"Power Play: Business Lobbying and Influence Tactics Unveiled"

Influence by Intimidation: Business Lobbying in the Regulatory Process

Acs, A., & Coglianese, C. (2023). Influence by Intimidation: Business Lobbying in the Regulatory Process. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 39, 747. [U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 20-40]

Abstract Interest group influence in the policy process is often assumed to occur through a mechanism of exchange, persuasion, or subsidy. However, a new study by Acs and Coglianese challenges this conventional wisdom by highlighting the role of intimidation in business lobbying within the regulatory process.

The researchers found that intimidation tactics, such as threats of lawsuits, negative campaigns, or boycotts, are commonly used by business interest groups to influence regulatory decision-making. This approach can have a powerful impact on regulators, who may feel pressured to accommodate the demands of these groups in order to avoid conflict or backlash.

Through a series of case studies and interviews with policymakers, Acs and Coglianese demonstrate how intimidation strategies can shape regulatory outcomes in ways that favor the interests of powerful corporations over the public good. By creating a climate of fear and uncertainty, these groups are able to tilt the regulatory playing field in their favor, often at the expense of consumers, workers, or the environment.

Implications for Policy and Practice

The findings of this study have significant implications for both policymakers and advocacy organizations seeking to promote transparent and accountable regulatory decision-making. By exposing the prevalence of intimidation tactics in business lobbying, Acs and Coglianese provide valuable insights into the power dynamics that can distort the regulatory process and undermine the public interest.

As such, it is essential for regulators to be aware of the potential for intimidation and to develop strategies for resisting undue pressure from powerful interest groups. Transparency, public engagement, and ethical standards can help to safeguard the integrity of the regulatory process and ensure that decisions are made in the best interests of society as a whole.

Advocacy organizations can also play a crucial role in countering intimidation by raising awareness of these tactics, mobilizing public support, and holding regulators accountable for their decisions. By shining a light on the shadowy world of business lobbying, advocates can empower citizens to demand greater transparency, fairness, and equity in regulatory decision-making.

Conclusion

Influence by intimidation is a hidden but pervasive force in the regulatory process, shaping outcomes in ways that benefit the interests of powerful corporations at the expense of the public good. By shedding light on this dark side of business lobbying, Acs and Coglianese have opened the door to a more honest and informed debate about how to ensure that regulatory decisions reflect the values and priorities of society as a whole. Only by breaking the silence on intimidation tactics can we begin to reclaim the regulatory process for the common good.