Laying Down the Law? Interest Group Influence on State Adoption of Animal Cruelty Felony Laws

Abstract

Since the late 1960s, the number and types of organized interest groups working at the state level have increased dramatically, but research shows that traditional organized interest groups, such as business and labor unions, are still the most influential in state policymaking (Thomas and Hrebenar 1996). Less is known, however, about the influence of non‐economically focused interest groups in the state policy process. Using pooled cross‐sectional data from the American states, I explore the effect that nontraditional organized interests can have on state policy. Specifically, I examine the influence of the Humane Society of the United States on state adoption of animal cruelty felony laws. Although the Humane Society is not one of the traditional groups expected to have a significant influence in state policymaking, my results suggest that it has played a significant role. However, I also find that the Humane Society's influence on the stringency of these laws is less pronounced.

Interest Groups and Pro-Animal Rights Legislation

“…Businesses and similar groups have usually had the most success within the system, using conventional pressure tactics (Allen, 2005). Animal rights groups, like any other public interest group, have had trouble overcoming the problems inherent in collective action involving a large number of activists (Colby, 1983;Olson, 1971).…”

Challenges and practices in Halal meat preparation: a case study investigation of a UK slaughterhouse

“…There is some assumption within policy makers and food producers, as well as some consumers, that Halal meat is quite acceptable to non-Muslims. However, it is well known that concern over animal rights and animal welfare is a powerful influencer of consumer actions (Adams, 2008;Allen, 2005;Peek, Dunham, & Dietz, 1997). It is likely that some consumers would reject meat that had been produced by the slaughter of conscious animals.…”

Advocacy for the Poor

“…While much of this literature focuses on the national level, a growing number of studies explore influence at the state level in areas as diverse as education, health, environment, and animal welfare (Allen, 2005;Gerber, 1999;Mintrom & Vergari, 1998;Ringquist, 1994;Ritchey & Nicholson-Crotty, 2015; Shipan in advocacy on behalf of the poor. Although they are legally prohibited from contributing money to political campaigns and face limitations on their lobbying activities, many "act like" interest groups in their interactions with government officials, especially at state and local levels (Berry & Arons, 2003).…”

“…In certain circumstances, advocates may be able to use their expertise to influence the decisions of policymakers eager to address a poverty-related problem and develop policies that have a high likelihood of success (Esterling, 2004;Kingdon, 1989). Moreover, recent studies find evidence of policy influence among comparatively weaker groups, such as those that are small in size and have limited monetary resources (Allen, 2005;Ritchey & Nicholson-Crotty, 2015). These studies suggest that even those groups with relatively fewer resources can achieve influence in state policymaking processes.…”