Skip to main content Accessibility help

Interest Groups on the Inside: The Governance of Public Pension Funds

  • Sarah F. Anzia and Terry M. Moe


New scholarship in American politics argues that interest groups should be brought back to the center of the field. We attempt to further that agenda by exploring an aspect of group influence that has been little studied: the role interest groups play on the inside of government as official participants in bureaucratic decision-making. The challenges for research are formidable, but a fuller understanding of group influence in American politics requires that they be taken on. Here we carry out an exploratory analysis that focuses on the bureaucratic boards that govern public pensions. These are governance structures of enormous financial consequence for state governments, public workers, and taxpayers. They also make decisions that are quantitative (and comparable) in nature, and they usually grant official policymaking authority to a key interest group: public employees and their unions. Our analysis suggests that these “interest groups on the inside” do have influence—in ways that weaken effective government. Going forward, scholars should devote greater attention to how insider roles vary across agencies and groups, how groups exercise influence in these ways, how different governance structures shape their policy effects, and what it all means for our understanding of interest groups in American politics.



Hide All

A list of permanent links to Supplemental Materials provided by the authors precedes the References section.

*Data replication sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at:



Hide All
Andonov, Aleksandar, Hochberg, Yael V., and Rauh, Joshua D.. 2018. “Political Representation and Governance: Evidence from the Investment Decisions of Public Pension Funds.” Journal of Finance 73(5): 2041–86.
Anzia, Sarah F. and Moe, Terry M.. 2017. “Polarization and Policy: The Politics of Public-Sector Pensions.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 42(1): 3362.
Arnold, R. Douglas. 1992. The Logic of Congressional Action. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Baumgartner, Frank R., Berry, Jeffrey M., Hojnacki, Marie, Kimball, David C., and Leech, Beth L.. 2009. Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Baumgartner, Frank R. and Jones, Bryan D.. 2009. Agendas and Instability in American Politics, 2d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bawn, Kathleen, Cohen, Martin, Karol, David, Masket, Seth, Noel, Hans, and Zaller, John. 2012. “A Theory of Political Parties: Groups, Policy Demands and Nominations in American Politics.” Perspectives on Politics 10(3): 571–97.
Borenstein, Daniel. 2017. “Borenstein: Backroom CalPERS Deal Piles Pension Debt on Taxpayers.” The Mercury News , January 6.
Brown, Jeffrey R. and Wilcox, David W.. 2009. “Discounting State and Local Pension Liabilities.” American Economic Review 99(2): 538–42.
Buchanan, James M. and Wagner., Richard E. 1977. Democracy in Deficit. New York: Academic Press.
Carpenter, Daniel and Moss, David A., eds. 2014. Preventing Regulatory Capture: Special Interest Influence and How to Limit It. New York: Cambridge University Press.
CBS Los Angeles. 2012. “Unions Blast Gov. Jerry Brown’s Pension Plan.”, August 28.
Clark, Robert L., Craig, Lee A., and Sabelhaus, John. 2011. State and Local Retirement Plans in the United States. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Dahl, Robert A. 1961. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Denzau, Arthur T. and Munger, Michael C.. 1986. “Legislators and Interest Groups: How Unorganized Interests Get Represented.” American Political Science Review 80(1): 89106.
DiSalvo, Daniel. 2015a. Government against Itself: Public Union Power and Its Consequences. New York: Oxford University Press.
DiSalvo, Daniel. 2015b. “The Limits of Retrenchment: The Politics of Pension Reform.” Manhattan Institute, Center for State and Local Leadership, Civic Report No. 103, September.
DiSalvo, Daniel and Kucik, Jeffrey. 2017. “Unions, Parties, and the Politics of State Government Legacy Cost.” Policy Studies Journal 46(3): 573–97.
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.
Finley, Allysia. 2012. “The Democrat Who Took on the Unions.” Wall Street Journal, March 25.
Gilens, Martin and Page, Benjamin I.. 2014. “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens.” Perspectives on Politics 12(3): 564–81.
Gray, Virginia and Lowery, David. 1996. The Population Ecology of Interest Representation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Gregg, Katherine and Stanton, Mike. 2011. “Panel Votes to Lower Its Level of Expectation.” Providence Journal , April 14.
Hacker, Jacob S. and Pierson, Paul. 2014. “After the ‘Master Theory’: Downs, Schattschneider, and the Rebirth of Policy-Focused Analysis.” Perspectives on Politics 12(3): 643–62.
Hess, David. 2005. “Protecting and Politicizing Public Pension Fund Assets: Empirical Evidence on the Effects of Governance Structures and Practices.” U.C. Davis Law Review 39: 187227.
Hojnacki, Marie, Kimball, David C., Baumgartner, Frank R., Berry, Jeffrey M., and Leech, Beth L.. 2012. “Studying Organizational Advocacy and Influence: Reexamining Interest Group Research.” Annual Review of Political Science 15: 379–99.
Howell, William G. and Moe, Terry M.. 2016. Relic: How the Constitution Undermines Effective Government—And Why We Need a More Powerful Presidency . New York: Basic Books.
Jochim, Ashley E. and Jones., Bryan D. 2012. “Issue Politics in a Polarized Congress.” Political Research Quarterly 20: 118.
Kasler, Dale. 2015. “Questions Arise on CalPERS Investment Risk-Reduction Plan.”Sacramento Bee , October 20.
Kasler, Dale. 2016a. “With Investments Soft, CalPERS Eyes Higher Contribution Rates. What Does That Mean for Workers?Sacramento Bee , November 21.
Kasler, Dale. 2016b. “CalPERS Ratifies Lower Investment Forecast. Higher Pension Contributions Are Coming.”Sacramento Bee , December 21.
Kiewiet, D. Roderick and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 2014. “State and Local Government Finance: The New Fiscal Ice Age.” Annual Review of Political Science 17: 105122.
Lowery, David and Gray, Virginia. “The Comparative Advantage of State Interest Organization Research.” In The Oxford Handbook of American Political Parties and Interest Groups, eds. Maisel, L. Sandy, Berry, Jeffrey M., and Edwards, George C.. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lowi, Theodore J. 1969. The End of Liberalism. New York: Norton.
Malanga, Steven. 2013. “The Pension Fund That Ate California.” City Journal (Winter); available at
McConnell, Grant. 1966. Private Power and American Democracy. New York: Knopf.
Mendel, , Ed. 2018. “CalPERS Faces Steep Climb to Replace Its Funding.”; available at
Mitchell, Olivia S. and Smith, Robert S.. 1994. “Pension Funding in the Public Sector.” Review of Economics and Statistics 76(2): 278–90.
Monahan, Amy. B. 2010. “Public Pension Plan Reform: The Legal Framework.” Education Finance and Policy 5(4): 617–46.
Myers, John. 2015. “CalPERS Pay-Down Plan Isn’t Fast Enough for Gov. Jerry Brown.” Los Angeles Times , November 20.
Myers, John. 2016. “A New Fight Seems Likely over California’s Long-Term Pension Fund Assumptions.”Los Angeles Times , November 16.
Nation, Joe. 2011. “Pension Math: How California’s Retirement Spending Is Squeezing the State’s Budget.” Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, December 13.
Nation, Joe. 2017. “Pension Math: Public Service Spending and Service Crowd Out in California, 2003–2030.” Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, October 2.
Novy-Marx, Robert and Rauh, Joshua. 2009. “The Liabilities and Risks of State-Sponsored Pension Plans.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 23(4): 191210.
Pew Center on the States. 2012. “The Widening Gap.” June 18.∼/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs_assets/2012/pewpensionsupdatepdf.pdf.
Raimondo, Gina. 2011. “Truth in Numbers: The Security and Sustainability of Rhode Island’s Retirement System.” Rhode Island, Office of the General Treasurer.
Randazzo, Anthony. 2014. “Pension Reform Case Study: Rhode Island.” Policy Brief, January 15. Washington, DC: Reason Foundation.
Ritchey, Mark and Nicholson-Crotty, Sean. 2015. “‘Blue Ribbon’ Commissions, Interest Groups, and the Formulation of Policy in the American States.” Policy Studies Journal 43(1): 7092.
Romano, Roberta. 1995. “The Politics of Public Pension Funds.” Public Interest 119: 4253.
Rose-Smith, , Imogen, . 2016. “How Low Can CalPERS Go?Institutional Investor, November 30.
Sabatier, Paul A. 1988. “An Advocacy Coalition Framework of Policy Change and the Role of Policy-Oriented Learning Therein.” Policy Sciences 21(2–3): 129–68.
Schattschneider, E. E. 1960. The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Reinhart, Winston.
Slosson, Mary and Christie, Jim. 2012. “California Legislature Approves Pension Reform.” Reuters, August 31.
Smith, E. J. 2011. “State Pension Disaster!”, May 25.
Stalebrink, Odd J. 2014. “Public Pension Funds and Assumed Rates of Return: An Empirical Examination of Public Sector Defined Benefit Pension Plans.” American Review of Public Administration 44(1): 92111.
Truman, David B. 1951. The Governmental Process. New York: Knopf.
Vermeer, Thomas E., Styles, Alan K., and Patton, Terry K.. 2010. “Are Local Governments Adopting Optimistic Actuarial Methods and Assumptions for Defined Benefit Pension Plans?Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management 22(4): 511–42.
Washington, Post. 2014. “Gina Raimondo Reins in Rhode Island Pensions, Propelling a Bid for Governor.” Editorial, September 10, Available at
Yackee, Susan Webb. 2014. “Reconsidering Agency Capture During Regulatory Policymaking.” In Preventing Regulatory Capture: Special Interest Influence and How to Limit It, eds. Carpenter, Daniel and Moss, David A.. New York: Cambridge University Press, 292325.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Perspectives on Politics
  • ISSN: 1537-5927
  • EISSN: 1541-0986
  • URL: /core/journals/perspectives-on-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Anzia and Moe Dataset

Supplementary materials

Anzia and Moe supplementary material
Anzia and Moe supplementary material 1

 Word (86 KB)
86 KB


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed