.S. Elections ............................................ 14 1.4 Interest Group Strategies and Goals in Traditional Political Science ............ 22 1.5 Political Networks and Interest Group Strategies .......................................... 30 1.6 Interest Group Impact on Legislative Behavior and Policy Outcomes .......... 39 1.7 Social Network Analysis and Legislative Networks ...................................... 48 1.8 Synthesizing Political Science and Political Sociology Research ................. 53 Chapter 2. Interest Group Influence in Congressional Policy Networks ......................... 55 2.1 Interest Groups, Access and Relationships .................................................... 55 2.2 Congress and the Social Nature of Decision-Making .................................... 64 2.3 Policy Networks and the Policy Process ........................................................ 74 2.4 Social Network Theory of Interest Group Influence ...................................... 82 2.5 Hypotheses ..................................................................................................... 88 Chapter 3. Methods .......................................................................................................... 91 3.1 Why the 111th Congress? ............................................................................... 91 3.2 Network Membership Criteria ....................................................................... 94 3.3 Variables, Measurement and Data ................................................................. 96 3.3.1 Committee Memberships ............................................................................... 98 3.3.2 Constituent Ideology ...................................................................................... 99 3.3.3 Member Experience ..................................................................................... 101 3.3.4 Member Gender and Race/Ethnicity ............................................................ 102 3.3.5 Ideology ....................................................................................................... 103 3.3.6 Occupational History ................................................................................... 105 3.3.7 Member State ..............................................................................................