Dispensing at the outset with the cloak of objectivity (""naturally I was against it""), former social studies teacher Levy conducts a behind-the-headlines investigation into the congressional fight over the SST. Her journalistic method shows better than any textbook theories the kind of pressures operating on legislators, and this is the fullest account we know of (on any level) of that very successful example of a public interest lobby -- the Coalition Aginast the SST. Levy is perhaps a bit optimistic in assuming that the SST has been laid to rest ""once and for all,"" and her account (in a postscript) of the unsuccessful campaign for more liberal food stamp allowances via the Foley-Quie amendment ends with the disturbingly simplistic conclusion that ""not until there is a lobby powerful enough to defeat both the SST and hunger will we have an interest group worthy of being called 'the people lobby.'"" It's hard to disagree with the sentiment, but the implication that the public interest is readily identifiable and compatible On all issues is hardly supported by the two issues under review. At least Levy's moral certainties are forthrightly expressed, and though they're a poor substitute for a more analytic perspective, this should still be a very useful case study.