Outside the Issue Niche

TLDR

Interest groups shape their identities on Capitol Hill by distinguishing themselves from other advocacy organizations, yet prior work has largely focused on narrow policy niches while overlooking the roles of representation, ideology, and advocacy techniques. The author contends that interest group identities arise across multiple dimensions, with issue focus being important but not dominant. Using both qualitative and quantitative analyses of interviews with representatives from 168 national health‑care interest groups, the study examines how these dimensions interact. The results show that a group’s identity motivates it to simultaneously consider how its actions are perceived on Capitol Hill and by its own members.

Abstract

Interest groups care deeply about, and struggle to shape, their identities on Capitol Hill. A group’s identity is what makes it unique and separates it from other organizations in the advocacy community. Previous research has argued that interest group identities are formed by creating exclusive niches over narrow policy issues, but this research has neglected the degree to which groups depend on representation, ideology, and advocacy techniques in establishing their uniqueness. The author argues that interest group identities are formed in multiple dimensions, with issues serving as an important, but nondominant, basis for identification. Qualitative and quantitative methods are used to analyze data from interviews with representatives of 168 national interest groups working on health care. The findings provide a basis for bridging theories of group maintenance and influence by demonstrating that identity encourages groups to consider simultaneously the ways their behaviors are perceived on Capitol Hill and by their members.