Drawing on findings in the literature on power structure research, this article argues that many of the biggest and most important nonprofit organizations are central components in the ongoing conflict between the corporate community and the power elite on the one side and the liberal—labor coalition and progressive social movements on the other. The article overviews five case studies to demonstrate the role of various types of nonprofits in specific policy conflicts.
Allen, M.P. (1992). Elite social movement organizations and the state: The rise of the conservative policy-planning network. Research in Politics and Society, 4, 87-109.
2.
Alpert, I., & Markusen, A. (1980). Think tanks and capitalist policy. In G. W. Domhoff (Ed.), Power structure research (pp. 173-197). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
3.
Baltzell, E.D. (1958). Philadelphia gentlemen: The making of a national upper class. New York: Free Press .
4.
Baltzell, E.D. (1964). The Protestant establishment: Aristocracy and caste in America. New York: Random House.
Bartley, T. (2007). How foundations shape social movements: The construction of an organizational field and the rise of forest certification. Social Problems, 54, 229-255.
7.
Burch, P.H. (1972). The managerial revolution reassessed: Family control in America's large corporations. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
8.
Burris, V. (1992). Elite policy-planning networks in the United States . Research in Politics and Society, 4, 111-134.
9.
Coltrane, S. (2001). Marketing the marriage "solution": Misplaced simplicity in the politics of fatherhood. Sociological Perspectives, 44, 387-418.
10.
Colwell, M. (1980). The foundation connection: Links among foundations and recipient organizations. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad. pp. 413-452. Boston: G. K. Hall.
11.
Colwell, M. (1993). Private foundations and public policy: The political role of philanthropy. New York: Garland.
12.
Daniels, A.K. (1988). Invisible careers: Women civic leaders from the volunteer world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
Darknell, F. (1975). The Carnegie Council for Policy Studies in Higher Education: A new policy group for the ruling class. The Insurgent Sociologist, 5, 106-114.
14.
Darknell, F. (1980). The Carnegie philanthropy and private corporate influence on higher education. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad (pp. 385-411). Boston: G. K. Hall.
15.
DiTomaso, N. (1980). Organizational analysis and power structure research . In G. W. Domhoff (Ed.), Power structure research (pp. 255-268). Beverly Hills: Sage.
16.
Domhoff, G.W. (1970). The higher circles. New York : Random House.
17.
Domhoff, G.W. (1974). The Bohemian Grove and other retreats: A study in ruling-class cohesiveness. New York: Harper & Row.
18.
Domhoff, G.W. (1978). Who really rules? New Haven and community power re-examined. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.
19.
Domhoff, G.W. (1979). The powers that be. New York : Random House.
20.
Domhoff, G.W. (1990). The power elite and the state: How policy is made in America. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
21.
Domhoff, G.W. (1996). State autonomy or class dominance? Case studies on policy making in America. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
22.
Domhoff, G.W. (1998). Who rules America? Power and politics in the year 2000 (3rd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
23.
Domhoff, G.W. (2002). The power elite, public policy, and public opinion . In J. Manza, F. Cook, & B. Page (Eds.), Navigating public opinion: Polls, policy, and the future of American democracy (pp. 124-137). New York: Oxford University Press.
24.
Domhoff, G.W. (2005). The Ford Foundation in the inner city: Forging an alliance with neighborhood activists. Available at http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/ford_foundation.html
25.
Domhoff, G.W. (2006). Who rules America? Power, politics, and social change (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
26.
Domhoff, G.W. (2007). C. Wright Mills, power structure research, and the failures of mainstream political science. New Political Science, 29, 97-114.
27.
Dunn, M. (1980). The family office: Coordinating mechanism of the ruling class. In G. W. Domhoff (Ed.), Power structure research (pp. 17-45). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
28.
Eakins, D. (1966). The development of corporate liberal policy research in the United States, 1885-1965. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
29.
Fish, J.H. (1973). Black power/White control: The struggle of The Woodlawn Organization in Chicago. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
30.
Fisher, R. (1994). Let the people decide: Neighborhood organizing in America. New York: Twayne.
31.
Funicello, T. (1993). Tyranny of kindness: Dismantling the welfare system to end poverty in America. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.
32.
Gonzalez, G.A. (2001). Corporate power and the environment: The political economy of U.S. environmental policy. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
33.
Guthrie, D., & McQuarrie, M. (2005). Privatization and low-income housing in the United States since 1986. In H. Prechel (Ed.), Research in political sociology: Politics, class, and the corporation (Vol. 14, pp. 15-51). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
34.
Goodman, P., & Finn, P. (2007, April 9-15). A corrupt timber trade. Washington Post Weekly, pp. 6-9.
35.
Himmelstein, J.L. (1990). To the Right: The transformation of American conservatism . Berkeley: University of California Press.
36.
Himmelstein, J.L. (1997). Looking good and doing good: Corporate philanthropy and corporate power. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
37.
Jenkins, J.C., & Halcli, A. (1999). Grassrooting the system? The development and impact of social movement philanthropy, 1953-1990. In E. Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 229-256). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
38.
Kahn, J. (1997). Budgeting democracy: State building and citizenship in America, 1890-1928. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
39.
Kendall, D. (2002). The power of good deeds: Privileged women and the social reproduction of class. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
40.
Krehely, J., House, M., & Kernan, E. (2004). Axis of ideology: Conservative foundations and public policy. New York: National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy.
41.
Levine, R.F. (1988). Class struggle and the New Deal. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
42.
Liou, T.Y., & Stroh, R.C. (1998). Community development intermediary systems in the United States: Origins, evolution, and functions. Housing Policy Debate, 9, 575-594.
43.
Livingston, J. (1986). Origins of the Federal Reserve System: Money, class, and corporate capitalism, 1890-1913. Ithaca, NY : Cornell University Press.
44.
Magat, R. (1979). The Ford Foundation at work: Philanthropic choices, methods, and styles. New York: Plenum.
45.
Mariolis, P. (1975). Interlocking directorates and control of corporations . Social Sciences Quarterly, 56, 425-439.
46.
Marquez, B. (1993). Mexican-American Community Development Corporations and the limits of directed capitalism. Economic Development Quarterly, 7, 287-295.
47.
Marquez, B. (2003). Mexican-American political organizations and philanthropy: Bankrolling a social movement. Social Service Review, 77, 329-348.
48.
Mintz, B., & Schwartz, M. (1985). The power structure of American business. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49.
Mitchell, R. (1991). From conservation to environmental movement: The development of the modern environmental lobbies. In M. Lacey (Ed.), Governmental and environmental politics (pp. 81-113). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
50.
Mizruchi, M. (1982). The American corporate network, 1904-1974. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
51.
Moore, G., Sobieraj, S., Whitt, J., Mayorova, O., & Beaulieu, D. (2002). Elite interlocks in three U.S. sectors: Nonprofit, corporate, and government. Social Science Quarterly, 83, 726-744.
52.
Mueller, J.E. (1973). War, presidents, and public opinion. New York: Wiley.
O'Connor, A. (1999). The Ford Foundation and philanthropic activism in the 1960s. In E. Lagemann (Ed.), Philanthropic foundations: New scholarship, new possibilities (pp. 169-194). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
55.
Ostrander, S.A. (1980). Upper-class women: Class consciousness as conduct and meaning. In G. W. Domhoff (Ed.), Power structure research (pp. 73-96). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
56.
Ostrander, S.A. (1984). Women of the upper class. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
57.
Ostrander, S.A. (1987). Elite domination in private social agencies: How it happens and how it is challenged. In G. W. Domhoff & T. Dye (Eds.), Power elites and organizations (pp. 85-102). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
58.
Page, B. (2002). The semi-sovereign public. In J. Manza, F. Cook , & B. Page (Eds.), Navigating public opinion: Polls, policy, and the future of American democracy (pp. 325-344). New York: Oxford University Press.
59.
Page, B., & Shapiro, R.Y. (1992). The rational public: Fifty years of trends in Americans' policy preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
60.
Peirce, N.R., & Steinbach, C.F. (1987). Corrective capitalism: The rise of American community development corporations. New York: Ford Foundation.
61.
Perlstein, R. (2001). Before the storm: Barry Goldwater and the unmaking of the American consensus. New York: Hill and Wang.
62.
Peschek, J.G. (1987). Policy-planning organizations: Elite agendas and America's rightward turn. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
63.
Piotrow, P. (1973). World population crisis: The United States response . New York: Praeger.
64.
Roberts, A. (1994). Demonstrating neutrality: The Rockefeller philanthropies and the evolution of public administration, 1927-1936. Public Administration Review, 54, 221-228.
65.
Robinson, M. (1993). The Ford Foundation: Sowing the seeds of a revolution . Environment, 35, 10-20.
66.
Russell, J. (2005). Funding the culture wars: Philanthropy, church, and state. New York: National Council for Responsive Philanthropy.
67.
Salzman, H., & Domhoff, G.W. (1983). Nonprofit organizations and the corporate community . Social Science History, 7, 205-216.
68.
Shaw, R. (1999). Reclaiming America: Nike, clean air, and the new national activism. Berkeley: University of California Press.
69.
Slaughter, S., & Silva, E.T. (1980). Looking backwards: How foundations formulated ideology in the Progressive Period. In R. F. Arnove (Ed.), Philanthropy and cultural imperialism: The foundations at home and abroad. pp. 55-86. Boston: G. K. Hall.
70.
Sonquist, J., & Koenig, T. (1975). Interlocking directorates in the top U. S. corporations . Insurgent Sociologist, 5, 196-229.
71.
Stauber, J.C., & Rampton, S. (1995). Toxic sludge is good for you: Lies, damn lies, and the public relations industry. Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press.
72.
Stoecker, R. (1997). The CDC model of urban redevelopment: A critique and an alternative. Journal of Urban Affairs, 19, 1-22.
73.
Tittle, D. (1992). Rebuilding Cleveland: The Cleveland Foundation and its evolving urban strategy. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
74.
Union of Concerned Scientists. (2007). Smoke, mirrors, & hot air. Cambridge, MA: Union of Concerned Scientists.
75.
Useem, M. (1980). Which business leaders help govern? In G. W. Domhoff (Ed.), Power structure research (pp. 199-225). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
76.
Useem, M. (1984). The inner circle: Large corporations and the rise of business political activity in the U.S. and U.K. New York: Oxford University Press.
77.
Weinstein, J. (1968). The corporate ideal in the liberal state. Boston: Beacon Press.
78.
Whitt, J.A. (1987). Mozart in the metropolis: The arts coalition and the urban growth machine. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 23, 15-36.
