362 Chapter 10Chapter 10 || Interest GroupsInterest Groupsa nonpartisan manner do not count toward that 20 percent), although some groups are
always looking for loopholes in these restrictions. Groups that want to engage in lobbying
or electioneering without looking for exceptions can incorporate under other IRS
designations and operate as a political action committee (PAC), a 527 organization, or
a 501(c)(4). Although contributions to these organizations are not tax deductible, such
organizations have fewer restrictions on the size of the contributions they can make and
on how their money is spent—for example, 527 organizations have no contribution or
spending limits. Two new options for electioneering by interest groups emerged in recent
elections: “Super PACs” and 501(c)(4) organizations. The former was a consequence of the
Citizens United Supreme Court decision that authorized unlimited independent spending
by corporations and labor unions in federal elections.^48 Many groups set up new PACs to
take advantage of these latest rules—the “Super” label reflects the fact that these groups
take in and spend much more money than the typical PAC. All the major 2016 presidential
candidates had an independent Super PAC running ad campaigns on their behalf.
In 2016, federally focused 527 organizations raised more than $494 million on
electioneering, and PACs and Super PACS raised about $1.8 billion on electioneering
and contributions to candidates and parties.^49 However, these large numbers mask some
important details. To begin with, some of the largest firms in America (Google, Walmart,
and Exxon Mobil, for example) have PACs that spend only a million or so on contributions.
Another large firm, Apple, has no PAC. The PAC for the Pharmaceutical Research &
Manufacturers of America is also small, and the other influential interest groups
mentioned earlier in Figure 10.2 (the AARP, NAR AL Pro-Choice America, and Family
Research Council) spend even less or don’t have a PAC or a 527. These numbers suggest
that money doesn’t buy elections or policy outcomes—if it did, these organizations
would probably spend a lot more on campaign donations and television ads.
Spending totals can also be deceptive. The National Association of Realtors, for
example, made over $10 million in contributions—but spread out over 500 candidates,
with slightly more going to Republicans than Democrats. The PAC for EMILY’s
List collected over $40 million but spent most of this on a direct mail operation that
generated funds, leaving only a fraction left for campaign contributions. The Gay and
Lesbian Victory Fund focused on recruiting and endorsing candidates and made no
contributions at all. Finally, another large spender in 2016, NextGen Climate Action,
was funded largely by a single wealthy donor. Moreover, most of the candidates the
organization supported in 2014 and 2016 lost their elections.
Finally, while the $1.8 billion that these groups raised together seems large, only
$1.1 billion was spent, and the average amount each group spent was much smaller.
Most PACs contributed to only a few candidates. And while more than a thousand
Super PACs were active in the 2016 election, most were small, and the average group
spent just over $500,000. These data highlight a sharp difference in electioneering
strategies between the very few large, well-funded interest groups and everyone
else. A few 527s, Super PACs, 501(c)(4)s, and PACs have the money to deploy massive
advertising and mobilization efforts for candidates or issues they like or against those
they don’t like. There are also some very large associations that can persuade large
numbers of members to work for and vote for candidates whom the group supports or
against candidates that the group wants to defeat. And just a few rich individuals can
make outsized contributions to a candidate they favor.
But these strategies are not available to the vast majority of interest groups, which
simply don’t have the resources. Most interest groups hope to give modest help to a few
candidates who are sympathetic to their goals. These contributions are generally made
in the hope that, once elected, the officeholder will remember their contribution when
their group asks for a meeting. It is important to remember that electioneering is only
one strategy available to interest groups. Some groups do not do any electioneeringpolitical action committee
(PAC)
An interest group or a division of an
interest group that can raise money to
contribute to campaigns or to spend
on ads in support of candidates. The
amount a PAC can receive from each
of its donors and the amount it can
spend on federal campaigning are
strictly limited.527 organization
A tax-exempt group formed primarily
to influence elections through voter
mobilization efforts and issue ads
that do not directly endorse or oppose
a candidate. Unlike PACs, 527s are
not subject to contribution limits and
spending caps.Full_11_APT_64431_ch10_340-373.indd 362 16/11/18 10:26 AM