US Pressure Group Profiles

US Pressure Group Profiles

HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN FOUNDATION

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) foundation is the largest civil rights organisation that is working to achieve equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Americans. The HRC are avid Democrat supporters. They have more than 1.5 million members and supporters nationwide who are committed to making the Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s vision a reality. The foundation works to improve the lives of LGBT people by increasing awareness and understanding and encouraging the adoption of LGBT inclusive policies and practices.

·       In the 2012 President election they spent a total of $91,149. Over $59,531 was spent supporting Barrack Obama and $31,618 was spent opposing Mitt Romney. Their communication costs were at $26,242.

·       In the 2014 midterms they spent a total of $66,942. Over $65,835 went towards Democrat candidates and $1,107 went towards opposing Republican candidates. Communication costs were at $30,266

Some notable people support the HRC such as Barrack Obama, Brad Pitt, Betty DeGeneres, Jennifer Lopez and Demi Lovato.

Their key cases and successes include successfully getting same-sex marriage legalised (2003/04) and the defeat of the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004 and 2006. Also, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act 2013), repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (2010) and the repeal of Defence of Marriage Act (2011).

Their methods include lobbying which is used to gain publicity amongst the electorate and ensure that Congress considers policies. They have a range of programmes set up for different types of Americans (children, youth, family programmes etc).

      (National Abortion and Reproductive Rights and Action League)

NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA FOUNDATION

Formed in 1969, NARAL took the lead role in expanding reproductive freedom for women regardless of immigrations that. This makes them a pro-choice pressure group that seeks to expand access to abortion and oppose restrictions on abortion. The NARAL support the Democratic Party due to their pro-choice stance on abortion and their continuing support of the landmark ruling, Roe v. Wade (1973). As of 2013, Ilyse Hogue, a nationally recognised social change practitioner, assumed the role of President of NARAL. The NARAL employ a variety of tactics to achieve their goals:

·       Lobby Congress to convince elected representatives to support the right to choose

·       Organise men and women to make sure that lawmakers hear from the pro-choice people they represent

·       Work with state affiliates to advance ideas benefiting women’s freedom

·       Uses the political process to elect lawmakers who share pro-choice values

The NARAL has 20 state affiliates; they are independent entities with their own boards of directors, employees and members. They work in partnership with NARAL to advance pro-choice policies and combat pro-life attacks. For example, NARAL Pro-Choice New York and NARAL Pro-Choice Texas are just two out of the 20 state affiliates.

Expenditure	2011-2012	2013-2014
For Democrats	$565,809	$157,967
Against Democrats	$0	$16,661
For Republicans	$5	$0
Against Republicans	$1,114,544	$472,876
Total	$1,608,358	$647,504

NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE

Formed in 1968 (sources vary, some say ’67) the National Right to Life is the oldest and largest pro-life organisation in the United States with affiliates in all 50 states. The group seeks to work towards pro-life amendments and work against induced abortion as well as infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide. Some “quick facts” from their site include: an unborn baby’s heart begins to beat 18-21 days after fertilisation (that’s pure bull sh*t), brain waves can be detected as early as 40 days after fertilisation and since Roe v. Wade there has been 55 million abortions. They use very similar tactics to that of the NARAL.

The National Right to Life mission statement declares their role is to protect and defend the most fundamental right of humankind, the right to life. They are a predominantly Catholic group founded by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. The current serving President is Carols Tobias (2011-) and the fact they have affiliates in all 50 states and higher expenditure shows that they’re more influential and powerful than the NARAL.

Expenditure	2011-2012	2013-2014
For Democrats	$0	$0
Against Democrats	$3,219	$4,646
For Republicans	$2,095,143	$$1,150,323
Against Republicans	$8,657	$0
Total	$2,107,019	$1,168,759

AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

A more moderate arm of the Israel Lobby, the AIPAC has a particular stranglehold over the U.S government, and supports the Republican Party. It is impossible to pass anti-Israel legislation in Congress as a result of their intense involvement behind the scenes of US politics. They have over 100,000 members. Reportedly it has very strong links to the Republican Party and has a huge $100 million budget, spending millions in both the 2012 and 2014 elections. The annual Policy Conference is a second only to the State of the Union address for the number of federal officials in attendance at an event.

Their key court case is:

·       Federal Election Committee vs. Akins (1998) – This was brought to the Supreme Court in order to determine if The American Israel Public Affairs Committee was a political committee or not

·       Were they successful or nah? The court ruled they were a public affairs committee; a public group whose issues it fights for is in the public interest and therefore is not political. The definition of public here however is contentious.

They have a YouTube channel which is useful for the education of Americans on the Israel and Palestine conflict and where it promotes its opinion.

It calls for:

·       Substantial aid being given to Israel from the U.S, in the form of nuclear weapons to counter Iran and in intelligence operations

·       A two-state solutions based on direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians

·       It supports continued U.S. involvement in “negotiations with an acceptance of Israel’s need for secure, recognised and defensible borders, with the understanding that Israel must determine it’s own security requirements”

NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION

This is a non-profit organisation founded in 1871 who’s primary goal is to protect and defend the right to bear arms.

They are advocates of the Republican Party. When the group first emerged it consisted of conservatives who later identified themselves as Republicans. They also support the Republican belief of protecting the second amendment, along with many others.

Although the group believes in supporting candidates based on their attitude to gun rights rather than party affiliation. A Reuters poll in April 2012 found that 82% of Republicans and 55% of Democrats accepted the NRA. As of January 2014, it supported efforts by Republican Senator Jerry Moran to prevent funding the treaty unless ratified by the Senate, which opposes the treaty. Their aims can be summed up as:

1.    To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, FUCK YEAH!

2.   To promote public safety, law and order, and the national defence

3.   To train members of law enforcement agencies, the armed forces, the militia and people of good repute in marksmanship and in the safe handling and efficient use of small arms

4.   To fast and promote the shooting sports

5.   To promote hunter safety

The NRA Political Victory Fund (PVF) PAC was established in 1976 to challenge gun-control candidates and to support gun-rights candidates. The first supporting candidate was Ronald Reagan in 1980. In 2012 the NRA Institute for Legislative Action spent a total of $7.5 million on federal elections on 66 candidates and spent $9.5 million in the 2012 election. $1.8 million went towards backing Romney’s campaign in 2012. The NRA spent over $360,000 in the Colorado recall election of 2013, which resulted in the ouster of the state senators John Morse and Angela Giron, a victory for group. $38 million on both negative and positive advertising.

Advertising is a major tactics for the group whether it’s during elections to support or discourage other candidates and during the year to support the second amendment, changing public perception. A large amount of spending is dedicated to advertising.

Although public support has fallen in 2014 (55%) its membership surpassed 5 million in 2014. The NRA typically uses lobbying, publications and outreach programmes as their methods.

Some of their campaigns: Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006 was a bill introduced in Congress intended to prohibit the confiscation of legally possessed firearms during a disaster. After Hurricane Katrina states were concerned about citizens having firearms in a national emergency, resulting a law allowing states to confiscate these. The group opposed this and were successful in their campaign as the law was eventually dropped.

The Assault Weapon Ban of 2013 was a bill introduced on January 24 2013 to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes. This occurred one month after the shooting at Sandy Hook. It was defeated in the Senate showing the success of the group again.

AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is an American conservative political advocacy group. AFP is committed to educating citizens about economic policy and mobilising those citizens as advocates in the public policy process. A major force behind the tea party movement, AFP seeks to support free markets and entrepreneurship by advocating lower taxes and limited government spending and regulation.

AFP supports:

·       Cutting taxes and government spending in order to halt the encroachment of government in the economic lives of citizens by fighting proposed tax increases and pointing out evidence of waste, fraud and abuse

·       Removing unnecessary barriers to entrepreneurships and opportunity by sparking citizen involvement early in the regulatory process in order to reduce red tape

·       Restoring fairness to our judicial system

Leadership and spending in 2012 & 2014

From 2011-2012, in what the Wall Street Journal called “perhaps the biggest attack on Mr. Obama so far in the 2012 election campaign.” The AFP spent $8.4 million ($2.4 in 2011 and $6 million in 2012) on television ads that criticised the federal loan to now-bankrupt manufacturer of solar panels, Solyndra. In September 2012, the Washington Post called AFP “One of the major players on the right” reported the AFP planned to spend $125 million on the 2012 presidential election.

·       AFP wound up spending a record $122 million in 2012

·       Grand total spent on 2014 federal elections: $5,082,683

·       $4.8 million spent in 2014 midterm elections

The lastest wave of anti-Obamacare ads includes a Halloween-themed video with scenes from horror movies and a headline: “What Do You Fear?”. AFP are running ads targeting Democratic Senators who have backed Obamacare.

HEALTHCARE FOR AMERICA NOW

Issues campaigned for:

The extension of medical benefits to most of the population who are currently uninsured for healthcare.

By identifying significant public policy issues as they arise and taking responsibility to lead campaigns to address them in collaboration with the diverse membership of its coalition, the HCAN will be able to achieve the goal of public heath care. These efforts include pushing for strong accountability measures for insurance companies. HCAN continues to prepare reports highlighting insurance industry excesses and abuses to educate the public about developments related to implementation of the law by state and federal agencies

The party they tend to support:

Democrat leaning: in full support of Obamacare even after failing to achieve one of HCAN’s key goals: the creation of a public option – a government run health plan that would introduce greater competition into local health insurance markets, which are currently dominated by two companies.

Advertising

In 2012, as a result of political and legal challenged to Obamacare (Affordable Care Act), the HCAN transitioned from campaigning for passage of the law to a broad campaign to fully implement health care reform at state and federal level.

Membership

They are a progressive political coalition of more than 1000 organisaitons who came together in 2008.

Key legislation they influenced:

The Affordable Care Act has passages that are endorsed by HCAN. They declare that the Affordable Care Act’s impact will be extensive in the policy and political arenas.

They employ a variety of methods such as using media statements, Huffington Post and short films starring celebrities.

PROGRESS NOW

Democracy works best when every voice is heard. They are the largest online progressive advocacy organisation in Colorado, connecting people online with the issues of importance offline. ProgressNow Colorado is on the job 24/7 to let Coloradoans know how elected official vote, what they say and where they stand on progressive issues.

Progress Now Colorado – specific to Colorado, an issue they specifically look at is getting the best healthcare insurance for Coloradoans.

They’ve developed a new marketplace where health insurance plans can be easily compared and financial assistance found, to find the best plan.

They have the tendency to support the Democratic Party and are fully in support of Obamacare. They ask for donations up to $2000. A lot of their methods include internet advertising which is often very humorous.

NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

This was established in 1857 and has 2,731,419 members. The issues they stand for are:

·       Reforming No Child Left Behind (NCLB) / Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

·       Increasing education funding

·       Minority community outreach

·       Dropout prevention

·       Lowering the achievement gap

·       Priority Schools Campaign

·       Discouraging school vouchers and all forms of competition with pubic schools

·       Reforming laws governing charter schools

The NEA tend to support the Democratic Party as they have a more liberal ideology when looking into issues such as education and minorities. NEA asserts itself as “non-partisan”, but critics ponit out that the NEA has endorsed and provided support for every Democratic Party presidential nominee from Jimmy Carter to Barrack Obama and has never endorsed any Republican or third party candidate for presidency.

NEA political activity:

 In October 2013, the NEA came to the support of illegal immigrants protesting on the National Mall and federal legislation that would grant legal status to illegal immigrants and double legal immigration.

 In voicing his support for the bill, NEA executive director John Stocks explained “Every day in America thousands of students are denied the American dream because of their legal status. Every day in America thousands of students don’t know if they will come home to find their parents. This is a moral tragedy, an injustice to the more than 3 million members of my union and the National Education Association”

·         NEA has lobbied for changing to the No Child Left Behind Act (2001) – United States Act of Congress that is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which included Title I, the government’s flagship aid program for disadvantaged students.