Monsanto — Appointing, Legislating, and Lobbying Its Way to the Top

raise sort outs argon defined as an organized group of slew that makes policy-related appeals and they crapper check a profound effect on our organization and hunting lodge (Ginsberg, Lowi, and Weir 419). These groups represent their quests in the political arna in a mutation of directions they john get government officials appointed to government positions, residence hall government officials, and inventory media to advertise their message to mobilize unrestricted judicial decision and contestation voters.Businesses touch groups in particular utilize these strategies, beca design there is an sparing incentive in passing approach pathible laws and conveying a just image to government and the normal. One duty occupy before long benefiting from their interaction with the Obama administration is Monsanto. Monsanto is a tiptopion dollar company responsible for genetically modify seeds, the chemical Roundup and its associated Roundup ready crops, the toxic che mical substance federal agent Orange, bovine emergence hormones (rBGH), and the synthetic sugar substitute known as aspartameto name a few.As a channel interest group, it has been a terrific success in using government to push its agendum, oft to the dismay of env adjuremental activists, scientists, and concerned citizens who involve their government to regulate businesses and entertain the universe. This paper allow examine how business interest groups give c be Monsanto progress to been commensurate to further their schedule under the Obama administration through the mesh of employees to federal positions, anterooming, and subprogram of media to mobilize public opinion. ) Appointment to Federal positions The day of the month of employees in business to positions in government is a common point today and is a good deal referred to as The Revolving Door. This is the shuffling in and step to the fore of government and private sector jobs, and it is bad because i t leaves these government officials with biases and the higher(prenominal)(prenominal) circumstances of being favor sufficient to their former employer. In the Obama administration, there are currently many a(prenominal) revolving doors from private industry (Revolving Door).One current revolver from Monsanto who is now fashioning policy decisions regarding our food synthetic rubber is Michael Taylor. Michael Taylor was named deputy commissioner for foods at the Food and Drug Administration in January 2010 and is a former vice President of Monsantos Public Policy(Meet Michael R. Taylor, J. D. , Deputy Commissioner for Foods and Veterinary medicinal drug). This obviously creates a bias when making decisions active policies regarding products manufactured by Monsanto, such as genetically circumscribed foods or the bovine growth hormones used in milk.When Monsanto employees like Michael Taylor get into these agencies, they are usually favorable to their former employer Monsant o when making decisions. They also ensure direct rag for lobbyists to the agencies they are in control of many of Washingtons top lobbyists have close ties to important members of coitus or were themselves important political figures, thence virtually guaranteeing that clients result have direct addition to government officials (Ginsberg, Lowi, and Weir 414).Taylor is a former lobbyist and current government official who now gives Monsanto full regain into the decision making of many of Americans decisions about food. Unfortunately, he is just one in a litany of government officials who have vested interests in the private sector while pipe down being allowed to make decisions affect the health and gumshoe of the American public. By getting employees into federal positions, businesses attach their chances of creating a strong adjure triangle system that supports their interest group.The iron triangle is a stable, cooperative relationship that often develops among a congre ssional committee, an administrative agency, and one or to a greater extent than supportive interest groups (Ginsberg, Lowi, and Weir 418). This iron triangle system is powerful in creating favorable economy and regulation for Monsanto their good working relationship with legislative committees and executive agencies allows them to support their agenda and further their business by directly shaping policy outcomes. 2) Lobbying members of congressLobbying is a critical part of how interest groups represent their agenda in government and seek passage of favorable legislation. A lobbyists destination is to influence policy in a certain direction by mobilizing individual citizens to contact legislators (grassroots lobbying), testifying at hearings, submitting written annotates to an agency or committee, arouse releases, and other activities (Hasen 217). Lobbyists also take full of advantage of their direct access and personal contact with legislators and taff members to influence policy decisions (Hasen 217). Monsanto is incredibly adept in all these areas, and was the top lobbying client in the agribusiness sector with $8,831,120 spent in 2008 and $5,970,000 in expenditures in 2012 (Annual Lobbying on Agricultural run). Business interest groups often lobby congress and the executive beginning to promote their agendas and enact favorable laws and regulations. They do this by befooling direct access to members of Congress and federal agencies and making their interests heard.This is even encouraged by the administrative Procedure Act (APA) that requires closely federal agencies to provide notice and an prob skill for comment before implementing proposed new rules and legislation (Ginsberg, Lowi, and Weir 434). This allows businesses like Monsanto to meet with agencies like the USDA, FDA, and EPA to weigh in on discloses that affect them, such as the merits and safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), discouraging labeling of GMOSs, or en forcef ulnessment rules on chemicals and pesticides.Research shows that business interest groups have gained legislative success through directly influencing the bureaucracy. accord to research, the significant trait in interest group influence is the privileged, institutionalised integration of some groups into public decision making (Binderkrantz 177-78). Because of Monsantos high train of activity with government agencies and their competency to get access and lobby officials directly, their opinion is often integrated into public policy.Another way Monsanto lobbyists gain influence is through the study they have to offer the government. Research says the nigh important factor governing the influence of a group was the office of a group to provide lawmakers with both technical and political information (Smith 235). Monsanto provides busy government officials with information about the issues that conveys authority and touts research backing, making policy decisions easier for a go vernment official who may know nought about the subject otherwise.In fact, many politicians say lobbyists are an necessity part of government in response to a 1978 bill expanding lobbying disclosures, Senators Edward Kennedy, peter Clark, and Robert Stafford issued the statement that Government without lobbying could not function. The flow of information to Congress and to every(prenominal) other federal agency is a vital part of our participatory system (Ginsberg, Lowi, and Weir 431). This quote exemplifies how politicians rely on lobbyists as an essential showtime of information regarding policy issues.Lobbyists role as conduits of this information to government is crucial because they are in complete control of how information is presentedand thus how their agenda is received. One recent piece of legislation that Monsanto benefited from because of the information their ability to directly access lawmakers was House Resolution 933, an emergency spending bill passed to fund government operations through September and avert a government shutdown. The bill, signed by President Obama on March twenty-sixth 20013, will refer to protect this multi-billion dollar corporation from effectual ramifications of the safety of its products.The budget bill, now dubbed the Monsanto Protection Act, inserted an unrelated provision that grants Monsanto against legal injunction for the next year and the ability to continue planting seeds and reap crops even if there are problems found with genetically modified organisms. Because they were difficult to rush this bill through to avoid government shutdown, these shady alimentation were able to sneak through. The Missouri Senator who added in the bill, Roy Blunt, admits he worked with Monsanto in creating the lucubrate of this legislature (New Law Spurs Controversy, Debate Over Genetically circumscribed Crops).This piece of protective legislation shows how corporations can use their direct access to government official s to alter policy changes. Because of this advantage of access and authority, business interest groups like Monsanto are extremely successful in transforming their agenda into public policy. Overall, research does indicate that there is a bias towards businesses. When comparing comments from business to nonbusiness commenters in federal agency hearings, there was a clear master in policy outcomes.Agencies are more likely to be persuaded by lobbyists for business interests because of the number of comments coming from business interests and the fact that the comments from business-related interests provide more information and signal a greater level of commenter expertise, causing agencies to reply to the requests made (Webb 128). This research shows business interest groups have the advantage both in the amount of input, and the sense of credibility the information has coming from a large industry.Monsanto educates these government officials through their companys own agenda and thus often succeeds in getting the policies it wants passed. This bias towards businesses undercuts the effectiveness of pluralism. Pluralism is the conjecture that all interests are and should be free to compete for influence in the government, with the outcome of this competition being compromise and moderation. The idea is that people will belong to interest groups that affect them and let their voices be heard by government, so that their needs can be met.Unfortunately, business interest groups often have a much greater voice than other interest groups through their existing ties to government via federal appointments and because of their financial power to fund lobbyists. Because they have a greater presence, the corporations needs are met while the needs of the public manufacture secondary. While interest group pluralism presumes that public policy outcomes are determined principally through a contest for influence among organized pressure groups, we can see that it isnt a v ery fair contest when Monsantos lobbyists have millions more dollars to spend. Stephenson and Jackson 7) It is clear that there is a negative implication of lobbying when legislation begins to favor elect interests rather than the public good. Because business interest groups are able to influence government in a disproportionately higher rate than citizens, legislative outputs no longer reflect the outcome of intelligent debate, promoting the common good, or the preferences of the median voters. Instead, public policy reflects the preferences of lobbyists clients (Hasen 219). 4. Mobilizing Public look Through Media Monsanto, like other interest groups, often uses media to further its cause.It can be used to rally support for the products it makes or it can be used to oppose policies that could affect the company negatively. Because it is a multi-billion dollar company, it is able to spend an inordinate amount to advertise their agenda and gain public favor more easily than compa nies that are not as strong off financially. Research shows the effectiveness of an interest groups use of media is correlated to its currency and size the best predictor of an interest groups ability to use the mass media as a political tool is the level of organizational resources (money, members, staff, etc. it enjoys (Thrall 417). This shows that the advertising messages the public receives is determined by who has the most money to market themselves, and companies like Monsanto are obviously a predominate influence due to their resources. A recent example of Monsantos use of the media to further its agenda was the attempt at labeling genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that failed because of Monsantos supreme ability to mobilize public opinion.The California Proposition 37 added to the ballot in 2012 was an initiative to label foods that contain genetically modified organisms. Even with mounting concerns about public safety, Monsanto was able to control this issue through media and advertising and ensure that California voters would not let the proposition pass. They were successful because large companies were able to out fund non- avails and other groups who donated a fraction of Monsantos budget.Because of their resources and ability to advertise, Monsanto and other agribusinesses were able to easily sway voters with their carefully crafted ad campaigns. By paying to run millions of dollars on ads that imperil rising food costs if food labeling was required, they swayed many Americans worried about tough economic times. Their use of the media convinced citizens that labeling genetically modified foods was against their self-interests financially, and this menace prevented many people from voting the proposition through.It was a big comment on the state of consumer affairs in the country that a dim-witted labeling law could not be passed though the administration could follow many other countries leads and mandate GMO labeling, Monsanto is left deciding the fate of food with its money, power, and influence. 4) end reaffirms your thesis statement, discusses the issues, and reaches a final judgment your conclusion based on your research and your reasoning. Business interest groups are a powerful force in the decision making process of our country and will continue to exert force over policy as long as they have resources and access.To make their interests known and accepted, they utilize the attainment of federal positions, lobbying, litigation, and backup of media. To get their agenda expressed through the government, they use federal appointments in a process called the Revolving Door. This leads to biased decision making passim branches of the government that can negatively affect policy outcomes for the public. If this continues, citizens will become alienated and discorporate trusting of the federal government which seems to be only serving the elite interests of corporations.Lobbying is another way that citizens a re rightly beginning to lose trust in the system. While in theory all interest groups are supposed to be able to lobby the government, only those interests with large amounts of money, access, and connections will have a good chance at having their interests be heard. though there are regulations on how much lobbyists can spend and laws requiring them to register, it is still clear that lobbyists for billion dollar corporations are experiencing a higher level of success than public interest groups with little funding.This shows that in government, those with the most money and access will prevail. Unfortunately when businesses and trade associations make up more than half of the Washington lobbying community, it is unlikely citizens will fare as well as corporations (Baumgartner 1194). This has major implications when research shows that some special interest lobbies frequently influence legislation and regulation in ways thatare detrimental to the public good (Baker 53). Regulation s made from information presented by lobbyists doesnt serve the public goodit serves Monsantos.The use of the media is another area in which Monsanto has dominated its competition. It was the highest contributor in advertising against Proposition 37, and the over seven-spot million dollars poured into the cause was effective in squashing the issue of labeling genetically modified food. When a group like Monsanto is able to pour that amount of cash in hand into mobilizing public opinion, they have complete control over the issue and how they want it to be seen and voted on by the American public.With enough money they were able to assuage concerns over the safety of genetically modified foods and managed to convince people it would actually go against their own self interests in terms of cost. The elite team of advertisers Monsanto has the funds to hire enables them to spin their issues in any way they need to in order to gain both governmental and public support for their agenda. By gaining support they can ensure individuals vote to Monsantos benefit and dont actively oppose the company, leaving their profit motive as the single determiner of important public policy.