Advocacy New Approaches

Another Example of the Cash / Votes Conundrum

2009-06-16T18:13:00.000-07:00

So, the Washington Post had an article today highlighting how Kay Hagan, a Senator from North Carolina, was the only Democrat to vote against the recently passed tobacco regulation legislation (N.C. Tobacco Farmers Find Friend in State's New Senator.) Now, before I go too far down this path, let me make it clear that this is not a post about the merits or demerits of tobacco legislation. Personally, I'm for regulating tobacco. I support efforts to reduce the burdens on our health care system caused by this product.

However, as long time readers of the blog might suspect, I do NOT support the ongoing speculations and cynicism in media reports about the motives of elected officials in their voting decisions. Sure, there are many examples of wrong doing by elected officials and we're all a little jaded by the political process. But does every story really have to try to tie an elected official's voting record to campaign contributions?

In this example, the Post notes that Kay Hagan took $19,200 from tobacco interests to help finance her Senate race. What the Post does not point out is that she raised a total of over $8.5 million for that cycle. Her tobacco money equaled approximately .2% of her overall funds. The same article notes that there are 50,000 people directly employed by tobacco in the state, which is about .8% of the employable population (assuming people under 18 and over 65 aren't working). This is a $7 billion industry in the state. Does it even make sense to suggest that she voted the way she did because of the money for her campaign, as many people have? (although this is not, I should be clear, what the Post said). Why can't we believe that she did it for her constituents?

In fact, she raised more money from individuals associated with EMILY's List, MoveOn.org and the health care industry than she got from tobacco. Her going against these "monied interests" seems to be a bigger story here and clearly those groups are not happy with her position on these issues (although she has been known as a long time tobacco supporter, so I'm not sure they're surprised).

The point here is that we already have an electorate that feels beaten down by special interests and powerless in the face of money and lobbying in the political process. These types of stories and inferences aren't helping. We can disagree with the decisions some politicians make -- and I do, frequently. But I really wish we wouldn't ALWAYS paste everyone with the "bought off politician" label simply because they disagree with us or they represent a part of the country with different interests from our own.

It sounds terribly naive, I know, but I believe it is possible that many politicians do truly believe that what they are doing is in the best interest of their constituents. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Are members of Congress bought off by cash or votes?

2009-06-10T05:05:00.000-07:00

I was struck by Dana Milbank's sarcastic and, let's face it, somewhat snarky description of the recent hearings on DOD appropriations issues on Capitol Hill (see Defending the Nation From Common Sense from today's Washington Post).

In it, he feeds into the common perspective that those terrible members of Congress in Washington, DC represent the corporate interests of their particular state far more than its citizens, much less the citizens in the rest of the nation. In referring to Senator Murray, for example, as the "Senator from Boeing" and picturing poor, beleaguered Defense Secretary Gates as ". . .(pleading) with the lawmakers to rise above the powerful contractors that fund their campaigns and influence their elections" (sniff) Milbank clearly points to greed and (possibly) corruption as the main drivers of defense spending in Washington, DC.

Now, don't get me wrong, I love a bit of satire as much as the next person, and I certainly appreciate all the fodder for it in Washington, DC. And Senator Murray and others don't need me to make excuses for them. But, let's try to be a little fair here. Sure, Senator Murray (and Senator Shelby and Senator Cochran and anyone else with a defense contractor in their state) wants to be sure that the devices made by those contractors continue to be made. But here's the question -- are they protecting these contracts in exchange for the campaign contributions? Or are the doing it to protect tens of thousands of jobs in their states -- jobs held by constituents -- jobs held by constituents who may vote -- jobs held by constituent who may vote and who are struggling through tough economic times?

Let's look at the numbers. According to opensecrets.org, The Boeing PAC, for example, has given $10,000 to Patty Murray in the current cycle (2005-2010). Overall, she has raised $5,385,000 in this cycle. The Boeing contribution represents LESS THAN .2% of her overall dollars. Even if you add in individual Boeing PAC contribution to that number, it's still less than .4% overall. That's "point" 4, NOT 4.

On the other hand, Boeing employs over 76,000 people in her state, which has a population of just over 6.5 million. In other words, 1.16% of the people in Washington State are Boeing employees. At a time when unemployment in the state is running 9%, you better bet she's going to fight to keep Boeing jobs, regardless of whether she gets money from the Boeing PAC or not.

Although I can't guess at Senator Murray's motivations any more than Dana Milbank can, I can offer up another and less sinister perspective on this story, and that is this: constituents DO have a powerful voice and level of influence in Washington, DC. Anyone who can demonstrate a constituent connection to a legislator can get in to their office and be heard -- not necessarily agreed with, but heard. I encourage people to read articles like Milbank's for fun (because it is funny), but to not let it fuel the cynicism that is keeping citizens away from the political process.

In short, the Senators insisting on keeping certain Defense spending in place could just as easily be doing it for the people they represent as the people that help finance their campaigns. For those who still find it appalling that elected officials would represent the interests of their own constituents over the good of the country, well, the truth is that's what representative democracy is all about.

Citizen Advocacy Interview with Mike Markarian of HSUS

2009-06-06T14:47:00.000-07:00

I had a great time chatting with Mike Markarian of the Humane Society Legislative Fund about my new book, Citizens in Action. You can read all about it (and see an absolutely adorable photograph of Ozzie, my infamous Australian Cattle Dog) on the HSLF's Animal and Politics blog. If you're feeling really cool, you can even read the same article on the Huffington Post.

Happy advocating!

Advocating in the Judicial Branch

2009-05-27T13:01:00.000-07:00

It's funny that when some people think of "advocacy" they think almost instantly of lawyers. In fact, many definitions of "advocate" at Dictionary.com indicate that an advocate is someone who pleads for a cause in a court of law. And yet ironically, the judicial branch of government has been, in many ways, the most closed off to the type of citizen advocacy I'm usually talking about.

This makes it doubly interesting that President Obama has decided to nominate someone who he admires because she has "an understanding of how the world works and how ordinary people live" (from one of the Washington Post articles on this topic). If you think about it, in the way the world really works, citizens want to avoid the judicial system at all costs. But it sounds like President Obama and his pick for the Supreme Court might actually be looking at our court system as a venue in which the barriers and obstacles that citizens many face are overcome. I'm wondering if this will be possible in an environment where citizens are rarely effectively heard?

Certainly, as was seen in the case of the U.S. Senate's refusal to ratify the nomination of Judge Bork to the Supreme Court in 1987, citizens can have a say in who might actually be placed on the court. But in that case, their voices were heard by their duly elected representatives in the Senate.

What I find interesting about this choice, and many of the choices of the Obama Administration, is that he and his team seem to be bringing that ethos of "citizen engagement" to all levels of governance -- even a branch that has traditionally been almost completely removed from the input of "regular people." I wonder if it will work? I guess we'll have to wait and see!

Congress: Coming Today to a Neighborhood Near You!

2009-05-26T11:32:00.000-07:00

Well, it's quiet in DC this week, but that doesn't mean the policy work isn't happening! In fact, this week is the Memorial Day District Work Period, and members of Congress and many of their DC staff are in their legislative districts and states looking for feedback from their constituents.

Following are a few tips for providing that feedback in a meaningful way (I mean, beyond "stop being such an idiot"):

Find out about townhall meetings: Most elected officials are holding townhall meetings over the next few days. These are open to the public and are often held at local civic institutions, such as a library, school auditorium or city hall. Call their offices (you can find numbers at www.congress.org), ask when and where the next meeting is -- and attend! You'll be surprised at how few people actually show up -- and how much personalized attention you can get.
Craft a personalized, thoughtful, relevant message: What messages meet this criteria? Specifically messages that explain how you personally are impacted by a policy issue (personalized), relate to the elected official's constituents (relevant) and don't contain any swear words (thoughtful) -- not one. You'll also want to do your best to ask for something specific, such as asking the official to cosponsor a specific piece of legislation, support funding for a certain program or even just agree to have a more in-depth meeting on a policy issue.
Learn about your legislators: If you want to influence policy makers, you need to know a little about them. Spend some time over the next week looking up bills they've introduced at www.congress.gov and reviewing their webpages at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov. You might be surprised at what you find -- they may already be on your side!

More ideas and resources at www.advocacyguru.com/resources.htm

Why Obama's "Grassroots Army" isn't Working (and How it Can be More Effecitve!)

2009-04-06T11:49:00.000-07:00

The Washington Post had an article today titled "Obama's Grassroots Machine Sputters in Effort to Push Budget." It's an interesting look at the difficulties "Organizing for America" is having in translating the power of the citizen-based movement that lead to Obama's election into legislative victories.

Now first off, I think it's important to cut them some slack. No one has ever really tried to utilize campaign supporters in this way before and I applaud them for doing it. Nevertheless, it appears in this case that they did not have much of an impact on the budget debate, which was passed through the Congress using the same old partisan techniques that are always used.

Why didn't they succeed? In my opinion, Organizing for America failed to recognize a fundamental truth about legislative advocacy, as opposed to electoral advocacy. When trying to get individuals to ultimately vote for a specific candidate (i.e., electoral advocacy), asking them to sign a petition can go a long way toward achieving you goal. Once someone has signed a petition they are generally far more likely to walk in to the ballot booth and support that candidate.

However, in legislative advocacy the role of the citizen is slightly different. In this case, citizens must encourage legislators to vote a certain way on legislation. Organizing for America chose to demonstrate citizen support through petitions. However, recent evidence shows that names on a petition really aren't that influential with members of Congress. In fact, personalized, thoughtful and relevant communications are what can make a true difference in this environment. The organizers of the effort could have been far more effective if they had targeted a few key areas and worked to get a few members of the grassroots army making a more personalized pitch to their legislators as opposed to getting thousands of people to sign petitions.

I think, though, that Thomas Mann's assertion that "...the petition drive was "a pretty lame start to the effort, and largely inconsequential to the outcome,"" and that "... the hard politics of policymaking are still driven by partisanship, by public opinion polls, by the roles of interest groups and all the other things that have always mattered in Washington" was a bit overstated. One thing that ALWAYS matters in Washington, especially to members of Congress, is what real, live, thoughtful constituents think about the issues. Any effort that focuses the energy and resources of these individuals in a meaningful way will, over time, be successful.

Obama and Citizen Advocacy

2009-03-16T18:44:00.001-07:00

I read another glowing Washington Post article (Obama Turns to his E-mail List) today breathlessly touting the amazing work of the Obama Administration in developing a grassroots army to help sell its budget.

Don't get me wrong. I admire the Organizing for America approach and everything they're doing to get citizens more engaged in the process of governing the country. And their use of representative democracy to further their message by helping people on the e-mail list connect directly with members of Congress certainly makes sense.

But I have to say, and this may be blasphemy, what's so amazing about this approach? Sure, I haven't seen it used in this particular way before (executive branch using grassroots advocacy techniques to influence the legislature) but the general process is something nonprofits have used for decades (or perhaps centuries, I'm not that old).

Perhaps I don't get it, but what's so "revolutionary" about:

"A new online tool, to be unveiled this week on the DNC/OFA Web site, will help constituents find their congressional representatives' contact information so they can call the lawmakers' offices to voice approval of the proposal "

There are about 20 different sites that do that now, among them Congress.org, House.gov and Senate.gov.

Let's all just remember that grassroots advocacy is almost the world's oldest profession. Nonprofits and even, gasp, those community organizers have been there and done that when it comes to engaging citizens in the political process. What will set this effort apart is not simply the fact that it's being tried, but rather the actual change that is generated as a result. I look forward to hearing more about results, not just the fact that e-mails are being sent to a large list.

What's IN and What's OUT for 2009

2009-02-03T07:15:00.000-08:00

The latest edition of the Advocacy Tipsheet highlighting what's in and what's out in advocacy for 2009 is up on my website. What's out? Panicing, Mavericks and Doing it for the Money, among other things. What's In? Planning, Coalitions and Doing it for the Cause.

Take a look and let me know what you think! Oh, and one more thing that's "in" -- my new book! Citizens in Action is being shipped in February. Stay Tuned for more...

If you're still not sure whether Grassroots Advocacy will be important for the next four years...

2009-01-28T09:43:00.000-08:00

... or possible eight, then you haven't read this article from the Washington Post outlining how the Treasury is taking steps to restrict direct lobbying on the dispensation of economic recovery funds. In other words, if you're a professional lobbyist, you won't be able to talk to federal officials about the best ways to spend the funds.

But, if you're a citizen advocate you'll be able to talk to whomever you want. If this isn't a strong indication of the new way of doing things in DC, I don't know what is.

Clearly, if you want to get some of those funds directed toward your important cause, you'll need to have an active, prepared and, most important, nonprofessional advocacy network ready to go!

Think of it as the grassroots advocacy Olympics: if you haven't retained your amateur status, you may not be eligible for the Gold Medal.

If you weren't sure whether grassroots matter...

2008-12-04T16:58:00.000-08:00

Check out today's Washington Post article "On Health Care, Obama Policymakers Turn to Campaign Tools." It reports on the myriad ways transition team players, like former Senator Tom Daschle, are turning to real live citizens for ideas on how to improve the health care system. On a recent conference call with a thousand upporters, Daschle noted that the new administration is planning listening sessions, town halls and even more online outreach efforts in the next month.

"President-elect Obama believes that change really comes from the ground up, not from Washington," according to Senator Salazar from Colorado, who is helping with health care summits for the new administration.

And people seem to be responding! Several thousand comments have been left on the transition team's Change.gov website outlining options for improving health services. In fact, a recent interactive online conversation combined video with postings from citizens to try to answer the question "what worries you most about the health-care system for our country?" Visitors were able to score the suggestions with which they agreed the most (or least) through a "Digg" like system.

Perhaps most important, though, is how the transition is using technology to make health care policy issues real for both citizens and politicians. As Daschle pointed out, in response to the recounting of a personal story about small business people struggling to provide health insurance, "[w]hen I was in the Senate, it was stories like that, probably more than all the factual information, that really moved you to want to act."

Clearly, the personal, relevant compelling stories of citizens can make a difference. Maybe it's time to think about how you can be involved in the debate!

Preparing for the 111th Congress

2008-12-02T07:58:00.000-08:00

Crossposted on ASAE's Acronym Blog

Welcome to the first in a series of five posts outlining strategies for preparing for the 111th Congress. Believe it or not, the elections are finally over and we’ll have a new Congress and a new Administration in 2009. Regardless of whether your party was wildly successful or not so much, it’s important for advocate leaders to be fully prepared with their grassroots, grasstops and coalition building efforts as early as possible.

Why are the grassroots so important this time around? Well, you’ve undoubtedly noticed that “Joe the Plumber” is in and “special interests” are out in Washington, DC these days. Only those organizations that have effectively incorporated their own “Joes” (i.e., citizen advocates) into their government relations plan will have their message heard and even perhaps acted on in this environment.

That’s why this series of posts is designed to help you hit the grassroots advocacy ground running in January 2009. We’ll look at five different strategies for preparing the network, starting with our first strategy, which is to wrap-up the 110th Congress. Are you ready? Let’s dive in!

Advocate leaders should take some time now to close the books on the 110th Congress. Take a moment to undertake the following three activities:

Clean out and update your database list: Review e-mail addresses, advocate address information, affiliation information and grasstops contacts and connections to be sure that you have the right advocates communicating with the right elected officials. Remember that it’s better to have fewer active advocates in your database than thousands of individuals who aren’t interested in policy debates – or worse, aren’t receiving your communications! Now is the perfect time to update and clean out.
Update your legislative agenda/advocacy materials online: When was the last time you took a really good look at all the materials available on your site? Even if you update information regularly, much of the older information is often left on the site for search engines to find. For many organizations, the advocacy section of the website is the first impression a potential advocate will see. Make sure you’re putting your best foot forward.
Create a list of successes from the 110th: Most organizations will want to put together a legislative summary outlining the work of the previous Congress. Be sure to include in that summary a clear section highlighting successes – and be sure to define success as broadly as possible! While an ultimate success may be passage of a particular piece of legislation, incremental accomplishments such as increasing the numbers of cosponsors for legislation, expanding the reach of the grassroots network or even getting a bill to the hearing stage should be celebrated. Given the length of time it takes to move legislation through the process, it’s important to stress when some progress (even limited progress!) is being made.

Once you’ve finished wrapping up for the 110th, you’ll be able to move on to our next strategy, Preparing Your Team -- stay tuned!

2008-11-26T07:32:00.000-08:00

I was honored to have a piece in Forum Magazine titled "Build an Online Advocacy Network for Advocacy Success." I outlined some options for advocate network leaders to consider when approaching the brave new world of web 2.0. I highlighted some challenges (and opportunities) inherent to this particular environment.

An editorial in yesterday's Washington Post offers more insights. In her piece "Citizenship 2.0, author Danielle Allen outlines two types of policy / political web 2.0 approaches: one focused on a top down hierarchical approach and one focused on a more interactive, community based philosophy. She looks at these two approaches from the perspective of the political parties, noting that in the past, the right has been far more likely to adopt the later approach than the left.

But the times, they are a changing. Recently the left has become far more cognizant of and familiar with the more interactive, less hierarchical approaches as evidenced by, in part, the Obama campaign's desire to build a conversation with the American people through the internet. Whether this will be successful or not remains to be seen, but Allen argues that, if it is, we'll see a richer and more engaging citizenship experience for all.

Citizens and Civics: A Shocking Disconnect

2008-11-20T08:11:00.001-08:00

Considering the fact that the words "citizen" and "civics" derive from the same root, you'd think there would be more knowledge about our system of government out there in the country. For me, personally, having lived through the Clinton Impeachment debates, the Republican takeover of the House and the Gore / Bush "hanging chad" campaign (decided by the Supreme Court), I was sure that everyone certainly knows what impeachment and the electoral college are, much less the three branches of government! (not Moe, Curly and Larry, FYI)

That's whay I was surprised to read this USA Today article on the, frankly, apalling lack of knowledge about our government. According to the piece, only half of Americans can name all three branches of government and just over half know that it's the Congress that can declare war (not the President).

But then, I took part of the test and was further surprised at my own apalling lack of knowledge :). Some of the questions are hard!: albeit, not the "how many branches of govermment" questions. The Scopes Monkey trial? What's a progressive tax? Huh?

You can take the full test at www.americancivicliteracy.org. Be prepared to be humbled.

Why the Legislative Process is Like Thanksgiving Dinner 2008

2008-11-19T22:31:00.000-08:00

The legislative process has been compared to the process of making sausage: while some may find the final product palatable, you don't really want to see how it's made. However, I've recently come to a profound and somewhat startling realization. Forget Sausage. Think Thanksgiving Dinner.

Every year we host Thanksgiving dinner for 10 to 15 friends, and every year the menu has been the same. I mean EXACTLY the same. Each guest brings the same dish at the same time to the same house. In fact, in the last couple years our “invitation” has simply been one sentence: “Thanksgiving – you know what to do.”

This year, my husband, in keeping with the enthusiasm for change that is sweeping the nation, desperately wanted something different. While he agreed in theory that (in his words) “the fundamentals of our holiday are strong,” he sent an impassioned plea for new culinary delights -- for “Yes We Candied Yams” or “Swing State Sweet Potato Pie.” In keeping with the theme of change he has even committed to making Cranberry and Pineapple Salsa.

Salsa. On Thanksgiving. Needless to say, everyone is horrified. There’s been talk of a boycott, dismay over the abandoning of traditions -- even accusations of, dare I say it, un-American activity. While some of the guests are willing to sit down with Tim (but only with preconditions) to determine the course of the meal, others are ready to take the maverick course and walk out.

Why all this drama over a simple meal? Each of our guests has a very different and very steadfast idea of what the Thanksgiving feast must include. In past years the Chardonnay faction went head-to-head with the Pinot Noir bloc. The green bean casserole enthusiasts simply could not come to terms with those preferring green bean almondine. And I sincerely thought that the mashed potato and gravy vs. sweet potato casserole controversy would erupt into a fist fight.

Don’t even get me started on Pumpkin versus Pecan Pie. Until you’ve tried to get pumpkin pie out of your carpet (or out of your dog’s mouth) you can’t honestly say that you’ve hosted a Thanksgiving dinner.

So will we select between these conflicting and equally worthy menu items? Will we embrace change? Will we make the "hard choices"? My guess is no. As in year’s past we will have two kinds of potatoes, two kinds of green beans - even two kinds of turkey (regular and "tofurkey" for the vegetarians, including myself). And the varieties of wine available will become too numerous to count.

Incremental change may occur, although probably without much enthusiasm if the great “bacon-wrapped turkey” experiment of 2007 is any guide. We might have a fruity salsa to go with our regular cranberries out of the can. We will probably, as always, forget that we bought dinner rolls until it’s too late. We’re stuck in our ways.

So when you wonder why no big changes ever occur in the legislature, or how Congress comes up with these bills that have 18 million unrelated items, just take a good look at your own holiday traditions. Here are a few tips to (hopefully) help you think of all this in a different way:

Understand where the other person is coming from: Is your Aunt Millicent really insisting on her beloved "Brussel Sprout Surprise" because she's a horrible person? Will explaining to her over and over again that no one else likes Brussel Sprouts really convince her to forgo her long-time favorite? Not likely. Remember that members of Congress are representing the same diverse and, umm, interesting perspectives when it comes to policy matters.
Fight for your form of potatoes: Speak up! If you just have to have sweet potato casserole at Thanksgiving, say so - and do everything you can to make that happen. Don't just sit there at the table all squinchy-faced thinking about how your meal is ruined because it doesn't include what you want. You may not be successful in lobbying for your potatoes, but you'll feel better if you ask. And who knows? You might not get your potatoes this year, but maybe you can have something to say about the style of cranberry sauce (but no salsa, please). Or perhaps a promise (be sure to get it in writing) of your form of potatoes for next year.
Develop alliances: My step-sister and I always join forces in lobbying for the sweet potato casserole, and we've developed strong alliances with other factions. As a result, support for our preference has remained rock solid, despite repeated efforts to have it removed from the menu. Think strategically and politically about how you form these alliances. Who has the ear of the "menu-planners" in Congress? How can you join forces with them to get your menu item on the table?
And finally, be prepared to give thanks, regardless. Many of us, thankfully, have enough resources (and space for leftovers) to please the majority of our Thanksgiving guests. That's a pretty big thing to be thankful for at a time when millions of people around the world go hungry. In the policy arena, remember that the U.S. Congress is dealing with somewhat more finite resources. Actual choices must be made and sometimes the things we like lose out, especially when new menu items - like an economic crisis -- start filling up most of the plate.

So, take a deep breath, think of the things you are thankful for, raise your glass of Chardonnay, or Pinot Noir, or whatever you want, and vow to continue the fight for your potatoes another day!

Campaign Contributors: NOT Trying to Buy Off Legislators

2008-11-19T11:31:00.000-08:00

Conventional wisdom suggests that those who make big campaign contributions expect big things in return. Yet scientific evidence suggests otherwise. A recent article in the Washington Post titled "Big Political Donors Just Looking for Favors? Apparently Not" highlights research done by the Center for Responsive Politics on political contributors.

The organization's report suggests that the "investments" organizations make in campaigns are really quite small considering the potential impact policy proposals might have on their ability to do business. The financial services industry, for example, only invested about $123 million in the campaigns. While that seems like a lot, it's chump change compared to the $700 billion being wielded by the government -- $700 billion that will determine the industry's structure far in to the future.

As the article author points out:

"If you thought campaign contributions bought you goodwill, and you knew that decisions made in the next couple of years might be worth hundreds of billions of dollars in potential profits and losses, wouldn't you be willing to "invest" a lot more in the outcome?"

Sure, some might argue that this simply points out that politicians can be bought for cheap. But I'm not one of those people. Perhaps the more important lesson to take from this is that money simply doesn't play as big a role in legislative decision making as many Americans think it does. In many cases, those seeking to elect certain legislators over others are simply trying to ensure a favorable environment for their issues in the next Congress: they want to elect members of Congress that ALREADY understand and agree with their views, not "buy off" those that don't.

Even more important is the recognition that regardless of how people feel about money in the political process, everyone has an even more powerful tool at their disposal. It's called constituency. Now get out there and use it -- and happy advocating!

Why the Elections Matter (No Matter WHO Wins)

2008-10-07T11:39:00.000-07:00

Check out my new white paper on advocacy and the elections., which refutes the conventional wisdom that suggests since all Presidential candidates essentially express the same views, it may not really matter who wins.

Even the politically-charged campaign of 2008 demonstrates this truism, where, on the same day in answer to similar questions, the candidates had this to say about recent economic turmoil on Wall Street:

"We must not bail out the management and speculators who created this mess." (McCain)

And then,

"[We] must not bail out the shareholders or the management of AIG that were making big profits when times were good.” (Obama)

(“McCain, Obama Scramble to Shift Economic Message,” Washington Post, 9/18/08)

Unfortunately, the rhetoric in the political campaigns fuels the fire of apathy in our political system. But elections and, more important, the advocacy efforts we undertake with our policymakers after elections, do matter -- and matter deeply -- to every individual, family and business in America, regardless of who wins the McCain / Obama matchup. To find out why as well as a dozen ways to get involved, check out this new resource!

How Citizens Turned Around the Bailout Vote

2008-10-06T07:31:00.000-07:00

Last week's titanic struggles to enact a bail out bill revelaed one starting fact: Citizens have far more power in our democracy than we’ve ever given them credit for. In an environment where campaign donations and bribes are supposed to be the way to a politician’s heart, something has gone seriously awry.

While the "bail out" or "financial rescue" plan (depending on your philosophy) eventually passed, it did so only after, as pointed out in a Washington Post article this weekend, groups like AARP, the US Chamber and the National and Community Banks asked their grassroots to get involved. Only after the frantic calls in to Congressional offices switched to at least 50-50 were lawmakers willing to take the plunge.

Wall Street is in this predicament, in part, because they never cultivated the “power of constituency. They have relied on money and influence in a political environment where the authentic and personalized outrage of everyday citizens holds far more sway. You can’t blame them for trying. Conventional wisdom would dictate that these industries, which have more than doubled the level of giving to political campaigns in the last 10 years, should have been able to get this bill passed with minimal effort

Yet, if the “here’s my money, where’s my vote” approach works so well, why didn't it work earlier in the week? Clearly, there’s a backlash – and a big one: big enough to alter the entire structure of the deal.

The whole bailout debacle demonstrates that organizations with well-developed grassroots advocacy networks can have their voices heard like never before. It’s the reason we have talk of provisions to help individual homeowners, questions about whether the package should deal with credit card and auto loan debt and potential restrictions on executive pay. Where Wall Street dropped the ball, in addition to taking on questionable loans, was in not building a deep and broad network of supporters across the country willing to go to bat for them when those loans hit the fan.

Clearly, the lesson in all this (besides "don't borrow more than you can pay back") is that grassroots advocacy works. It turned around this vote -- maybe it can turn around yours!

Political Prognosticators

2008-10-01T17:42:00.003-07:00

I attended a terrific event with political prognosticator extraordinaire Charlie Cook today. First of all, he referred to some great websites we can all use to keep an eye on the latest polling numbers, including the Gallup daily poll, where users can sign up for a daily e-mail update of the latest and greatest in campaign numbers. Other great sites are Pollster.com and RealClearPolitics.com.

He had also, of course, had some useful / interesting things to say about the upcoming election, including:

Young voters are registering in droves and are likely to actually vote in the general this year.
He does not believe that Obama supporters should worry about the "Bradley effect," where voters might indicate that they would support an African American for president in pre-election polls and then change their mind in the voting booth.
White voters over 50 are the toughest group for Obama to attract, and may be the ones that ultimately decide the election.
Democrats should expect to gain 6 to 8 seats in the Senate and anywhere from 12 to 20 in the House.
Obama's lead, although narrow, has been steady. Unless something dramatic happens, he's likely to maintain that lead and win the overall election.

It was an entertaining and thought-provoking session. We'll have to see if it was prescient in about a month!

Forming an Advocacy Habit: Be an Active, Engaged, Involved Citizen!

2008-09-30T06:57:00.000-07:00

Well folks, I bet you didn’t believe you’d make it, but it’s the end of September and the end, for now, of my daily advocacy habit tips. I’m considering extending the program in a more concerted way (I admit it, you all were guinnea pigs), so let me know what you liked (or didn’t) about the daily missives.

I would not blame you at all if recent U.S. and world events overtook your enthusiasm for developing an advocacy habit. That said, I believe in a world of decreasing federal and state budgets combined with increasing distrust of Congress and lobbyists, advocacy, and especially grassroots advocacy, will be more important than ever.

So, your very last advocacy task is to come up with a few things on your own that you know you can commit to on a daily basis to be a better advocate. They might include:

Daily review of the webpages of your elected officials to see what they’re up to
Connect, at least once per day, with another advocate or an elected official through a social networking site like Facebook or Linked In
Check the headlines of the Washington Post and/or the Politics page on the Post website to see the latest that’s going on in Washington, DC (you can do the same for state level publications)
Watch the U.S. House and Senate in session every once in a while on C-Span.org

You can start your daily ritual by checking for any statements on the websites of your relevant elected official noting how they voted on the “bailout” or “financial rescue” bill (depending on your perspective. You can find them at www.house.gov or www.senate.gov. If you think they did the right thing (or the wrong), let them know!

Happy Advocating!

Forming an Advocacy Habit: Know your Legislators!

2008-09-29T07:11:00.000-07:00

Whether you're an individual advocate or leading a campaign, it is always a good idea to know a little about the audience receiving your advocacy messages. Elected officials and their staff will respond far more positively to a message that is framed in terms that make sense to them. This means that the message needs to be:

Relevant, in terms of a connection to the legislator's district as well as the policy issues in which the legislator is interested
Personalized, with a compelling story about why the issue is important to the person writing
Specific, i.e., including a very specific action the legislator can take and, of course
Trustworthy. This is not the place to guess about impacts or make us numbers (yes, I know it feels like legislators make up numbers all the time, but you shouldn't)

To help develop these particularly powerful messages, it's useful to know something about the specific legislators to whom you'll be writing. Take 10 minutes today to do a little research on your relevant legislators and fill out our Legislator Profile Form. That way, when you have to contact them in a panic about, oh, I don't know, a financial bailout bill, you'll have all the information you need at your fingertips!

Happy advocating!

Forming an Advocacy Habit: Spread the News -- Everyone CAN Vote!

2008-09-26T06:43:00.000-07:00

I heard a disturbing story on NPR this morning. Apparently, a rumor started circulating on the Internet that people whose homes were foreclosed on would not be able to vote! Election officials and other state staff in Maryland have received enough phone calls about this that they actually feel the need to issue a statement saying "you can still vote, even if you've had your house foreclosed on."

This mortgage crisis is coming to something serious when people think their right to vote is somehow tied up in their property ownership status. That might have been a criteria two hundred years ago, but it's not now. If you're a citizen, you get to vote. Sure, in DC we may not be able to vote for people who are able to vote themselves in Congress, but that's a different story.

To familiarize yourself (and others) with the registration and voting process, have some fun today by checking out http://www.rockthevote.com/. It will be far more fun than watching the stock market. Your task for today is to pick one or two activities you'll undertake in the next month to get people out there voting. You might add a "Are you registered to vote?" note on your e-mail signature. Or, you might post the Rock the Vote widget on your website (you can see ours at http://www.advocacyassociates.com/.) Either way, you're making the world a better, more democratic place!

Happy advocating!

Forming an Advocacy Habit: Plan for Persistence

2008-09-25T07:50:00.001-07:00

I sometimes hear advocates say "But I've tried EVERYTHING with Congressman, Councilperson, Senator X and I can't get anywhere. They obviously won't listen to me. This advocacy stuff doesn't work very well."

I recognize that it is frustrating to deal with recalcitrant elected officials who don't see the world as you do. But that doesn't mean there isn't hope! When I delve a little deeper into this complaint, I often find that the "everything" that was done was two letters, a phone call and a meeting. That's certainly a great deal, don't get me wrong, but it's nowhere near everything you can or need to do to capture an elected official's interest, especially when he or she might be inclined to disagree with you.

As such, today's habit forming activity is to think NOW about the 10 things you might do to "step up" your advocacy efforts in these situations. Write them down so the next time you feel like you've done everything, you're sure you know what that entails. I'll give you three to get started:

To be as persistent as possible I have:

1. Asked the elected official to submit a statement to the Congressional Record (for the U.S. Congress) or write an article for our newsletter (for Congress and others)
2. Asked the elected official to visit a facility / site / beneficiary of our services in his or her district
3. Learned something about the elected official's own priorities and tried to connect with him or her on those terms (i.e., offered to help with a legislative initiative or asked a friend / supporter of the elected official to reach out).

Come up with seven more and you're done with your habit for today!

Forming an Advocacy Habit: Factions, Financiers and the Federalist Papers

2008-09-24T07:06:00.000-07:00

One of our recent advocacy habit forming activities was to go back and look at the U.S. Constitution. Today, I'd like you to consider looking at some other important founding documents, specifically the Federalist Papers.

If you aren't sure what those are, have no fear! These were articles written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay and were published in New York newspapers in an effort to persuade New Yorkers to ratify the constitution. Think of the Federalist Papers as one of the earliest "public relations" campaign of our nation! I am 100% positive that if all this were happening today, these pieces would have been written as "The Federalist Blog."

Now, I'm not suggesting that the style of these papers should be adopted for modern PR efforts. Frankly, I think the language might be a bit dated for most Americans. That said, there is much that can be learned from these articles, both in terms of the structure of our government, but as well as how to pitch a complicated idea.

Since I promised a "10 minute" activity, I'm going to point you toward one specific paper, Madison's #10. For some reason it speaks to me in these trying times. Something about all the talk of "factions" which Madison describes as:

"a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."

It sounds like a certain group of Wall Street financiers, doesn't it? It's OK, though, because Madison has the solution!

Forming an Advocacy Habit: Link In to Advocacy

2008-09-23T06:22:00.000-07:00

Link In to Advocacy!

The popular networking site Linked In isn't just about making business connections and finding old friends. It's also a powerful tool for advocacy. Next time you need to bend the ear of a particular elected official, search for his or her name on the site. Even if the official hasn't joined, it's likely that you'll find staff, campaign supporters and others.

The "degree of contact" icon on the list that is generated from a search will tell you the number of connections between you and the person in question. So, for example, if someone is marked as a 2nd degree of contact, that means you know someone in your network who knows your target person.

Linked In can also help you determine who in your network might be "grasstops" type individuals. They may not have told you that they have connections in high places, but that information could be found on their Linked In profile.

In essence, the Linked In approach takes the old political truism of "it's not what you know, it's who you know" to a whole new level -- and now you can capture that power for your own advocacy effort. Oh, and while you're on the site, look me up!

Forming an Advocacy Habit: Tell a Personal Story!

2008-09-22T06:17:00.000-07:00

Personal stories capture the attention of elected officials, particularly when they are told by constituents or someone working on behalf of constituents. Take a moment to figure out why you advocate for the causes you care about. Why do they impact you personally? Use the "Story Telling Worksheet" I've developed to help.

If you're working on behalf of a larger organization, encourage members to develop their stories and do what you can to capture that information in a database sorted by legislative district. Feel free to adapt the worksheet I'm providing here if it's helpful.

Armed with this information in your own lobbying efforts, you'll be much better equipped to make a connection with elected officials.