Interest groups have received national attention in recent years; the numbers of registered interest groups and the prominence of some of these groups have been dramatically increasing since the 1970s (Berry 1997, 20). This trend has caused great alarm in many people and, at the same time, has encouraged many people to participate in the political process through interest groups and contribute more than simply a vote. It seems that everyone has a clear opinion of whether or not interest groups serve the public interest. Interest groups do serve what I perceive to be the public interest. The benefits and services that interest groups provide outweigh any negative effects they might have.

The "public interest" is a vague concept that holds a different meaning for everybody. I view the public interest as a manageable solution that is the most favorable and most profitable outcome for everyone either directly or indirectly involved. The public interest is a system of "majority rule," where the majority is informed, interested, and willing participants in the process. Minority rights are also protected, allowing a strong minority to rise above an uncaring majority. Robert Dahl's theory of "minorities rule" states that there is only a minority of people involved in the political process on any given issue, and decisions are made by a majority of this interested minority. This is a profitable system, because, as Dahl argues, real democracy does not mean "50 percent plus one getting their way on every issue" (Berry 1997, 10). Pluralism is another aspect of the public interest: diversity of values and resources are the foundation of our society.

According to this definition, interest groups are in the public interest for many reasons, most importantly because interest groups contain the elements of pluralism defined by Robert Salisbury: diverse elements and values, multiple resources of political influence" that are distributed among all groups, a political arena for interest groups to receive representation, and no permanent winners but permanent losers (handout: Salisbury). Interest groups do have diverse values and competing interests that promote involvement by individual citizens, giving them a choice between involvement in many different interest groups. Multiple resources, such as "money, votes, legal authority, [and] expertise,'' are spread among interest groups. Because these resources are dispersed among many groups, rather than concentrated in one or two, interest groups often combine their resources and form coalitions (handout: Connolly and Salisbury; Berry 1997, 192).

Interest groups have access to a political arena that has permeable boundaries. They can bring their issues to the arena and then opt not to participate when the issue in the arena has no real importance to them. In his study of New Haven, CT, politics, Dahl found this to be true. Interest groups are apathetic on most issues and usually stay on the sidelines until there is a disturbance involving the issue that directly affects them. At this time, according to Dahl, "'active and legitimate groupie]''' can enter the political arena and makes themselves heard effectively. The affected interest groups and policy makers reach decisions "through bargaining and compromise." No particular group is "consistently dominating,)' which illustrates Salisbury's assertion that there are no permanent winners in our system (Berry 1997, 10). All interest groups should and do have access to this political arena. Because different groups have different resources, interest groups often find allies to enter the arena with them. This allows groups to share their resources and help create a new equilibrium on an important issue, an equilibrium that is the most favorable and most profitable solution possible.

Interest groups play many important roles that serve the public interest. Interest groups represent their members before the government. They provide a path for their members to voice their concerns "to those who govern them...and have the government listen" (Berry 1997, 6). Another role interest groups play is "agenda building." Often, interest groups are responsible for bringing policy problems with their issue to light. Interest groups use agenda building to turn policy problems into "policy questions" that are "being actively considered by government." Interest groups also serve as educators to both the government and their members. Groups are often called on to share policy expertise with policy makers and provide information to the public in the form of publications and advertisements. Through these efforts, interest groups increase legislative and citizen awareness of policy problems and possible solutions (Berry 1997, 101, 8, 7). Interest groups have also become involved in the process of "program monitoring." They closely monitor policies and programs that affect their members. If the policy is not proceeding to their satisfaction, interest groups may issue reports to the media or go to court to fight for "exact compliance with a law" (Berry 1997, 8).

An important resource that interest groups have in playing these roles is access. Interest groups have more access to legislators than ordinary citizens have, which is why many citizens turn to interest groups for representation on an important issue. This access is gained in part by the credibility and policy expertise that interest groups have and share with legislators (Berry 1997, 227, 101). Leaders of important groups, such as those representing business, labor, blacks, farmers, and feminists, report having talked to a member of Congress at least twice a year. A much smaller percentage of ordinary citizens can claim the same. The doors of members of Congress are often open wider to leaders of interest groups, who often represent a large constituency of people, than to an ordinary citizen (Berry 1997, 227).

Perhaps the most important role played by interest groups is the encouragement of citizen participation. Interest groups promote active participation as a virtue, and many citizens want to play a larger role than voting in periodic elections. Interest groups offer their members an opportunity to organize around an issue they feel strongly about.

Members of interest groups participate by contributing money, writing letters to legislators and potential members or donors, and taking part in protests to play "a more significant role in the political process" (Berry 1997, 7). In their effort to stimulate citizen participation, interest groups offer a variety of benefits to their members. Selective incentives are available only to members of a group; such incentives include gaining information, making contacts, and group activity and visibility (Berry 1997, 68, 69). Material benefits are ''the tangible rewards that individuals...get in return for their donations.'' Common material benefits that members receive are information publications, direct services, and, optimally, a change in policy that benefits members directly (Berry 1997, 71, 72). Many people join interest groups for the purposive benefits gained from organizing to support a cause, rather than for direct, material benefits. Others join interest groups "to work and associate with others.'' These solidary benefits often complement purposive or material goals that citizens have for becoming involved in an interest group ( Berry 1997, 731 74, 75 )

Interest groups have many assets and resources available to help them represent their members in the lobbying process. Interest groups place an emphasis on having the most current information about their issued Interest groups also share information with allied groups and even with policymakers (Berry 1997, 96, 101). Interest groups also benefit from the cohesiveness of its members. This allows interest groups to successfulIy mobilize its members to act on their issue. The strength and/or morality of an interest group's cause attracts the support and action of people who are not members of the interest group, especially if the group has members with celebrity status. Perhaps the most important asset that interest groups have for use in the lobbying process is an understanding of how the decision-making and policy-making process works and how to effectively use their other resources (Berry 1997, 181).

There are many ways that interest groups benefit those who are directly involved in their work, but interest groups can also benefit people who are indirectly involved in the process Collective benefits can be won by interest groups; these benefits, which are the opposite of selective benefits, affect both members and non-members of a group. People can enjoy the benefit from groups' lobbying effort without actually joining the group. For example, if an environmental interest group is successful in pushing stricter anti-pollution laws through Congress, citizens will benefit from the law whether or not they are members of the environmental organization (Berry 1997, 68).

Despite the ways interest groups serve the public interest in our pluralistic and democratic society, many people are afraid that the number and influence of interest groups is spiraling out of control. The number of interest groups expanded in the 196Gs and 1970s, and the formation of new interest groups has prompted other interests to organize in response to the competing agendas of existing groups (Berry 1997, 42). Critics also contend that because more than one group forms around a single issue or interest, these interest groups engage in a bidding war for members and resources that is often based on offering impressive selective benefits to members. This increased competition between interest groups has not resulted in Ha perfect balance of interests represented in Washington" (Berry 1997, 43). Another problem critics have with interest groups is that the most successful and prominent groups are the ones that represent the narrowest interests and issues. Because groups have such a narrow focus, most people are not represented by groups in their daily lives.

The strongest argument that interest groups are not in the public interest is that groups contribute money to political candidates to "buy" favorable policies. Political action committees (PACs) are the funding branches of interest groups and are "the instrument through which interest groups get their money to candidates" (Berry 1997, 154). In 1976, it was ruled that PACs could only spend $5000 per congressional candidate per election; they can spend much more on such things as independent expenditures and in-kind contributions. Interest groups also "bundle" contributions to a candidate by asking members to contribute a check written directly to the candidate and then send the bundle of checks on to the candidate. This money never passes through an interest group's account and is not considered a donation from the group itself (Berry 1997, 141, 148, 149). Money may not buy votes or policy, but it does give groups access to legislators. Many citizens are concerned that their representatives are abandoning constituent interests in favor of interest groups' issues because the representatives are returning a favor to interest groups.

In 1981, Jimmy Carter called interest groups "'a disturbing factor in American political life...because the national interest is not always the sum of all our single or special interests"' (Berry 1997, 18). However, the public interest is not the sum of our single interests, but rather the public interest is a majority that is interested, informed, and willing to participate in the political process. It is also a solution that is the most favorable and most profitable outcome for everyone. Because interest groups play such important roles as representing their members, educating legislators and the public, monitoring policies, bringing attention to unsatisfactory policies, and encouraging people to participate in the political process, they do serve the public interest.

Interest groups bring some of the most important issues in society to the political arena, issues that would not have made it to that arena otherwise. By participating in an interest group, citizens have "a direct, focused, and undiluted way of supporting advocacy on the issue they care most about" (Berry 1997' 46). Citizens who are apathetic on these issues will likely not participate when the issues are forefront in the arena, leaving those who are truly interested to participate. Interest groups spur the participation of citizens in the political process by offering a chance to do more than simply vote. Citizens join groups to incur the material, purposive' and solidary benefits of participating.

Our form of government is designed to allow citizens to organize and lobby around their special interests. When writing Federalist No. 10, James Madison "believed that the size and diversity of the country and the structure of our government" would prevent one powerful interest from "oppressing" all the others (Berry 1997, 237). Out of Madison's solution developed perhaps the most important element of pluralism: "There can be no permanent winners but there may be perennial losers" (handout: Salisbury). No particular interest or interest group dominates all others in this country, and interest groups with different views often work together in the "search for policy solutions" (Berry 1997, 240). It is, therefore, in the public interest to allow interest groups the freedom to bring important issues into the political arena, educate citizens and government, and encourage citizen participation in the political process. These vital services that interest groups provide our pluralistic society are more important to the public interest than the criticisms that others offer. The services of interest groups are important to the public interest and would probably be unavailable to us if they did not exist.

Berry, Jeffrey M. 1997. The Interest Group Society. 3rd ed. New York: Longman.

Handout. 1998, excerpts from Connolly, William. 1971. The Bias of Pluralism. New York: Atherton; and Salisbury, Robert. 1993. "Parties and Pluralism.'' in American Political Parties, Eric Uslaner ed. Itasca, IL: F.E. Peacock.