Is American Government Dominated by Big Businesses?

In addressing this question, one must come to a consensus as to the real situation of present American government. Is the big businesses' influence on government illusionary or is it real and factual? Statistics is no substitute for judgment, but glancing back over the last half century, America's lower class has gradually declined financially while a sharp increase took place in the power of economic elites. Newly ascendant representatives seized this opportunity and won approval of the economic policy change. Are we beset with a "clear and present danger" or are we making a mountain out of a molehill?

Whichever way one thinks, one must admit that business corporations have taken more than their legal share in government policymaking. Tobacco industries, oil companies and various others have donated sumptuous amounts of money in exchange for favorable decisions on the President's part and either party. Numerous other concealed methods are employed to pressure benefactors to opt for the "correct" decision. Is the American public being equitably and correctly represented or is the democracy of this country being sidestepped as financial interests of the privileged are considered before national needs?

Complex as the situation may appear, many suggests that the perfect counterbalance for such business domination is citizen groups. Citizen groups can be described as collections of individuals who have joined together to pursue common interests and to influence public policy. Special-interest groups have been part of the American political process since its beginning and have been viewed ambivalently for more than 200 years. As early as 1787, James Madison warned about the "mischief of factions." Special-interest groups have also been viewed as an integral and beneficial part of the American political process, legitimized in the U.S. Constitution by the 1st Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and the right to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances". These "special-interest groups" are an essential component of governmental decision making, providing important information on public opinion and on the impact of policy proposals.

In recent years, America has witnessed the rise of myriad such citizen groups with broad ranges extending from consumer and environmental groups to those interested in hunger, gun control and women's rights. This rapid mobilization of interests greatly broadened the policymaking communities, moving the policymaking away from closed "sub-governments" to "issue networks", which in are a set of organizations that share expertise in a policy area and interact with each other over time as relevant issues are debated. These groups may act individually or through broader "umbrella" organizations, allying themselves to combat-associated issues or standing alone in their attempt to influence government policy decisions. A kind of "free for all" atmosphere emerged, resulting in the reaffirmation of "the end justifies the means". Defenders of citizen groups assert that these groups make excellent coalition partners because they have such a high level of credibility with the public and the news media. Through these groups, government policies have become open to the scrutiny of the public eye, a factor which plays a important part in how policy will be decided.

This system of checks and balances refutes the argument asserting the fact that the American governing process is dominated by big businesses. Due to the citizen groups' triumphal enter of the political arena, America's policymaking process has been made more democratic as the negotiating table is stretched to accommodate new members.

Most importantly, citizen groups have broadened representation in the American political system and along with many other variables, has altered the policymaking, producing a complex and intricate "modus operandi" of policymaking. Despite the complexity and the subsequent complications arising from it, there is no reliable evidence that American government is any more or less responsive to pressing policy problems that it has ever been. Unsolved problems still remain, but these are characteristic of every era.

Democracy calls for government "of the people, by the people, for the people" and this has been ideally achieved through a deeper involvement of the people in the government. Balancing the demand of representation and the need for results can be complicated but one cannot deny the fact that the policymaking process has improved and become more representative in every way. The end result of this mobilization on the special interest groups' part is the modification of policy communities, making them "highly participatory and more broadly representative of the public"; in the end, everyone wins.