Econ 3330 loves Gander Mountain

Gander Mountain and guns seem to be a reoccurring subject in our class recently. After talking about Olson, Becker and interest groups, it occurred to me… how does the NRA get members to join?

According to this article, the NRA claims to have about 4.5 million members. We learned in class that Olson favors smaller groups because there is a free rider problem for larger groups. When a group gets larger, the individual contribution of the next member decreases, so people start free riding the benefits without incurring any costs. On the other hand, Becker would contradict Olson and argue that NRA is powerful because of their large membership base. With more people, there are more resources for the group to use and the free rider problem is mitigated.

The NRA has an annual membership fee of $35. That means the group gets roughly 150 million dollars a year for their collective goods (safety programs, gun advocacy, lobbying against gun restrictions, etc.), which upholds Becker's theory. However, Olson does explain that large groups like the NRA exist because the NRA is organized to promote firearm competency, safety, and ownership (lobbying is a byproduct), which lessens the free rider problem and their members enjoy selective incentives. Examples of positive selective incentives from joining the NRA would be discounts on restaurants, attorney referral services, and insurance. Negative incentives: exclusion from private shooting clubs because public shooting locations are rare. So join today!

NRA Endorsement of Perriello

This Daily Progress article discusses the recent acknowledgment that Tom Perriello will most likely be endorsed by the National Rifle Association in the upcoming election. The NRA follows a “friendly incumbent rule” by which they support pro-gun law makers seeking re-election.

"Tom hasn’t been afraid to stand up to members of his own party when it comes to fighting for the Second Amendment, and the NRA’s endorsement will signify to Virginia gun owners that they can continue to count on Tom to represent them,” said a spokeswoman in his campaign. Perriello has a strong history of defending second amendment rights and the NRA supports their friends who have stood by them in the past.

The article got me thinking about our discussion in class of the median voter theorem. If the single dimension policy space is a social conservatism continuum, or even more specifically a continuum of gun policy conservatism, what will this endorsement do for Perriello?

The NRA’s endorsement and Perriello’s pro-gun platform would move him (as a candidate option) along the continuum towards the conservative end. It can be predicted from the theorem that inevitably Perriello may lose the votes of some liberal anti-gun extremists as a result of isolation. Yet, it would also be assumed that he would gain the votes of those super loyal to the NRA in all its decisions Conservatives.

The overall gain Perriello would get from his position in the policy space would be contingent on the location of the median voter. If the median voter is already more conservative it is likely that the NRA’s endorsement and his pro-gun stance will benefit him, but rather if the median voter is more liberal (with respect to second amendment rights) it could do more harm than good in his efforts to win the election. Given that much of the 5^th district is heavily rural, I’d say this is really great for Perriello and could give him a big boost.