“Democracy by coincidence” is a phrase that researchers at Princeton and Northwestern universities coined in a study about political influence. The phrase describes a situation in which ordinary citizens get what they want from government only when they happen to agree with the position of economic elites or interest groups representing business interests.
The central point of the study (Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens) is that average citizens have little or no impact on U.S. government policy. Although the study was limited to federal policy, the average citizen encounters similar difficulties at the State level – namely: well established lobbying groups that “move through revolving doors between public and private employment; provide self-serving information to officials; draft legislation; and spend a great deal of money on campaigns.”
Frank R. Baumgartner, a professor of Political Science at the University of North Carolina, echoed the Princeton/Northwest conclusion writing in a separate study that policy outcomes tend to favor the side that enjoyed greater resources (i.e. PAC contributions, lobbying expenditures, membership size, etc.).
What does this mean for solar policy?
For nearly 30 years public opinion has overwhelmingly favored adoption of policies that are beneficial to the deployment of solar energy equipment.
In 1986, ASU Professor Morris Axelrod conducted one of the first surveys in Arizona to explore the public’s attitude toward solar energy. The survey found 92 percent of Arizonans favored using State funds to help support solar energy technology and to develop uses for solar energy.
Axelrod stated at the time that there is “rarely a public issue on which one finds such overwhelming consensus or agreement.”
In 2007, Vote Solar found overwhelming majorities of voters across Arizona and of every demographic and partisan group side with a clean energy approach to address the state’s energy needs, including 83 percent of Republicans, 89 percent of Independents and 91 percent of Democrats.
It is not surprising given these data sets, that a public opinion as popular as those expressed in polling spanning nearly 20 years, still rings true in 2014. Even in the aftermath of last fall’s acrimonious debate over net metering in which lobbying expenditures were tilted 10 to 1 against the pro-solar policy position – public opinion in Arizona continues to overwhelmingly support favorable solar policies. A survey commissioned in November by the pro-solar advocacy group TUSK (Tell Utilities that Solar won’t be Killed), found that 77 percent of Arizonans would be less likely to vote for a public official that voted to end support of solar.
Nonetheless, Arizona regulators went against public opinion in its net metering decision last November and dealt a setback to the state’s up-and-coming solar electric equipment industry.
Across the country similar anti-solar campaigns as was waged in Arizona have been unleashed by well-funded special interest groups. And still, public support for solar remains unwavering.
A recent Navigant Consulting (Energy and Environment Survey) found that 79 percent of Americans have a favorable impression of solar energy.
In Hawaii, that favorability rating exceeds 90 percent.
This latest wave of policies designed to reverse regulations favorable to solar leaves one to wonder if the Princeton/Northwestern study conclusion will prove correct: that public officials will “act against the interests of the average citizen when their views conflict with special interest.”
Or, will representative democracy “of the people, by the people, for the people” prevail in this epic power struggle?
Jim Arwood
Communications Director
Arizona Solar Center
Questions: Do you believe that public officials are ignoring public opinion in deciding recent issues relating to solar energy? Is overwhelming public opinion analogous with common good? Do special interest groups enjoy greater policy expertise than the average citizen does?
