Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-27T00:01:44.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lawyers and the Structure of Influence in Washington

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Robert L. Nelson ,
John P. Heinz ,
Edward O. Laumann  and
Robert H. Salisbury
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Despite the widespread perception that lawyers exercise considerable influence over national policy making in the United States, their participation in the process has previously received little systematic empirical analysis. Based on a variety of evidence gathered in interviews with more than eight hundred Washington representatives, including data on their work, careers, contacts with government agencies, networks of acquaintance, and relationships with clients, we argue that lawyers are not as prevalent, active, or influential in national policy making as the popular image suggests. Rather, the findings indicate that lawyers occupy a relatively specialized niche in the system of interest representation, one that allows them to command substantial economic rewards and to maintain a measure of independence and autonomy in their work, but that limits their influence in policy formation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , 1988 , pp. 237 - 300
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 by The Law and Society Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

This research was supported by grants from the American Bar Foundation and the National Science Foundation's Panels on Sociology and on Law and Social Sciences, Grant SES-8320275. We gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Tony Tarn, who performed most of the statistical analyses contained here, as well as the valuable research assistance of Marilyn Krogh, Andrew Shapiro, Frank Iaffaldano, and James Curtin. Several colleagues and friends provided helpful comments on earlier drafts: Richard Abel, Robert Bell, Jonathan Casper, John Chubb, Richard Danzig, Kermit Hall, Mark Hansen, Herbert Jacob, Laura Kalman, Thomas Merrill, Michael Powell, Susan Shapiro, Wesley Skogan, Arthur Stinchcombe, and two anonymous reviewers.

References

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, COMMISSION ON PROFESSIONALISM (1986) “. . . In the Spirit of Public Service:” A Blueprint for the Rekindling of Lawyer Professionalism. Chicago: American Bar Association.Google Scholar
AUERBACH, Jerold S. (1976) Unequal Justice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
BERRY, Jeffrey (1984) The Interest Group Society. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
BERRY, Jeffrey (1977) Lobbying for the People. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
BISHOP, Y., S. E., FIENBERG, and Paul W., HOLLAND (1975) Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
BLOOMFIELD, Maxwell (1976) American Lawyers in a Changing Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
BRYCE, James ([1891] 1912) The American Commonwealth. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
CASSELS, L. (1951) “Arnold, Fortas, Porter & Prosperity,” Harper's (November) 62.Google Scholar
CHERINGTON, P. W., and R. L., GILLEN (1962) The Business Representative in Washington. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
CLOSE, Arthur C, and Craig, COLGATE Jr. (1981) Washington Representatives 1981. Washington, DC: Columbia Books.Google Scholar
CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY (1983) Congressional Quarterly Almanac 1983. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
CURRAN, Barbara A. (1985) The Lawyer Statistical Report: A Statistical Profile of the U.S. Legal Profession in the 1980's. Chicago: American Bar Foundation.Google Scholar
DERGE, David (1962) “The Lawyer in the Indiana General Assembly,” 6 Midwest Journal of Political Science 91.Google Scholar
DERGE, David (1959) “The Lawyer as Decision-Maker in the American State Legislature,” 21 Journal of Politics 408.Google Scholar
DEVRIES, W. D. (1960) “The Michigan Lobbyist: A Study in the Bases and Perceptions of Effectiveness.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Political Science, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
DURKHEIM, Emile ([1908] 1958) Professional Ethics and Civic Morals. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
EULAU, Heinz, and John, SPRAGUE (1964) Lawyers in Politics. Indianapolis: Bobbs, Merrill.Google Scholar
FERGUSON, Robert A. (1984) Law and Letters in American Culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
FIENBERG, S. E. (1980) The Analysis of Cross-Classified Categorical Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
FRIEDMAN, Lawrence (1985) Total Justice. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
GALANTER, Marc (1983) “Reading the Landscape of Disputes: What We Know and Don't Know (and Think We Know) About Our Allegedly Contentious and Litigious Society,” 31 UCLA Law Review 4.Google Scholar
GALANTER, Marc (1974) “Why the Haves Come Out Ahead: Speculation on the Limits of Legal Change,” 9 Law & Society Review 95.Google Scholar
GEORGE WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW (1970) “Inside Washington Law: The Roles and Responsibilities of the Washington Lawyer,” 38 George Washington Law Review 527.Google Scholar
GOLD, David (1961) “Lawyers in Politics,” 4 Pacific Sociological Review 84.Google Scholar
GOODMAN, Leo A. (1973a) “The Analysis of Multidimensional Contingency Tables When Some Variables Are Posterior to Others: A Modified Path Analysis Approach,” 60 Biometrika 179.Google Scholar
GOODMAN, Leo A. (1973b) “Causal Analysis of Data from Panel Studies and Other Kinds of Surveys,” 78 American Journal of Sociology 1135.Google Scholar
GOODMAN, Leo A. (1972) “A General Model for the Analysis of Surveys,” 77 American Journal of Sociology, 1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GORDON, Robert (1984) “The Ideal and the Actual in American Law,” in Gawalt, G. (ed.), The New High Priests: Lawyers in Post-Civil War America. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Gawalt, G. (1983) “Legal Thought and Legal Practice in the Age of American Enterprise, 1870-1920,” in Geison, G. (ed.), Professions and Professional Ideologies in America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
GOULDEN, Joseph (1973) “The Washington Legal Establishment,” The Washingtonian (October) 84.Google Scholar
GOULDEN, Joseph (1972) The Superlawyers. New York: Weybright and Talley.Google Scholar
GREEN, Mark (1975) The Other Government New York: Grossman.Google Scholar
HALLIDAY, Terence C. (1987) Beyond Monopoly: Lawyers, State Crises, and Professional Empowerment Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
HEINZ, John P. (1983) “The Power of Lawyers,” 17 Georgia Law Review 891.Google Scholar
HEINZ, John P., and Edward O., LAUMANN (1982) Chicago Lawyers: The Social Structure of the Bar. New York: Russell Sage Foundation and American Bar Foundation.Google Scholar
HENNESSEE, J. (1967) “The Washington Legal Establishment: Which, As Everyone Knows, Runs the Government,” The Washingtonian (October) 34.Google Scholar
HORSKY, Charles (1952) The Washington Lawyer. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
HURST, Willard (1959) The Growth of Law: The Lawmakers. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
IRONS, Peter H. (1982) The New Deal Lawyers. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KAGAN, Robert (1978) Regulatory Justice. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
KELLER, Morton (1977) Affairs of State: Public Life in Late Nineteenth Century America. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KOLASA, B.D. (1971) “Lobbying in the Nonpartisan Environment: The Case of Nebraska,” 24 Western Political Quarterly 65.Google Scholar
LAUMANN, Edward O., and David, KNOKE (1987) The Organizational State. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
LAUMANN, Edward O., and Franz, PAPPI (1976) Networks of Collective Action. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
LAUMANN, Edward O., and John P., HEINZ, with NELSON, Robert L. and SALISBURY, Robert H. (1985) “Washington Lawyers and Others: The Structure of Washington Representation,” 37 Stanford Law Review 465.Google Scholar
LAUMANN, Edward O., HEINZ, John P., NELSON, Robert L., and Robert H., SALISBURY (1986) “Organizations in Political Action: Representing Interests in National Policy Making.” Presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Sociological Association, New York (August 30-September 3).Google Scholar
LEXIS GENERAL FEDERAL DIRECTORY (1986) “General Federal Library Files—CASES File for the Year 1980.” Dayton, OH: Mead Data Central.Google Scholar
MACAULAY, Stewart (1979) “Lawyers and Consumer Protection Laws,” 14 Law & Society Review 115.Google Scholar
MARTINDALE-HUBBELL (1965, 1981) Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory. Summit, NJ: Martindale-Hubbell, Inc.Google Scholar
MILBRATH, Lester (1963) The Washington Lobbyists. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
MILLS, C. Wright (1951) White Collar: The American Middle Classes. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MOE, Terry M. (1980) The Organization of Interests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
NADER, Ralph (1970) “Law Schools and Law Firms,” 54 Minnesota Law Review 493.Google Scholar
NELSON, Robert L. (1985) “Ideology, Practice, and Professional Autonomy: Social Values and Client Relationships in the Large Law Firm,” 37 Stanford Law Review 503.Google Scholar
NELSON, Robert L., HEINZ, John P., LAUMANN, Edward O., and Robert H., SALISBURY (1987) “Private Representation in Washington: Surveying the Structure of Influence,” 1987 American Bar Foundation Research Journal 141.Google Scholar
NEWMYER, R. Kent (1967) “Daniel Webster as Tocqueville's Lawyer: The Dartmouth College Case Again,” 11 American Journal of Legal History 127.Google Scholar
O'CONNOR, Karen (1980) Women's Organizations' Use of the Courts. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
O'CONNOR, Karen, and L., EPSTEIN (1981) “Amicus Curiae Participation in U.S. Supreme Court Litigation: An Appraisal of Hakman's Folklore,” 16 Law & Society Review 311.Google Scholar
OLSON, Mancur (1965) The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PARSONS, Talcott (1964) “A Sociologist Looks at the Legal Profession,” in Parsons, T. (ed.), Essays in Sociological Theory. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
ROSEN, Robert E. (1984) “Lawyers in Corporate Decision-Making.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
ROSENTHAL, Douglas (1974) Lawyer and Client: Who's in Charge? New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
SALISBURY, Robert H. (1984) “Interest Representation: The Dominance of Institutions,” 78 American Political Science Review 64.Google Scholar
SALISBURY, Robert H., with HEINZ, John P., LAUMANN, Edward O., and Robert L., NELSON (1986) “Who You Know Versus What You Know: The Uses of Government Experience for Washington Lobbyists.” Presented at the Meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago (April).Google Scholar
SCHLESINGER, Joseph A. (1957) “Lawyers and American Politics: A Clarified View,” 1 Midwest Journal of Political Science 26.Google Scholar
SCHLOZMAN, Kay L., and John T., TIERNEY (1986) Organized Interests and American Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
John T., TIERNEY (1983) “More of the Same: Washington Pressure Group Activity in a Decade of Change,” 45 Journal of Politics 351.Google Scholar
SCHUMPETER, Joseph A. (1950) Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
SKOWRONEK, Stephen (1982) Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1877-1920. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SPSS, Inc. (1986) User's Guide: SPSS-X. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
SZALAI, Alexander, et al. (1972) The Use of Time. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
TOCQUEVILLE, Alexis de ([1835-40] 1945) Democracy in America. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
TRUBEK, David (1984) “Where the Action Is: Critical Legal Studies and Empiricism,” 36 Stanford Law Review 575.Google Scholar
TRUMAN, David (1951) The Governmental Process. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
VANDERMEER, P. R. (1985) The Hoosier Politician: Officeholding and Political Culture in Indiana 1896–1920. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
WALKER, Jack (1983) “The Origins and Maintenance of Interest Groups in America,” 77 American Political Science Review 390.Google Scholar
WILSON, James Q. (1973) Political Organizations. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
ZEIGLER, L. H., and M., BAIER (1969) Lobbying. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Press.Google Scholar
ZEIGLER, L. H. and H. VAN, DALEN (1971) “Interest Groups in State Politics,” in Jacobs, H. and Vines, K. (eds.), Politics in the American States. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar