Interest Group and Party Alliances in Historical Perspective

Session Submission Type: Full Paper Panel

Session Description

This panel presents research reassessing the relationships and influence of political parties and interest groups in American history; it focuses on how interactions between groups and parties play out over time and are affected by broader political, economic, and social shifts. Scholarship has long shown that groups and parties form alliances and work together to increase their probability of political success. But creating and maintaining such alliances is not easy, as leaders in the different organizations may disagree on political strategy or policy preferences, or may find it difficult to convince their constituents of the necessity of such cooperation. Papers included in this panel will aim to answer a variety of questions related to group and/or party alliances – such as: when do parties follow the preferences of interest groups and when do they deviate from them? Does the frequency and depth of bonds between groups and parties vary over time and, if so, why? Under what conditions can interest groups cooperate and how do they go about doing so? How do interest groups exist within ‘big tent’ political parties in which they may be a minority group?

The panel will consist of four papers. Laura C. Bucci looks at the changing relationship between the Democratic Party and organized labor in the post-1970s era. Bucci argues that, as union membership decreased in this period, the Democratic Party shifted towards a message centered on individual rights and effort. Katherine Krimmel assesses the rise of programmatic political parties in the United States in the period after 1950 and argues that American parties over time have come to rely more on interest groups in their policy positioning. Andrew Proctor looks at support for LGB policies among elites in the Democratic Party between 1980-2012 to assess whether gay and lesbian Americans constitute a ‘captured group’ within the party in this period. Proctor shows that gay and lesbian Democrats had support from other marginalized groups in the party but for most of this period were out of line with the dominant forces within the party. Finally, Boris Heersink and Matthew J. Lacombe look at the conditions under which groups that seemingly have little to no connections can come to form an alliance. Heersink and Lacombe present case studies of the Coors boycott in the US (which united gay activists and Teamsters) and the 1984-85 Miners Strike in the UK (which created an alliance between a gay and lesbian group in London and a mining community in Wales), and argue that political entrepreneurs within groups can forge cooperation by highlighting shared threats, creating or accentuating shared ideological convictions, and building institutional ties.

Kristin Goss and Paul Frymer will serve as discussants. Goss will serve as chair of the panel.

Sub Unit

• Division 7: Politics and History

Individual Presentations

• The Rise of Programmatic Partisanship in the United States - Katherine Krimmel, Barnard College, Columbia University

• A Union for Every Worker: Collective Action and Democratic Party Discourse - Laura C. Bucci, Saint Joseph's University

• The Organizational and Attitudinal Roots of LGB Political Incorporation - Andrew Thomas Proctor, Wake Forest University

• Unexpected Group Alliances: Early Partnerships Between LGBT Activists & Workers - Boris Heersink, Fordham University; Matthew Lacombe, Case Western Reserve University

Chair

• Kristin Goss Duke University

Discussant

• Paul Frymer Princeton University