Advocacy New Approaches

The Players in The Influence Game

2012-03-08T07:59:00.000-08:00

To win the “Influence Game,” you must be able to effectively place those you’re seeking to influence into one of four categories, specifically champions, supporters, rank and file (or neutrals) and opponents. Knowing this will help you figure out where and how to focus your resources. Following are a few ideas for managing each:

Champions will carry the water for you within the influence arena. This is especially important in legislative venues where individual citizens cannot take specific actions like introducing or voting on bills. Focus early and with some vigor on finding or developing these people. You won’t move very far without them.

In general, supporters will vote with you and may take small actions (such as signing on to a letter or cosponsoring legislation). Don’t get complacent about their support and certainly don’t ignore them. You don’t want them to wander off. One of the most common things you hear in an elected official’s office is “well yes, I support issue X, Y, Z, but no one asked me to [sign that letter, make that statement, vote for that amendment].” This often marks the difference between success and failure.

The “rank and file” or “neutrals” often don’t have a strong opinion about your issue. Direct your advocacy effort toward convincing them that, when it comes down to a decision they must make (such as a vote), it’s to their advantage to vote with you. There’s always a possibility of turning neutrals in to supporters or champions. However, the real danger is that without adequate pressure from those who influence them, they may turn into opponents -- possibly even through apathy. In legislative environments, it’s often much easier to say “no” than “yes.”

In terms of the opposition, don’t focus on trying to get them to change their mind. If you can “coopt” them from the outset, for example by giving them something they want in exchange for their silence on an issue, try that. Otherwise, your time is best spent understanding and responding to their arguments.
More on “The Influence Game” in upcoming posts! And see what it's all about at www.theinfluencegame.com

Not Again! More Good People Leaving the Congress

2012-03-05T10:12:00.000-08:00

From 1993 to 1994 I worked for Congressman Mike Kreidler, a Democrat from the 9th district of Washington State. If you don’t remember his Congressional career, that’s OK. Unfortunately he was in office for only two years. He lost his bid for re-election in the famous 1994 elections, when the House switched hands for the first time in 40 years. Fortunately for the citizens of Washington State, he is now their health insurance commissioner, so it worked out for everyone.

One of the members of Congress I had the chance to interact with during my years in the Washington delegation was Representative Norm Dicks (D-WA). When I say “interact,” I mean I’d be behind the scenes in hearings or meetings he was in charge of. I’m sure Rep. Dicks will not be writing in his memoirs “I got to interact with Stephanie Vance.”

What I remember about “Norm” (as everyone, friend or foe, knows him) is that he seemed very scary and acerbic. However, behind his gruff demeanor hid a caring for his district, the state and the people around him unparalleled by anyone in the U.S. Congress. Sure, he could scare the crap out of anyone in his way, and he definitely let his colleagues know when he wanted their support for an issue or funding level. But I never got the impression that any of this was done for “power” or for the “good of Norm.” It was all about a love for Washington state and Congress as the institution representing government “by the people.”

Now, I don’t mean to make it sound like he’s dead. He’s very much alive (in fact, if anyone is, it’s Norm). It’s just that, like Olympia Snowe and other reasonable legislators before him, he recently announced his departure from the House of Representatives. His statement came as quite a shock to D.C. insiders. As the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, Norm holds one of the most powerful positions in the Congress. He was expected to easily win re-election. So why leave now?

He is quoted as saying “At some point you have to retire. I just decided that now is the right time.” And it may all be little more than that. But I do wonder if the institution has just become a lot less fun for someone like Norm who worked well with both sides of the aisle and always sought bipartisan solutions. I can’t put words in his mouth or assume that he’s retiring for reasons other than, in his words, a desire to “see Husky games and go fishing.” I can be concerned that this is another example of what the extreme bipolarization of the institution is doing to the future of our democracy. If we don’t have good, thoughtful, reasonable people who understand the nature of compromise to run it, it’s not going to work all that well.

Most Recent Senate Retirement a Loss for Us All

2012-03-02T08:50:00.001-08:00

There’s an adage that says “moderation in all things.” Apparently the U.S. Congress did not get the memo on that, as evidenced by the latest example of rational, thoughtful people feeling compelled to leave the Senate. I’m talking about the recently announced retirement of Olympia Snowe (R-ME). In this Washington Post opinion piece, she points to “dysfunction” and “political polarization” of the institution as her main reasons for leaving.

Although she and I are of different political parties, her decision saddens and discourages me. In my 20 years in Washington, D.C. (yes, I’m old) Senator Snowe has always impressed me as one of the “good ones.” Every person I’ve ever spoken to from Maine (believe it or not, we get a fair amount coming to D.C. for lobby days) shares that view, even when they don’t agree with her. They have always told me that it’s clear she cares about both her constituents as well as what she sees as the best way to move the country forward in a balanced way. She’s been a champion of everything from libraries to improving access to health care services to reducing regulatory burdens on small business. And Senator Snowe has, despite all its problems, always been supportive of the U.S. Congress as an institution designed to express the views of citizens.

Senator Snowe’s retirement is just one symptom of a much bigger problem. This problem stems from the incivility and anger that has seeped, sometimes insidiously, into our political process. Unfortunately, with the election season in full swing, I think the acrimony will get even worse this year. It’s up to “we the people” to make sure this doesn’t happen. I’m probably not going to convince the real “haters” to stop being hateful. I hope, though, that I can convince some of the more reasonable citizens to speak up. Too many of us (and I say “us” because I’m guilty of it myself) are abdicating our responsibility to say “hey, enough is enough. Stop acting like 4-year olds.” We do this through voting (be sure you’re registered!) and speaking out, politely but firmly, when we see antagonism from either side of the aisle or from citizens themselves.

I still love the idea of Congress as an institution. I still love the idea of citizen engagement. But I say “idea” because in practice lately it’s not working out so well. The only way we can move forward (or at least stop moving back!) is to recognize that even when you believe others are horribly misguided in their views, we are all joined together as part of a larger “we.”

Knowing the Nature of What You’re Selling: Part 4 – Timeframe

2012-02-22T07:17:00.000-08:00

In the last few posts I’ve talked about how effective lobbyists understand the nature of what they’re selling in Washington, D.C.. They identify the intent (action vs. inertia), the scope (controversial or not), the importance (must do vs. may do) and the timeframe (short vs. long term). This post covers the final factor, timeframe. When a policy decision must be made quickly, it’s easier for special interests to “pile on” their pet projects. Policymakers are likely to just “go with the flow” because they simply do not have the time to consider an alternative option. Look at the example of the emergency payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits extension passed on Friday February 17th, 2012. Tucked into the bill were provisions to “study the use of state and local 9-1-1 service charges,” as well as funds to conduct research into wireless public safety communications. Believe it or not, these telecommunications-related sections of the bill were considered “germane” because proceeds from the sale of wireless spectrum were one means used to pay for the tax break and benefit extension. Oh, and because the “Next Generation 9-1-1 Advancement Act,” which was the genesis for this section bill, was originally introduced by Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL), a member of the House Communications and Technology Subcommittee.

Whether you agree with this “piling on” approach or not, it’s effective. Clearly, the timeframe of passage impacts both the types of strategies you use in your influence campaign, as well as how extensively you use them. A couple hours of research might be appropriate for a decision to be made within a few weeks, while several weeks (and, indeed, ongoing analysis) would be appropriate for causes that will take several years to finalize one way or another. At the same time, you may need to build a foundation over time in order to take advantage of a “spur of the moment” opportunity. Rep. Shimkus introduced the 9-1-1 improvement act in July of 2011. He and his allies were well positioned – and early on.

Overall, when playing the influence game recognize that some “yeses” are easier to get to than others depending on all these factors. The easiest tend to be short term “must do” decisions that are non-controversial and not action-oriented. On the more difficult end of the spectrum are controversial, optional decisions that require your decision maker to take proactive action. If you know the nature of what you’re selling, you can find where you are on this spectrum, and plan your strategy accordingly. If your idea is a little on the controversial side, look for opportunities to connect it with those on the “easier” end of the spectrum. This is a tried and true legislative strategy that works.

Five Things Advocates Need to Know About the Budget and Appropriations Process

2012-02-16T07:25:00.000-08:00

Happy Budget Day! If you’re intimidated, confused or even just bored by the federal budget process, read on for a few things we think citizens should know – without getting all bogged down in D.C. jargon (OK, maybe a little jargon).

It’s important now because your voice matters more than anyone else in the political process. Clearly, the 112^th Congress is focused on cutting spending, which means that some program you like (whether it’s foreign aid, domestic education or business tax credits) will be cut. Or perhaps you believe that everything should be reduced or eliminated – as many people do these days. Members of Congress focus with intensity on the view of their constituents. If you want your perspective to win out – you better speak up. If you are going to speak up, though, be sure you know what you’re talking about. Nothing screams “I haven’t done my homework” like someone saying, for example, “let’s balance the budget by eliminating all foreign aid programs.” Foreign aid programs make up ½ of 1% of the budget. Eliminating them won’t even balance my yearly coffee budget (yeah, I drink a lot of coffee). Follow these four tips to learn a little more – and use this wisdom to become a lot more effective.

First, know the difference between the Presidential budget process and the Congressional budget process. The Administration’s proposal, which comes out every February, is simply that – a proposal. What Congress, as the branch that has the true “power of the purse strings,” decides is a totally different matter. When the person occupying the White House and the leadership of the House and Senate are of the same political persuasion the budget numbers may be somewhat similar. However, when the President and the Congress don’t see eye-to-eye, the President’s proposal becomes less a signal of where there are agreements and more a sign of what items will be most in contention

Second, know the differences between “budget,” “appropriations,” and “authorization” bills. The first is a budget blueprint, the second type of bill allows a program to exist (authorization) and the third type provides actual funding for that program (appropriations). The processes work in tandem and are equally important to the overall outcome. Effective advocates understand the differences and develop their policy asks accordingly.

Third, know the differences between discretionary and non-discretionary spending. The VAST majority of federal spending is on what are known as “non-discretionary” programs, such as Medicare, Social Security and interest on the national debt. In essence, these programs are not truly non-discretionary: Congress could pass policy language making changes that would reduce or increase spending in these areas. However, major changes to these programs are few and far between. Most yearly funding battles are oriented around the one-third of the budget that is considered “discretionary.” Advocates need to understand that the funds available for domestic discretionary programs are decreasing, while demand is increasing, thus increasing the need for citizen voices.

Finally, know where to learn more. In addition to the materials available on your own organization’s website, there are many other sources of information. Consider Look at the Office of Management and Budget (www.omb.gov), the Congressional Budget Office at http://www.cbo.gov/, which has a primer on the budget process, and the National Priorities Project at http://nationalpriorities.org/, which also has a primer on the budget process has an interesting “where do your tax dollars go” calculator.

Armed with this information you’ll be ready to make a real difference. So go forth!

Love your government – Or at least don’t hate on them for a while

2012-02-14T14:40:00.000-08:00

I recognize the likely futility behind this advice. But hey, it’s Valentine’s Day and I just have to put in a good or at least neutral word for Congress. I’m not suggesting that you buy your legislators flowers or chocolate (that’s not allowed under the ethics rules unless the flowers are less than $50 and the chocolate is eaten standing up. Long story. Don’t ask.) Conversation hearts might be possible, but I’m too concerned people will add a “you suck” message to those before sending them so I’m not going to really suggest that either.

No, my simple way of asking advocates to show the love is to at least stop showing the hate for a few days. I’ve been surfing a lot of legislator social media sites (Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, etc.) lately as part of an effort to encourage citizens to advocate online. These sites are a really effective way to get a sense of what the legislators is interested in -- a key to effective messaging. But WOW, the vitriol out there is amazing. I found very few sites where anyone said something like “hey, I agree with that” or even “I respectfully disagree.” Sure, less than 15% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing – and they certainly need to know that we’re not really thrilled with what’s going on. That said, could we all dial down the anger? Seriously. It’s not helping.

You don’t have to ask your representatives to “be mine” (some might take that too literally). But how about a “Let’s Talk” to indicate you’re willing to have a conversation with them? The good news is that you can have those conversations in-person while they’re home during next week’s district work period. Most elected officials schedule forums and town hall meetings where they can connect with constituents and hear their views. And I can’t tell you how many times one conversation at a town hall meeting has resulted in a member of Congress supporting a bill or program. It’s certainly far more likely to be successful than some of the approaches I’m seeing out there right now. Just look up their district offices through a site like www.congress.org (enter your zipcode on the top right side) and call. It's that easy.

I hope this plea for just a little bit more love (or a little bit less hate) doesn’t fall on deaf ears. Or, at least, I hope I don’t get a bunch of really cranky responses – a prefer chocolate.

Today The President's Budget is Released!

2012-02-13T08:26:00.001-08:00

Today is a big day in Washington DC. President Obama has released his 2013 budget proposal. You can download it here. Also, the president's budget proposal will also be available through a smartphone app that will be availble for iPhone, Android, and Blackberry.

Today news coverage will be all about the President's budget. While going through the document, be sure to read press releases of your representatives to understand where he or she stands on the budget proposal. Then you can begin to draft a game plan to get your organization's budget campaign.

Be sure to follow our twitter feed @advocacyassoc and #happybudgetday for info about the budget throughout the day.

Using Video to Advocate- a Lesson from Political Candidates and Clint Eastwood

2012-02-08T09:12:00.000-08:00

While pursuing an issue campaign, it’s important to use many forms of media to reach out to the general public and to elected officials for support. Depending on how your target audiences processes information, you should manage resources to deliver your message and keep them engaged. The most powerful resource any organization can use to reach all audiences is video. If executed correctly, a good video can quickly become viral and appear on television shows, social media pages, and newspaper/blog entries. There are three steps to begin a foundation for a successful video campaign.

Step 1: Have a Strong and Focused Message

There was a great example of a strong issue video during the Superbowl that has become wildly popular. If you haven’t seen it yet, I am referring to the Chrysler commercial featuring Clint Eastwood. The video was a powerful statement of how Detroit carmakers have begun a strong resurgence. Although it has no specific political agenda, the video builds a metaphor between the American Car industry and America. The video seeks to inspire Americans to believe in, and ultimately purchase, American made cars.

Step 2: Reach and Production Value

Elections have understood the value of video for a long time. Candidates have always used short commercials with limited reach and little production value. Today, these videos still exist, but they are now combined with the online video sources that have drastically increased the reach to a national level AT NO EXTRA COST thanks to sites like YouTube and Vimeo. In addition, videos now have greater production value. Production value is better today because technology has increased to the point that the time and resources needed to create a great video are less. Mastery of Final Cut Pro X, AVID, or even iMovie can make any amateur video seem great.

Some Examples:

Step 3: Don’t Be Too Bold

Videos are a powerful tool in any advocate’s arsenal. Be cautioned though: “with great power, comes great responsibility.” It’s important to note that “over the top” videos can result in negative consequences that will make your campaign look foolish. Your campaign will lose support if a controversial video becomes viral. Some examples of videos that have landed some of their candidates in hot water recently:

Chat Hour With The Advocacy Guru!

2012-02-07T13:59:00.000-08:00

Hello Advocactes!

Join Advocacy Guru Stephanie Vance on Wednesday February 8th at 2:00 pm eastern for an online chat session. She’ll be available to answer your questions on effective advocacy. Just go to www.join.me and type “advocacyguru” (no quotes) in the join box. Then click on the bubble to chat. It’s all free!

Knowing the Nature of What You’re Selling: Part 3 – Importance

2012-02-03T07:21:00.001-08:00

We’ve talked about how effective lobbyists understand the nature of what they’re selling in Washington, D.C.. They identify the intent (action vs. inertia), the scope (controversial or note), the importance (must do vs. may do) and the timeframe (short vs. long term). In the last couple posts I talked about intent and scope. In this one we’ll look at importance.

Now sure, every idea (especially yours) is important. But, let’s face it, some decisions are more immediately necessary than others. However, with the right strategy these “must do soon” decisions can be some of the easiest to influence.

Take the example of government responses to natural disasters. They tend to generate a fair amount of lobbying activity outside the scope of the natural disaster because special interests know that THIS legislation will move quickly, unlike 96% of the bills introduced in a year. In 2006, for example, when the U.S. Congress passed emergency legislation to help provide additional assistance to victims of Hurricane Katrina, the bill included billions of dollars for other totally unrelated programs, like research into the threats from “bird flu” as well as farm bailouts. Lobbyists and special interests saw these bills as opportunities to move their priorities because they were “must do” decisions. No legislators wanted to be against relief to victims of Hurricane Katrina, so they agreed to overlook the other items.

For your own influence situation, consider whether the decision is “must do” or “may do.” Does the decision maker desperately need what you’re selling right away? Or is it the kind of situation where it would be “nice” for them to buy your product, service or time? Are there other “must do” decisions coming down the pike that you can attach your issue to? Knowing the answers to these questions will help you develop a winning advocacy strategy.

Knowing the Nature of What You’re Selling: Part 2 -- Scope

2012-01-31T07:31:00.000-08:00

As discussed in my last blog entry, effective lobbyists understand the nature of what they’re selling in Washington, D.C.. They identify the intent (action vs. inertia), the scope (controversial or note), the importance (must do vs. may do) and the timeframe (short vs. long term). In the last post I talked about intent. In this one we’ll look at scope.

By scope I mean where the idea the lobbyist is selling falls on the “controversy”spectrum. These ideas range from large to small, from controversial to not, from easy to tough and everywhere in between. For example, legislation to “designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 20 Main Street in Little Ferry, New Jersey, as the "Sergeant Matthew J. Fenton Post Office"” (passed and sent to the President on 12/23/2011) takes less time and political capital than legislation to change health care laws, the tax code or the structure of the financial system.

Think of your influence effort as existing along a spectrum from easy to difficult, particularly in terms of your audience’s perspective. Will it cost them money? Time? Political or other capital? Will someone be angry with them if they agree with you? The answer to these questions will tell you whether the influence situation is controversial or relatively easy. In addition, you’ll want to consider whether your idea will be attached to something controversial. While you may have something relatively simple to propose, your task will be far more difficult with a gigantic legislative albatross around your neck.

Finally, don’t be fooled by those items that may not seem all that controversial, but can turn out that way. For example, if you want to establish National Pickle Week, you better know what you mean by “pickle.” Is it sweet? dill? Do gerkins count? What about chips vs. spears? In fact, you’ll probably want to include ALL pickles just to be on the safe side and avoid opposition.

Playing the Influence Game: Start with Knowing the Nature of What You're Selling

2012-01-26T07:19:00.000-08:00

You may have noticed the dearth of blog postings from the Advocacy Guru in the last few months. But have no fear! You’ll hear a lot from me in the coming months as I gear up for the release of my next book, The Influence Game, coming out in May, 2012 from Wiley publishing. The Influence Game shares 50 of the most effective “insider” tactics used by D.C. lobbyists and special interests to persuade legislators and their staff. And believe it or not, none of these involve manipulation, bribery or lying!

Throughout the next few months, I’ll be sharing the short versions of some of these tactics. I’m starting with one of the most important, “knowing the nature of what you’re selling.”

If you think about it, in any influence situation, whether you’re working with policymakers, business leaders or your spouse, you’re selling something. Sometimes it’s a widget and sometimes it’s an idea. But either way, you’ll want to know the intent, scope, importance and timeframe of your sale.

Let’s start with “intent,” by which I mean knowing the difference between asking for action or inertia. Sometimes you’ll want the decision maker to do something. Sometimes you’ll want the decision maker to NOT do something or, in fact, anything. It won’t surprise you to know that in Washington D.C. inertia is almost always the easiest to achieve. Special interests often succeed simply by persuading Congress that the status quo is better than any changes legislators could come up with. Inertia in Washington, D.C. is so bad that even the “must pass” bills, like the appropriations bills that keep the government funding never actually pass on time. And when I say never, I mean never. They haven’t passed on time ONCE in the last decade.

That said, sometimes advocates must push for something affirmative, such as passing a tax extension that would expire without specific action. Your entire strategy, including message development, timing, tactics used to reach out to decision makers and specific actions for follow-up, will depend on this basic understanding. So as you’re getting started with your influence effort, ask yourself “am I pushing for action or inertia?” Knowing the answer to this question will get you started in the right direction.

Next time we’ll look at the scope of your ask, particularly whether it’s controversial or easy -- and how to manage each type.

Is Bipartisanship Still Possible in 2012?

2012-01-25T10:17:00.000-08:00

The last few days have been overwhelming in the news with the South Carolina primary, Mitt Romney’s tax returns, the Republican Florida debate, the State of the Union address, and Gabrielle Giffords’ resignation. Reading the news and hearing the rhetoric in press releases, I’m sure many in the nation have little hope for anything to get done this year in Congress. So is bipartisanship really possible in 2012?

The answer: yes. In the last few days there have been signs that bipartisanship is still possible in today’s hyper-partisan Washington. President Obama called for congress to follow the example of our military to work together regardless of our divisions. The No Labels organization has worked tirelessly to get many of its bipartisan initiatives adopted. Notably, according to their daily dose, they have been successful in the state of the Union bipartisan seating and President Obama endorsed the No Label’s proposal for all presidential nominees to get an up-or-down vote within 90 days.

Perhaps more telling that Washington can transcend its political divisions is the resignation of Representative Gabrielle Giffords. During the State of the Union speech, the House chamber roared with her arrival and hugging of the President Obama. During her resignation ceremony and introduction of her final bill, both Democratic and Republican representatives were supportive of Representative Giffords. Representative Jeff Flake, a Republican, is seen by her side for much of the ceremony. Her bill passed the House with a vote of 408-0. That means 93% of the House of Representatives voted in favor of a bill. It’s been a while since that kind of agreement has been reached in the much divided House of Representatives.

I wouldn’t expect that DC will be on fire with bipartisan proposals. Bills like Rep. Mica’s upcoming transportation bill will be a test, but I do have hope that Congress can work together this year to get some bipartisan initiatives done.

Grassroots vs. Lobby Money: Who will win the SOPA Fight?

2012-01-18T09:50:00.000-08:00

Today is an important day for the internet. Websites such as Google, Wikipedia, and several others are protesting H.R. 3261 or Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA) and S.968 Preventing
Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft Property Act of 2011 (PIPA).

These are two bills that civil liberty groups, internet companies, and citizens have charged as an example of a strong lobbying effort by a particular group, this case Hollywood and the music industry, to solve a problem without regard to possible implications. An article from CNET does a great job outlining the current conflict.

The movie and music industry are backing SOPA and PIPA heavily with lobbyists and money, Google and others have decided to mobilize a massive grassroots network on their websites. Google has added a link on its home page for users to contact his or her representatives and Wikipedia has completely blacked out its website with a message to its users.

For those cynics who believe that ONLY money dictates what happens in Washington D.C., this massive grassroots effort may halt congress from passing either SOPA or PIPA. If the bills are halted, then there are some serious lessons that we as advocates can learn from this grassroots effort.Regardless of which side of the issue you stand, this is an important issue that you should weigh in on and contact your member of congress.

2012: A New Legislative Hope

2012-01-03T10:33:00.000-08:00

2011 was a tough year for legislation. An interesting article I read made a great point: “Key words in Congress in 2011: stalemate, deadlock, brinksmanship, partisanship.” CBS’ program 60 Minutes ran a segment discussing the gridlock that has occurred in Congress in 2011 and profiled the House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. You can see the segment below:

If your organization wants to get something done and foster the bipartisanship needed this year, be sure to have your members reach out to his or her representatives regardless of party affiliation. If a member agrees or disagrees with an issue because of party loyalty, the best way to overcome that policy position is constituency. Most members of Congress are willing to break party lines if his or her constituents demand that action.

The Senate will reconvene on January 23rd and the House will reconvene January 17th. So let’s get ready to advocate!

Today in U.S. History, The Bill of Rights was Ratified

2011-12-15T11:07:00.000-08:00

December 15 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified and became an important part of our nation’s highest document, the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights was an essential part of a compromise during the drafting of the constitution that if left off, several states and delegates would have refused to sign or ratify the Constitution.

The impacts of the first ten amendments are impressed on us every day. We are taught these rights and their implications in history class from elementary school to college. The INS citizenship test includes several questions regarding the Bill of Rights. Nations around the world built their Constitutions and Bills of Rights using the United States as an example. Many of the issues in today’s politics are rooted in the belief that one or more of these basic rights are under attack. Debates regarding the recently passed defense reauthorization bill that some people charge as a violation of the 5^th and 6^th amendments or the markup of the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act and violation of the 1^st amendment (free speech).

We are lucky to live in a country where these rights exist and tough conversations and debates can happen openly and nonviolently. As an advocate for your cause or organization, you are taking full advantage of the rights our founding fathers fought for and wanted to be used. Be proud and keep advocating.

Tweets Now Archived at Library of Congress

2011-12-07T09:16:00.000-08:00

Here on our blog, we talk a lot about how important Social Media is to any person or organization’s advocacy campaign. With this in mind, I found an interesting article yesterday that announced that Twitter and The Library of Congress have signed an agreement that EVERY PUBLIC TWEET EVER SENT will be archived in the Library’s historical record. The only tweets to not be archived are those marked private by the user.

This agreement between Twitter and the Library of Congress will obviously have strong implications. First, every public tweet your organization ever sends out will now be on record. Conversely, every public tweet Congresspersons, Senators, and Candidates send will also be on permanent record. For this reason, the carelessness some people,organizations, and politicians have with tweets will be even more costly in the future. Second, once the archive has been built up, we might have the capability to research twitter trends to track public opinion on certain issues. This could be a real game changer.

Keep that Winter Chill Away with the Flames of Passion (For Advocacy)!

2011-12-02T07:42:00.000-08:00

We’re nearing the end of the year, temperatures will soon drop to below freezing, and you might be ready to take off your advocacy cap, throw on a Snuggie, and hibernate until Spring rolls around. But don’t give in to this temptation, because this is actually a very important time for your advocacy movement. Here are a few things you can do in December to ramp up your advocacy efforts.

Gear up for next year. It’s time to create an advocacy agenda for 2012. Take a look back at what you accomplished this year and decide where you want to be by the end of next year. Do you want to focus on increasing your advocate base? Making them more active? Getting legislation passed? Pick one or two main areas for improvement and build a plan around achieving your new goals. Consider what relevant legislative battles could potentially come up in 2012 and decide how you want to tailor your advocacy in the context of November elections. Take the time to ask your members for feedback and ask them what tools would help them be better advocates next year.

Meet with Members back in the district. At some point in December your Members of Congress will be back in their districts. Ask your legislators to do a site visit or hold a meeting with you in one of their district offices. This is a great opportunity to show your legislators why your industry or cause is important to their constituents. If you can’t get a meeting with the Member, take some time to meet with their district office staff members. Building these relationships now will be beneficial to you down the line when the 2013 budget battle begins in February (that is, if they ever resolve the 2012 budget battle..)

Keep up the good work and you’ll be better prepared for the upcoming legislative year. Once you’ve done this, then you can treat yourself to some eggnog, toss on that Snuggie, and enjoy the Holidays knowing you were a good little advocate this year.

Top Models and Advocacy

2011-12-01T07:51:00.000-08:00

One of my many guilty pleasures (in addition to Star Trek – see an earlier blog posting) is watching America’s Next Top Model. For the uninitiated, ANTM features very beautiful people doing beautiful things and taking beautiful pictures in beautiful places. This season, the models are developing a “brand” beyond simply being beautiful. These brands are generally associated with one word, like “free” or “classy.”

How does this relate to advocacy? I promise it does, just stick with me here. I’ve noticed that some of the models are much better than others at finding a brand that really reflects their personality. One of them, for example, is “fun” – and she’s certainly fun (maybe not my definition of fun, but fun none-the-less). Another is “creepy.” She’s creepy. Really creepy. There are vampires involved. These models tend to win branding-oriented challenges because they are crystal clear on who they are and what they’re about.

The least successful models, on the other hand, have picked brands that really don’t reflect their personalities. The model who chose “free” for example, is one of the most rigid people I’ve seen (and I’m getting that through a television screen, so it must be pretty bad).

This rule about being clear about who you are and what you want applies to advocacy as well. In order to succeed, you must be perfectly honest with yourself about the strengths and weaknesses of your advocacy argument and how you want to present it to others. In addition, you must feel an authentic enthusiasm for your cause. It must fit you like a glove or, using our analogy, a couture dress

The Needs of the Many Outweigh the Needs of the Few

2011-11-29T08:49:00.000-08:00

If you’re a trekkie, you know that Spock quoted this phrase (I don’t think he invented it) in Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan. Yes, I’m a trekkie. However, while this perspective might be true in Star Trek, it’s not the case when it comes to effective advocacy. Sometimes, the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.

In Washington, DC the difference between a good cause and a special interest is simple: you agree with the policy perspective of a good cause and the other side is always represented by one of those horrible special interests. In truth, everyone has a special interest and hence everyone IS a special interest. It’s just that your special interest may be diametrically opposed to another’s. Or, more likely, others may not be convinced that your interest is in the best interest of everyone else. It’s not. That’s why it’s a special interest. If it were good for everyone it would be a common interest.

The appropriations process best reflects this phenomenon. Many, many groups compete for funds for their favorite programs, whether it’s research dollars for a certain disease over others, infrastructure capital for roads versus public transportation or housing assistance for low income individuals versus overall urban development funds. Now, sure, many items that receive funding seem pretty far-fetched in terms of the use of taxpayer dollars. We’ve all heard of the infamous bridge to nowhere. But remember, one man’s pork is another man’s bacon.

I recognize that citizens are frustrated because members of Congress sometimes vote in the interests of their district or state as opposed to the overall public good. But, frankly, that’s their job. Opposing a program that is clearly in the best interests of the area they represent on the grounds that it’s not good for the country is not only politically risky – it’s also not in keeping with their job description. And, believe me, people get pretty cranky about that.

In my opinion, we must all give up the idea that every special interest is bad or unworthy because it doesn’t coincide with everyone else. Perhaps more important, you must recognize that other people may have good intentions, even when they disagree with you. As advocates, your job is to promote your special interest, without vilifying the interests of others, in adherence to the principles of honesty, integrity and ethics by which we all should live (or at least that’s what my mom says).

Advocacy Tips: Keep Up the Spirit of Giving Thanks

2011-11-23T08:43:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow is Thanksgiving, or, as I like to call it, “Fatty Pants Day.” That means it’s time to give thanks for all those things you take for granted on a daily basis, like a good pair of stretchy pants (and I suppose your family, friends, a roof over your head ... ). As you’re making your list of things to be thankful for (I’m not the only one that actually writes out a physical list, right?), don’t forget to include your Members of Congress.

Okay, maybe politics is the last thing you want to be thinking about on Turkey Day, but there’s an important lesson here. Advocates spend most of their time urging their legislators to take action on important issues (as they should), but you can get so caught up in the “ask” that you forget to appreciate what your Congressman might have already done to support your cause. Maybe in the past they voted with your issue or made a statement in support of your organization. When you’re building a relationship with a Member of Congress and their staff, “thank you” can go a long way. Just as you expect them to understand and appreciate the good work your organization is doing, you need to in turn recognize and thank them for their work on your issue, even if they aren’t one of the biggest champions of your cause. If the congressional office knows you took the time to learn their history on the issues, they will be more willing to return the favor, and that’s an important part of building a relationship with that Member.

I officially pardon you from your tireless advocacy endeavors for tomorrow, but once you wake up from your tryptophan coma and the holiday is over, remember to start thanking your legislators!

Debt "Supercommittee" is hitting a deadlock dangerously close to their deadline.

2011-11-17T11:43:00.000-08:00

Next week is the deadline for the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to come up with a plan to reduce the federal deficit by $1.2 trillion over the next ten years. After a week or two of hopeful momentum on reaching a deal, including proposals from the two parties that only differ by $100 billion on taxes, negotiations have stalled once again. Formal legislation must be introduced by November 21^st and voted on by November 23^rd.

The main points of contention between the Republicans and Democrats on the committee are changes to Medicare and tax revenue increases. Last week Democrats said they would be willing to go as low as $401 billion in new revenue, while Republicans indicated the highest they were willing to go up to is about $300 billion. They differ on the types of tax reform that would generate this revenue. This week we are hearing more bickering than negotiation, more blame game than end game.

While it is unclear whether the committee will be able to reach a deal in time, all hope is not lost. It certainly wouldn’t be the first deal struck at the last possible minute this year—the very Budget Control Act that created this “Supercommittee” and raised the deficit ceiling was passed just hours before the U.S. government would have defaulted on its borrowing authority. Congress also narrowly avoided a government shutdown back in April when they couldn’t agree on how to fund the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011.

Did You Vote Today?

2011-11-08T13:19:00.000-08:00

Today is Election Day!

If some of you responded with “… What? Seriously?” don’t feel too bad. This is an off-year election mostly comprised of mayoral elections and ballot measures (there are only 4 states holding state-level legislative elections and only 2 states holding gubernatorial elections). The most exciting coverage of the day is related to some of the more contentious ballot measures, such as a vote in Ohio on a measure that restricts the collective bargaining rights of unions and whether the state of Mississippi will essentially outlaw abortions entirely by passing a measure to define a fertilized egg as a person.

While only a select few issues are getting lots of national attention, there are plenty more being voted on today that will have an impact at the state and local levels. This reminded me that it’s extremely important to advocate for local issues as well as national. A lot of us tend to focus on the “big picture” and forget that sometimes the best strategy is to build your way up from the bottom. Fighting for issues that are important to you at the local level not only directly affects the people in your community, but victories can also give you sway at the national level. If you can go to your Members of Congress and say “Look, people supported this and passed this legislation in your community, and see how much good it did,” your persuasive arguments become less theory-based and more evidence-based. And if there’s anything legislators love, it’s actual evidence of something working. It makes their job a lot easier when fighting for legislation if they can offer up specific examples of how that policy or program is benefiting their constituents.

If your efforts are entirely focused on national policies, consider adding this strategy into your advocacy arsenal. It will probably add a lot to your workload (Who doesn't love more work?), but it can be well worth it.

Shocking New Information: Electorate Disappointed with Government

2011-11-08T12:43:00.000-08:00

Over the weekend, an article in the Washington Post pointed out that the next Presidential election is just one year away and, get this, Americans are disappointed in the current performance of our government. Yes, I know you turn to this blog for the latest and greatest news. In fact, with record unemployment and job disapproval ratings, Obama faces the most difficult re-election challenge of any incumbent president for the last two decades. Fifty-three percent of Americans disapprove of the job he is doing overall, and 61% disapprove of the job he is doing on the economy.

In general, you'd probably imagine that the other side of the aisle feel pretty good about these numbers. However, a couple other statistics jumped out at me. First, 50% of respondents agreed with the statement that Obama is making a good faith effort to deal with the nation's problems, but the Republicans in Congress are playing politics. That compares to 37% (for the comparable questions) for the first President Bush at around the same time in his campaign for re-election. Americans blame the Republicans in Congress more than Obama for the state of the country. Almost 60% of respondents are likely to not automatically vote for their current member of Congress and, instead, look around for another option. By a slight margin, more Americans want the Democrats in control of Congress after the next election.

Perhaps most disturbing, aside from what the White House or Congress is doing, seventy-four percent of Americans think that things in our country have gotten pretty seriously off track. I'm always a little skeptical about that question because I'm not sure of these "things" of which they speak, but I do know that's not a good number (you can read current polling results here).

The main message from the polls are, of course, that voters aren't really all that happy with what's going on in the country and, sadly, I see that more and more people feel like they can't do anything about it. Here's the thing, though -- you CAN do something about it. You can find my checklist for effective advocacy here, as well as some articles on effective advocacy here. Or join my advocate chat hour at 2:00pm eastern on Wednesday November 9th. Just go to http://www.join.me/ and type “advocacyguru” (no quotes) in the join box. Then click on the bubble to chat. It’s all free. Seriously, I want to help you feel better about government, or at least know your voice can be heard.

We all enjoy a little drama in our lives, but keep it separate from your advocacy.

2011-11-04T09:44:00.000-07:00

The months leading up to a Presidential race are always rife with controversy and scandal. A little financial frivolousness here, a little sexual harassment there … there always seems to be plenty to go around. If there is one lesson a person running for public office learns quickly, it’s that your past can come back to haunt you.

Well, the same goes for any grassroots advocacy campaign. Like any business’ or individual’s venture to gain support from the masses, it’s extremely important to maintain a clean track record. And for those of you thinking that a little controversy can be good because it equals free publicity, cut it out. That may work for celebrities, but it will not advance your advocacy initiatives.

Take ACORN for example. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now was one of the largest anti-poverty groups in the nation (until it filed for bankruptcy last year), working to improve working and living conditions for low-income Americans since 1970. While they achieved many victories at the local, state, and national levels, that is unfortunately not the first thing that comes to mind for the average American. Instead, the first words that pop up are usually “voter registration fraud,” which ACORN was accused of during the 2008 Presidential campaign. The aftermath that occurred as a result of this controversy inevitably contributed to their downfall.

Now this is an extreme case—it received so much media attention because it was wrapped around the Presidential race. But it’s still an important lesson for any grassroots organization, no matter the size and scale. A scandal may not mean bankruptcy is in your future, but it could cause you to lose supporters and diminish your ability to create policy change. If you stay true to your cause and never waiver from your morals, you can build and maintain a truly strong movement.

Okay, I know that last part was a little cheesy and fortune cookie-ish … but it’s true!

The 2012 Senate Calendar has been Released!

2011-11-02T07:23:00.000-07:00

Last Thursday, the House Majority leader released the 2012 calendar for the House of Representatives. Yesterday, The Senate majority leaders released the 2012 Senate calendar.

Now that both the House and the Senate calendars are available, you organization can decide which days to would be most effective to have a Lobby Day.

The 2012 House Calendar has been Published!

2011-10-27T08:43:00.000-07:00

Great News! House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has just released the 2012 House legislative calendar. The calendar is important as it outlines when congress will be in session, constituent work weeks, voting limits, etc.

If you are planning on having a lobby day, be sure to consult this calendar before deciding on a specific day.

The Electoral College vs. The Direct Vote

2011-10-26T09:02:00.000-07:00

With the Republican primary going into high gear, the 2012 elections are gradually taking center stage in the news. A few days ago, there was a Politico article that featured a Gallup poll showing a majority of Americans are in favor of changing the presidential election from the Electoral College system to a direct vote. Under the Electoral College, each state receives the same number of votes as Representatives and Senators and that represent it. Whoever wins the popular vote in a particular state, wins their electoral votes. Currently there are 538 electoral votes in the Electoral College; the extra 3 belong to the District of Columbia. Under a direct vote, the president would only need to win a majority of votes in the entire country.

Remember the 2000 Gore v. G.W. Bush Election? George W Bush went on to the become president even though Then Vice-President Al Gore won the voting majority of the country. Unfortunately for him, winning the “popular vote” does not capture the presidency in or Electoral College system. Bush won 271 electoral votes to Al Gore’s 266. Interestingly, this is NOT a frequent issue in presidential elections. This situation has only occurred in three previous presidential elections (John Q Adams 1824, Rutherford B Hayes 1876, and Benjamin Harrison 1888). That’s less than 10% of US presidential elections to date.

If the Electoral College was eliminated and the direct vote implemented, it is likely that large sections of the nation would probably be ignored during an election. All a candidate would need to win the election are the votes in the nation’s population centers and major cities. Because of this, it is unlikely that small and rural states would ever ratify a Constitutional amendment. With that in mind, if your organization is contemplating jumping into the 2012 fray, remember to not just campaign in areas with the most people, but in the “swing states” that seem to determine the next President.

Chess and the Legislative Process

2011-10-24T14:54:00.001-07:00

Chess intrigues me. I’ve dabbled a little, but I’ve never really learned how to play. Nevertheless, to quote Lady Catherine de Burgh from Pride and Prejudice, “had I learned I would have been a great proficient.”

My fascination with chess relates to the strategy behind it – seeing several moves ahead, knowing not only your options but your opponents’ options, etc. This twisted mindset probably explains my fascination with the legislative process. So, in my latest foray into becoming a “chess proficient,” (i.e., downloading the free chess app and playing the computer a few times), I learned a few things that can be applied to the crazy stuff we do in Washington, D.C.

First of all, don't be afraid of being checked. Chess aficionados please forgive my inadequate explanation, but this is when you find yourself in the position of needing to move your King in order to prevent its capture. When the other side captures the King the game is over. In chess, as in lobbying, sometimes you have to be checked to gain a significant advantage, such as forcing an opponent to put one of their pieces in danger to protect another.

Second, and this one sounds bad, but at the beginning of the game pawns can protect you. Near the end (or sometimes in the middle) it's OK to let some go. They are often dispensable. I don’t mean that people are pawns (although sometimes we all feel as if we are). I mean that pieces of your policy agenda can be pawns. You use them at the forefront to protect other, more important pieces of your agenda. This is called “starting from your strongest position” and is very important to legislative strategy.

Third, the fewer "significant" players the other side has left, the safer you are. In the D.C. lobbying world, this usually means that if you can peel off big name supporters of the other sides’ perspective (and maintain your own supporters), you’ll survive much longer.

Fourth, the knights are more useful than you might think. I understand that many first-time chess players are a little flummoxed by the knights. They move differently than the other pieces. But remember that the knights can move both horizontally and vertically. In many cases that gives you a huge advantage.

Fifth, with your knight and your queen you can usually get the king cornered. If you have a knight, your queen, a bishop and a rook left at the end of the game you can always win, because you have pieces that can move in every direction on the board. So who are your knights, queens, bishops and rooks in your legislative battle?

Finally, in chess you should consider every move in terms of the following:

Who is directly at risk?
Where can you move them to a) get them out of trouble while b) making sure you don't get another piece into trouble?
Who else will be at risk if you make the move you're thinking of?
What move can you make to limit that risk? (I.e. protect someone)
Who are the most important players to protect?
What move will gain you the most advantage?

Seems to me these are good questions to ask when trying to move forward a policy issue in Washington, D.C. Who knows? Maybe you can avoid a checkmate – or at least reach a draw. And, if you actually play chess, please don’t comment that I don’t know what I’m talking about – I already know that.

It’s Halloween, Time to Put on Your Best Advocate Costume!

2011-10-24T08:59:00.000-07:00

The air is turning crisp and cool, the trench coats and boots have been brought out of storage and dusted off, and it’s almost time to don your best disguises for Halloween. As I started planning out my own costume, it occurred to me that it can also be beneficial to disguise yourself a bit when you’re advocating Congress—but not as a vampire or a pirate wench (and no, I’m not dressing up as either of those).

First, let me mention the characteristics of your inner advocate that you do NOT want to disguise. Don’t try to hide your passion or your persistence, as these qualities make up the foundation of effective advocacy. That said, there is a difference between passion and the need to say absolutely everything that’s on your mind, like “You just want more campaign money!” or “You should agree with everything I say because I’m obviously right.” It’s important to stay true to who you are, but if you find yourself starting to go this route when you’re communicating with your legislators, just know that you’re not going to get very far. Insulting someone is never the best way to get what you want from them. If you’re the type of person that normally tends toward these opinionated outbursts, try to rein it in when you’re advocating. Put on a mental disguise and become someone that, well, doesn’t do that.

Until your next advocacy adventure, have a Happy Halloween! And gentlemen, I know you might think it’s hilarious but please spare us all the former New York Congressman gray boxer-brief costume—no one wants to see that. At the very least, keep it off of Twitter.

The Clock is Ticking: The Super Committee's Timeline

2011-10-20T08:08:00.000-07:00

Between the Occupy Wall Street protests, Republican primary debates, and recent death of Muammar Gaddafi, many people seem to have lost sight of something very important: The 12 member bipartisan debt “Super Committee” that has been charged with finding $1.2 Trillion in cuts over the next ten years. In case you have not heard, The 12 members of the panel include:

Rep. Van Hollen (D-MD)
Rep. Clyburn (D-SC)
Rep. Becerra (D-CA)
Rep. Camp (R-MI)
Rep. Upton (R-MI)
Rep. Hensarling (R-TX, co-chair)
Sen. Baucus (D-MT)
Sen. Murray (D-WA, co-chair)
Sen. Kerry (D-MA)
Sen. Portman (R-OH)
Sen. Toomey (R-PA)
Sen. Kyl (R-AZ)

With extraordinarily secretive proceedings, there is only speculation about where the group is in terms of finding a consensus. There is a nice timeline at the Atlantic that outlines the urgency of the situation. Roughly five weeks from today, the committee will vote on its proposal. This will require a simple majority to pass. Assuming the proposal passes, a month later both chambers of Congress will vote on the proposal. That is right around the corner.

Whatever your advocacy issue is, I would HIGHLY suggest that you begin to reach out to your respective legislators and tell them how your issue should be treated in the Super Committee’s deliberations. You can also send your recommendations directly to the super committee on their website.

Advocacy Tips: Sometimes You Have to Start Small

2011-10-17T09:59:00.000-07:00

When Senate Democrats tried to get a passing vote on Obama’s American Jobs Act last week, it was quickly shot down. But that doesn’t mean they have to give up on the legislation entirely. This week the Senate plans to introduce a portion of the Jobs Act as its own separate bill for consideration—the piece that would provide $35 billion to prevent teacher and first-responder layoffs. So why are they introducing part of a bill that was already rejected? The idea here is that this component of the Jobs Act has more bipartisan support than the bill as a whole, so separating it out might yield a passing vote.

You should consider this strategy for your advocacy efforts. If your Members of Congress are giving you a hard time about giving you everything you want (don’t you hate that?), see if you can narrow down your ask to something they are more likely to agree to. Instead of demanding $10 billion in funding for your programs, ask them to speak up in support of some of the provisions that fit their legislative profile a little better.This doesn’t mean you should give up on the rest of your goals, but sometimes you have to start small to get things accomplished. If you are willing to compromise with your legislators in this way, it shows them that you are reasonable and that it would be worth their time to work with you in the future. From there, you can work your way up to the bigger asks.

Advocacy Tips: Tie in a Winning Message

2011-10-14T07:44:00.000-07:00

The pressure is on for Congress to make difficult decisions about where to cut federal spending. Congress has until November 18^th to finalize appropriations for Fiscal Year 2012 that include $7 billion in cuts compared to Fiscal Year 2011 (or else pass another Continuing Resolution), and the Select Committee on Deficit Reduction has until November 23^rd to devise and agree on a plan to reduce the federal deficit by $1.2 trillion over ten years. If you’re worried that the programs that are important to you are on the chopping block, now is the time the ramp up your advocacy efforts and make sure your legislators know why these programs should remain in place. While most of your arguments will be narrowly focused, there are a couple of strategic themes which transcend any issue area that you should consider for your messaging.

The first strategic theme is jobs, jobs, jobs. In case you haven’t noticed, Congress is very aware of the high unemployment rate in this country. You may have even heard one or two sound bites of a Member of Congress talking about the importance of job creation (okay, more like one or two thousand sound bites). Unless you’re advocating for the Jobs Are Overrated Association, you can probably find a way to talk about how these federal programs help your industry create jobs. So do it.

The second point you should be making is how this issue affects their constituency. Although you are most likely fighting for federal programs that are implemented nationwide, your legislators need to hear exactly how these programs affect the people in their districts. It’s okay to include the ways in which these programs better the country as a whole, but the focus should be on statistics that tell a local story—What percentage of their constituents benefit from this program? How many jobs will this program create in their district?

Keep these ideas in mind as you develop your advocacy game plan and you’ll increase your chances of getting positive feedback.

Resources for Tracking Legislation

2011-10-11T14:04:00.000-07:00

Many advocates I have spoken with are always impressed with how up-to-date on legislation we are at Advocacy Associates. Well, it is our job to know these things, but there is no reason any interested citizen cannot stay up to date on the latest congressional actions. The following are a few tools that will help you stay informed.

1. Word of Mouth. Unfortunately, this resource is unavailable to many of you simply because you are not in DC. This is not because of special interests or some crazy conspiracy. Much like there is movie gossip in Los Angeles that cannot be found elsewhere, there is unique political gossip in Washington that is not duplicated in blogs, magazines, or newspapers. This is why many people here are extremely careful about what he or she says. Reminds me of that old 1940s motto, “Loose Lips Sink Ships.”

2. CQ BillTrack. This is a key tool of every legislative monitor. This service tracks bills as they make their way through the process. You will see which committees the bills have been referred to, hearings about the bill, etc.

3. Thomas. A free service provided by the library of congress, this site allows you to plug in a bill number and find out critical information such as legislation text, cosponsors, summaries, actions taken on the bill, etc. It is not as quick to update as CQ, but it is very helpful if you want to lookup past or current bills.

4. Opencongress.org. Another site that provides similar information to the above mentioned sites. It was founded by the sunlight foundation in order to encourage civic engagement. The site is very intuitive and provides unique bill searches such as most viewed, most in the news, and rushed bills. This free resource site also provides information on Representatives and Senators such as contact info, voting history, campaign contributions, and much more.

As a final thought, I would STRONGLY caution against depending solely on main stream media outlets to keep you informed on legislation. News stations do not cover legislation until the last minute in order to create a sense of urgency and therefore a more exciting story. They also carry political bias. Do your own research so you can form your own opinion and advocate in all stages of the legislative process.

I couldn't have said it better myself...

2011-10-07T12:17:00.000-07:00

In what may seem a "dog bites man" story (i.e., not really earth-shattering news), the Washington Post recently reported that "Few Americans Think Congress is Doing a Good Job." In fact, just 14% do and even they aren't wildly enthusiastic. It's probably more accurate to say that "few Americans think that Congress is not doing an abysmal job."

That said, there is information associated with this article that advocates should know. The truth is that Congress is designed to be completely and totally inefficient. Not much is supposed to get done and, one might argue, legislators are doing an excellent job of that. I was very impressed by a comment in the article from a very wise citizen from Washington state:

“Congress is supposed to be a mess and all screwed up in times of transition, when you have one party in control of one chamber and the other in control of the other. It’s supposed to be a brawl,” said Eric Briggs, 40, a financial adviser from West Richland, Wash., who cheered the GOP’s fighting spirit. “But people just don’t want to hear fighting. They just want everyone to get along and for it to be happy and work out.”

I couldn't have said it better myself. And in an argument for promoting factions in the U.S. Congress, James Madison (one of our founding fathers and a really smart dude) said:

Liberty is to faction, what air is to fire, an ailment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be a less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.

I had to read that a bunch of times to understand what it said, but the gist is: without factions there would be no liberty, just like without air there would be no life. Even though it makes governing more difficult, we need to live with it if we're going to go with this whole "government by the people" thing.

So if you're frustrated with Congress, rest assured that you should be. The only solution is persistence!

Advocacy Tips: The Key to a Productive Relationship is Reliability

2011-09-28T09:00:00.000-07:00

I don’t know about you, but I’ve been experiencing some déjà vu lately. A potential government shut down, inability to compromise on Continuing Resolutions, poorly-timed congressional recesses-- I get this weird feeling, almost as if this has all happened before..

But seriously, Congress is at it again. Fiscal Year 2012 begins on October 1^st (just three whole days from now), and after weeks of negotiations, rejections, and lots of bickering over disaster aid funding, Congress is finally coming close to a solution: a Continuing Resolution to fund the government through October 4^th (just six whole days from now). Now they’ll be able to squeeze in a few more days of that good ol’ bipartisan rancor!

These back and forth, down-to-the-last-minute shenanigans (yes, I just said shenanigans) have become the catalyst for a national conversation about how reliable government actually is (not that people weren’t wondering that already). However, while there are understandably a ton of frustrated citizens out there, we can’t ignore the fact that on occasion Congress does pull through and get things done. How do legislators pull this off with so much on their plate? It all comes back to that same idea of reliability. Lawmakers rely heavily on their staff and colleagues for information and guidance on every single issue, and without this support it would be almost impossible for them to make educated decisions (go ahead and insert your own joke here, I know you want to).

Everyone needs a little help when it comes to getting things done, so if legislators are relying on their staff, who is the staff relying on? That would be you, advocates. Each staffer may have less issue areas they need to be knowledgeable about compared to the Member, but they are also expected to be complete and total experts. That means knowing all sides of the issue, having the most up-to-date facts, and most importantly, understanding how their issue areas affect the district they work for. This is where you become an invaluable source of information for them, because you can offer them two things they couldn’t get otherwise: your specific expertise and your local story. Staffers truly want to know all sides of their issue, and that includes your side, the side they might not have seen in their day-to-day research. Combine that with your first-hand experience of how that issue affects your district, and suddenly you have become a resource that staffer can rely on. Once you have built this trust, you can bet that when your Member requires information about that issue for some upcoming piece of legislation, that designated staffer is going to utilize anything relevant you provided them with.

Here are the three steps to becoming a trustworthy and effective resource for your Member of Congress:

1) Identify your target. Whether you’re sending a letter, requesting a teleconference or setting up an in-person meeting, it’s important to make sure you are meeting with the right staffer. It is almost pointless to meet with a staff member that does not handle your specific issue. If I handle transportation and you’re coming in to talk about health care, everything you say to me is most likely going in one ear and out the other. I have enough to worry about. And those materials you left for me? Probably going in the trash.

2) Provide quality information. Think about strategy when deciding what information you should and shouldn’t provide to a staffer. You don’t want to just give them general facts they already know, but you also don’t want to provide them with a novel including every last little detail you have at your disposal. Decide what is most germane to what you would like accomplished legislatively, and then draw from the facts and experience that is directly relevant to that.

3) Keep the lines of communication open. If you want to build a relationship of trust and reliability with a staffer, don’t just speak with them once and consider your job done. Following up with new information shows them that you are always there as a resource. You shouldn’t constantly bombard them, just use your best judgment and reach out when necessary.

Ethics Gone Wild?

2011-09-20T09:53:00.000-07:00

I love ethics. Ethics are good. We should all have them, especially in Washington, D.C.

At the same time, it's important to note that ethics are really, really hard to establish by rule or legislation. Codes are useful. Outlines are useful. Even "guidelines" (like the Pirate code) are useful. But when we start trying to control everyone's actions down to the minute there are some unintended consequences. Here are some examples:

The Toothpick Rule: No member of Congress or staff person may accept a "meal" from a lobbyist. The intent was to stop all those three-martini lunches we hear so much about (BTW, I've been in DC for 24 years and no one has taken me to a three-martini lunch. What am I doing wrong?). However, have you tried to define a "meal?" Turns out it's not as easy as you think. Is it sitting down? Is it a reception? Does it have to include alcohol? Does breakfast count (first meal of the day?). The result of seeking to clarify this is that members of Congress and their staff can attend an event where there might be food and lobbyists ONLY if there are no chairs in the room (so they can't sit down) and ONLY if the food itself can fit on a toothpick. Sure, you can eat as many toothpicked items as you want -- just don't sit.
The "No Awards in the Wrong Room" Rule: One of my colleagues just told me about this one. We all know that organizations like to recognize members of Congress who have been particularly helpful on an issue. For example, both the American Library Association and the Humane Society of the United States -- not exactly the most "well-heeled" special interests -- give "legislator of the year" awards. However, under this rule they cannot give the legislator a physical token of the award (plaque, etc.) if that member of Congress is the one who requested the room that the award event will be held in. Bear in mind that the only way to get rooms on the hill is through a Congressional office. Now, you can hand the legislator the award in another room. Or in the hallway. Or in the bathroom. Just not in THAT particular room. Huh? Is there a concern that we're trading room space for recognition? Seems odd.

I'm not suggesting that ethics are not sorely needed in Washington, D.C. I'm even a fan of Congressional codes of conduct (see the example for the House at: http://oce.house.gov/code-of-official-conduct.html -- in fact, I'll bet many Americans don't even know it exists!) I certainly can't be an apologist for the many crazy things that happen in D.C. But is this REALLY what we want legislators to be spending time on? Whether a certain food will fit on a toothpick? Or which room they accept a plaque in? For me the answer is no. What do you think?

Happy Constitution Day!

2011-09-15T18:30:00.000-07:00

As I'm sure everyone knows, Saturday,September 17th is Constitution Day, although this year it's being observed on Friday September 16th, so go ahead and leave the office early in celebration! Personally, I'm all for making it a federal holiday, but I'm not getting a great deal of traction for this idea.

Maybe that's because some of the provisions of the Constitution seem a little, ummm, questionable. Seriously, what on earth were the founding fathers thinking when they said things like "the Congress shall have the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States?" Seems like perhaps we got a little carried away on that one.

That said, we certainly can't agree on whether changing the Constitution, for example with a balanced budget amendment, is a good or bad idea.We all have our own opinions. But in a way that's the whole point, right? We can argue publicly about what the Constitution means and what the founding fathers thought and what we -- as in "we the people" -- should do in terms of changing it. That's a LOT to celebrate.

And perhaps most important, September 17th is ALSO International Talk Like a Pirate Day. Coincidence? I think not. In honor of the confluence of these events, I'm offering for you a tranlation of the preamble to the Constitution into piratize -- and here it is:

The pirate speaks,"We t' People o' t' United States, in Order t' form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, inaye domestic Tranquility,provide for t' common defence, promote t' general Welfare, and secure t' Blessin's o' Liberty t' ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for t' United States o' America."

If you want to translate more things (like the First Amendment, which protects our right to Piratize), go to http://www.talklikeapirate.com/translator.html. Oh, yeah, and the Constitution -- check it out at:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.htm

Do Social Media Campaigns Really Work? We Think So (and we know best)!

2011-09-13T06:43:00.000-07:00

There was an interesting article in the Washington Post Style section this past weekend about a woman who started an online petition for JC Penney to retract a T-Shirt from its stores which read: “I’m too pretty to do my homework, so my brother has to do it for me.” Between the 1,600 signatures she collected by putting her campaign on Change.org and the negative comments JC Penney was receiving on Facebook and product reviews, the T-Shirt was pulled from their stores within 13 hours of the petition’s birth.

This article is amusing, yes, but it is also very telling about the profound effect a social media campaign can have on a grassroots advocacy effort. It’s easy to get discouraged and think that the time and energy you put into your social media effort just ends up as white noise somewhere in the vast expanses of cyber space. Also, I would be lying if I claimed that every grassroots advocacy issue with a social media presence is successful within 13 hours (or at all for that matter). That said, what this article shows us is that a well-organized, well thought out campaign with a strong message can be extremely effective not only for building a foundation of supporters but for getting your message heard by the people you want to hear it. Your cause may not have an attention-grabbing, insulting T-Shirt to get people fired up, but if you can find a creative way to appeal to your audience, your advocacy base will only grow. Better yet, there is a serious possibility that you will accomplish something.

The Two Party System and What It Means for your Advocacy

2011-09-12T13:03:00.000-07:00

Lately, I have heard a lot of chatter about the impact our two party system has on governance. The common accusation is that the political parties’ maneuvers and rhetoric has left the government incapacitated. In response, the majority of the American public has begun to identify themselves as independents. The words liberal and conservative, Republican and Democrat have become dirty to the rest of the country. The Republican presidential debate and President Obama's speech last week are only further fueling the public's frustration. There is an emergence of centrist groups, No Labels and Americans Elect, seeking to challenge partisanship and our two party system.

Interestingly, this is not a new issue. When President George Washington retired from the presidency in 1796, His farewell address insightfully discusses the issues from political parties that are still applicable today.

“All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.”

I can write a book about the pros and cons of the two party system and partisanship, if really interested read this article about possible reformers to help the system, but let’s discuss how you can overcome the challenges posed in our system and effectively advocate for your issue.

1. DO NOT BE DISCOURAGED. The system is not perfect, but many nonpartisan citizens have successfully advocated for their issue.
2. Use the power of Constituency. Members have gone against party marching orders in the past. Most of the time it is because the majority of the people living in their district were in favor of the option that was against the greater party’s interests.
3. Persistence is key. During my time on the Hill and on the campaign trail, persistence was always the name of the game. The people who successfully got representatives to change their position were the most persistent in their emails, letters, and meetings.
4. Find like-minded individuals. There is power in numbers. Find people in your local community and state who also believe the issue you are advocating for. A persistent group will be more effective than a persistent individual
5. Lastly, gain support from larger groups to endorse your issue. These groups include trade associations, nonprofits, and local community organizations. You should target groups without official party affiliation and/or have groups from both sides of the aisle.

*** Check us out on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and YouTube

The White House Petition Site -- Useful? Or Useless?

2011-09-06T15:06:00.000-07:00

Many of you have probably heard that the Obama Administration is launching what's being called a "petition site." The idea is to have a place where people can directly petition the federal government -- you know, like it says in the First Amendment. If you can gather enough support, the White House will review your petition and send you an official response.

I'm all for advocating in any way, shape or form and, hey, if you have a big enough cause I say go for it. Such a site may help raise the profile of your issue in a new way.

But if you're one of the thousands of advocacy groups around the country focused on a somewhat niche set of issues that are unlikely to garner hundreds of thousands of supporters, I really don't think this site is a good use of your time. Why? Two main reasons:

First of all, in many cases a federal agency can't solve your problem. Unless you're talking about a regulation (i.e., the implementation of a law passed by Congress), one likely response you'll get from the White House is "hey, interesting idea, but we can't do anything about it. Congress needs to pass a law to allow that to happen." In some cases an agency may have some leeway, but for the most part the authority of the executive branch rests in its implementation powers, not in changing policy.

But second, and more important, effective advocacy is all about telling a personal story that relates back to a policy issue. To be a truly engaged citizen -- a true participant in the "we the people" philosophy -- you'll need to think carefully and wholeheartedly about how what government does impacts you directly. Once you're able to connect that personal story back to government action you'll be far more likely to gain the attention of policy makers of all types and from all sides of the aisle. A "yeah, me too" kind of signature on a petition just won't get you there.

So kudos to the Obama Administration for taking some steps to better listen to citizens. However, if you're a citizen who wants to move beyond being heard to to eventually be agreed with (our overall goal, right?), you'll need to likewise move beyond petitions and toward active, effective engagement.

The Seven Deadly Sins of Lobby Days

2011-09-06T10:42:00.000-07:00

Congress is back in session, and so are Lobby Days! Here is an article Stephanie Vance wrote offering the seven "don'ts" to keep in mind for your Capitol Hill day:

Although I am known by the somewhat spiritual title of "Advocacy Guru," I must admit that I'm not really of any particular religious ilk (although many of my closest friends belong to some of the world's finest religions). Normally I wouldn't really notice the start of the Lenten season, but in February, my colleagues and I happened to be having a, umm, "staff meeting" at a local watering hole. There we saw a number of people with the mark of the cross on their foreheads in honor of Ash Wednesday.

OK, yes, it seemed a bit odd that the first thing our fellow customers did after being absolved of all their sins was head out to happy hour. But, perhaps that's how it's done. Like I said, I'm not a religious expert. Nevertheless, events like this always get me thinking about sins (my own and those of others), so I’ve compiled the seven deadly sins of lobby days. Learn from our trials by not committing any of the following sins yourself:
Sin #1 -- Non-Constituency: When requesting a meeting, whether with the member or a staff person, the first question you will be asked is "are you from the district or state?" Elected officials and their staff are there to represent a discreet group of people. You absolutely MUST demonstrate your relevance to that discreet group of people or they won't meet with you. Our meeting request letters always include the city of constituent asking for the meeting - and some offices will ask for a full street address just to be sure!

Sin #2 - Non-Written Requests: OK, I lied. Actually the first thing you will be asked by the usually incredibly young person who answers the phone is "have you sent your request in writing?" Don't even bother to call before you have either faxed in the request (go to www.congess.org to look up fax numbers) or e-mailed it through the Congressman's website (accessible through www.house.gov and www.senate.gov)

Sin #3 - Assumption: As Robert Siegel once asked me when I worked at NPR "do you know the etymology of the word "assume?" My response was "who uses a word like 'etymology'?" Anyway, if you don't want to make a donkey's behind of yourself, never assume that your faxed or e-mailed request actually got to the office or that the scheduler will just magically get back to you. With hundreds of requests to go through a day, things get lost. Often. Be sure to follow-up (and be very polite - they don't lose things on purpose, they're just overwhelmed).

Sin #4 - Member-itis: Never, ever insist that you will meet only with the member instead of a staff person. First of all, nine times out of ten you won't get a meeting. Members of Congress have unimaginable demands on their time and, believe it or not, you are not the only constituent in town at a given time. If you are offered a meeting with a staff person, that's a good thing! They often have more time to get to know you and your issues. All you'll probably get with the member is a "grip and grin," and the vague feeling that your issues weren't really covered.

Sin #5 - Inflexibility: This is particularly a problem when it's combined with high expectations. Too many groups offer a very small meeting window and then are irritated when staff or members are not available in the 12:00pm to 2:00pm time slot they've designated for meetings. Try to have an entire day available - and ask participants in your lobby day to bring a good book.

Sin #6 - Overzealousness: If you have multiple people coming from one district or state, do everything you can to coordinate before requesting meetings. In too many cases, each individual will request their own meeting. By the fifth meeting on the same topic, the staff are generally pretty cranky. They will thank you for your consideration of their time if you coordinate well.

Sin #7 - Abandonment: Once you've had a meeting in Washington, DC or your state capitol, your advocacy for the year isn't finished. In fact, it's just started. In most cases you will need to work with the office on an ongoing basis to help them truly understand your issues and the impact of certain policy actions on their constituents. After your meeting, don't abandon your elected officials and their staff - embrace them (although not literally. Some of them aren't huggers).

In eschewing these sins you will leave a better, fuller, happier advocacy-related life. Believe me, as the founder of the cult of effective advocacy I've had plenty of experience in this area. Please feel free to send your worldly possessions my way.

Meeting Your Legislator’s Staff on a Lobby Day

2011-08-24T12:39:00.000-07:00

During your organization’s lobby day, some of your legislators will be unavailable and you will meet with their staffers instead. This may seem inconsiderate or a waste of time, but these meetings are just as important as meeting directly with your legislator. Let’s take a look at what a Congressional staff is like and what you can do to ensure that you have an impactful meeting.

In the House of Representatives, a Congressman’s DC office staff is typically 10-13 people, give or take an intern. When I have spoken with past lobby day participants, most are surprised that majority of their Congressman’s staff are young professionals. Yes, it is true that Congressional staffers are young with the average age range of 22-26 years old. The most notable exceptions are the chief of staff and legislative director, the two highest positions in the office after the Congressman. These positions are generally filled with middle aged professionals with a spouse, kids, mortgage, etc.

So why is the legislature staffed by college fresh twenty somethings? Well ,these staffers are often underpaid, starting salary for entry level position is around 25k a year and I have heard of salaries as low as 22k a year. DC is an expensive city and it is near impossible to support a family on this salary. Staffers are also over worked, in session staffers may work as much as 60-80 hours a week. Lastly, there is virtually no job security. All the federal employee laws that are in place in other departments do not exist on the Hill. Staffers can be fired at will and some Congressional members have a reputation for cycling staffers every 6-12 months. In addition, the staffers’ jobs are in danger every two years with elections. If the member is voted out, the staffer loses his or her job as well.

On the Senate side, the staff tends to be much larger. Depending on the Senator’s state size, position in leadership, and committee assignment, staff can range from 30-50 people. Many of these staffers tend to be young as well, but there are vastly more graduate degree holders working on the Senate side. There is slightly more job security for Senate staffers because elections only occur every six years, but Senators can also fire their staffers at will. The pay is also slightly better, but not enough to really make a distinction. The Senate staffers’ working hours are also identical to House staffers.

Now that you have some background on congressional staffers, let’s talk about what to expect during your meeting. The Congressional staffer is always very courteous during the meeting. The staffer will also pay close attention to your concerns, regardless of whether or not their boss agrees with your position. The staffer will be especially interested in your concerns if you are a constituent. A common error I find among lobby day participants is to not take the meeting with the young staffer seriously. This is a big mistake. Although young, I promise that the staffer is extremely well versed in the issues you wish to discuss. They eat, sleep, breath, swim, text, tweet, message, read, and everything else with the issues. Additionally, the legislator will turn to the appropriate staffer, regardless of age, for advice during crucial decisions and votes. It is imperative that you have a good meeting and leave a strong impression on the staffer as he or she will advise the member on that issue.

As Kaytee mentioned in an earlier blog post, the young staffers are generation Y-ers who are known for being technologically gifted and furious multitaskers. Be sure to be extra engaging in your meeting and include online resources such as QR codes on your business cards, social media channels, and digital copies of literature. Meetings with Congressional staffers are 15 minutes max. Ensure that you get the most out of your meeting by preparing your concerns into a concise set of points. I suggest doing some role play with a friend and/or practicing in front of the mirror the night before.

If your organization is interested in learning more about specific strategies while meeting with a legislator or his staff, I would suggest booking an Advocacy training specialist, such as the Advocacy Guru, to speak to your members before the lobby day. Happy Advocating!

***Please Visit our Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and LinkedIn Pages!

Advocacy Tips: You Cannot Persuade if You Don't Persist!

2011-08-23T08:49:00.000-07:00

Harassment is a large portion of my job when I schedule congressional meetings for a Lobby Day. Persistence is the more accurate word, but I used the word harassment because that’s what it feels like I’m doing when I call the same office three times in one day, begging to speak with someone because the Lobby Day is tomorrow and we still don’t have a meeting scheduled. It can be uncomfortable to feel like you are bugging someone. And on top of that, I am also frustrated that no one is getting back to me. I wonder why they won’t just respond so that I don’t have to harass them anymore.

Why am I telling you this aside from the fact that I sometimes need to vent? Because many people experience these same sentiments when they are advocating their Members of Congress. They only call or email their Members once about a particular issue, and choose not to follow up because they don’t want to annoy the congressional office. They give up because they reached out once or twice and never heard anything back. I can relate, but my biggest piece of advice to you is to let go of your instinct to pull away. If you stop asking, you will never get what you want. I may have to make 20 phone calls to get that meeting scheduled, but I get it. When an issue that is important to you is down to the wire, don’t feel bad about contacting your congressional office multiple times. Be tactful (don’t call every five minutes), but keep the momentum going. The truth is they want to hear from their constituents. They want to know something is so important to you that you feel the need to call, email, and call again. This is precisely why I have stopped feeling guilty for calling an office three times in one day, because I know at the end of the day they want to meet with their constituents. Finally, don’t be discouraged when they don’t get back to you- it doesn’t mean they aren’t listening. Plus, I can almost guarantee that if you stay persistent you will eventually get a response. Now whether you get the response you want.. is something we’ll tackle another day.

Advocacy Lessons From Our Furry Friends

2011-08-20T09:44:00.000-07:00

If you've known me for, say, five minutes, you'll know that I'm just a little enthusiastic about dogs. Some would say obsessed but I think they're being unreasonable. That's why I was really touched by this CNN article about a dog in Afghanistan named Giselle who has befriended some U.S. soldiers. In fact, she apparently befriends ALL U.S. soldiers she meets. Some people might have a name for that, but I just think it's sweet.

Her story reminded me of a tip sheet article I wrote many years ago after the demise of our beloved dog Xena Warrior Princess Dog about the advocacy lessons we can learn from the smart dogs in our lives. I won't reprise the whole thing here, but one of the main tips was to make the ask. At the risk of sounding weird by quoting myself, here's what I had to say:

"People don't know what you want unless you ask. Above all things, Xena Warrior Princess Dog excelled at making the ask. Whether she wanted a biscuit, a belly rub or a bite of her dog dad's dinner, Xena asked for it, frequently and without reservation. In fact, every once in a while it bordered on begging. Now I'm not suggesting that advocates resort to begging for what they want, but it is essential that you ask for something specific. Too many people try to "educate" their elected officials on the issues. They put all their time and energy into explaining the tragedy of situation X, while assuming that support for their preferred solution of policy Y would be obvious. It's not. Believe me, Xena never tried to get me to understand the tragedy of a biscuit-less life. She just told me she wanted a biscuit."

If you want to see the whole article, you can view it here (yeah, I know it's weird that it's on someone else's site. Thank goodness SOMEONE saves this things!)

In the years since I explained Xena's outstanding advocacy techniques, I came to recognize the one thing that works every time in effective advocacy, and that is big, melting brown eyes. Xena had them. Our current dog Ozzie has them. Both eventually got to the point where they didn't even have to ask for biscuits. They just got them.

Advocacy Tips: Diversity is Beautiful, so USE IT!

2011-08-16T07:30:00.000-07:00

Unlike the not-so-diversified debt “super committee” (9 of the 12 members are middle-aged white males), the United States is truly a mixture of demographics (old, young, male, female, black, brown, gay, straight; you name it, we’ve got it). From a legislators-eye-view, the prominent demographics in their district or state impress upon relevant issues, community goals, and, most importantly, voting trends. Here at Advocacy Associates we stress the importance of being a constituent and the strength it adds to your voice when communicating with your legislators (you vote for them, and therefore they care). Just as Members of Congress care about what you think as a constituent, they also care about what constituents think as part of a larger demographic within their district (appealing to large groups equals more votes). This is something to take into consideration as you develop your messaging strategy. In addition to discussing how an issue affects you personally as a constituent, paint a picture of how this issue is important to a large number of their constituents by making some observations based on demographics. For example, if you want your Member of Congress to support funding for a health-related program and your district has a large population of senior citizens, frame your messaging to reflect the legislation’s positive impact on the elderly, and vice versa if your district is dominated by younger people. You’ll be impressed at how Member’s (and their staff’s) ears perk up when you mention a demographic that is relevant to their district.

The Congressional August Recess or What The *#@! Are We Supposed To Do Now?

2011-08-15T12:54:00.000-07:00

Here in our nation’s capital, we are at a time when the Representatives and Senators hang up their shoes and leave for their home districts or states. Washington quickly turns into a ghost town as many people in government relations offices take this opportunity to vacation, enjoy extended lunch breaks, and leave early on Friday work days. When speaking with my friends and family back in California, a question I often find myself answering is, “Why do they get an entire month off?! We still need to figure out how to solve this issue, that problem, or the other thing. What the *%#@ are we supposed to do?!” Interestingly, over the weekend there was a letter to the editor in the Washington Post defending the recess (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/recess-doesnt-mean-vacation-for-congress/2011/08/08/gIQA7ZDuBJ_story.html). Whether you feel the August recess is a well-deserved break or not, let me answer this frequently asked question.

I’ll start by addressing the first part of the question, why do they take this month long break? Well, back in the years of horse and buggy, the buildings our legislators worked in had no air conditioning. In August, the humidity in D.C. is so unbearable that it should be outlawed by the Geneva Convention. As a result, the House and Senate would adjourn for the month of August to run home before the big bad humidity kicked in. Also, being a legislator before 1900 was not a full time job. The congressional schedule was only six months long so the legislators could return to their businesses. During the 1960s, the August recess became law because many legislators wished to spend some time with their families. As you can probably imagine (or remember for some of you), the 1960s was a busy time for Congress. For members today, the recess is not a big vacation in the Bahamas or Cancun. The overwhelming majority of our legislators use the recess as an opportunity to return to their districts and reconnect with their constituents.

So now that you have the abridged history lesson, let’s discuss what the August recess environment means for your organization or issue. I would NOT recommend having a lobby day, congressional briefing, or a meeting with congressional staffers in DC. Most of these staffers are out of town or will probably pay little attention during your meeting. Rather than trying to effect legislation, now is the time for your organization to turn its focus to creating a better relationship with the legislator. Connecting with your legislator in his or her home district will have a significant impact on the relationship as it solidifies your organization’s status as a vocal constituent group. Attending town hall meetings, arranging to have the legislator visit your workplace, or a simple meeting with the legislator will be enormously powerful in building a relationship with your Congressperson or Senator. The relationship you build today will be crucial tomorrow when you make your ask during the appropriations process, super committee vote, or the budget drafting.

*** Don’t forget to check us out on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and LinkedIn!

Final 3 Members of Debt "Super Committee" Announced

2011-08-11T12:26:00.000-07:00

Today, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi appointed Rep. Van Hollen (D-MD), Rep. Clyburn (D-SC), and Rep. Becerra (D-CA) to serve on the “super committee” created under the debt ceiling agreement. This rounds out the 12-member bipartisan panel tasked with developing a plan to cut $1.5 trillion from the federal deficit over the next decade. Part of the debt ceiling agreement dictates that automatic cuts across the board on domestic and defense spending will be “triggered” if this committee cannot agree to a plan by Thanksgiving and get it approved by Congress before Christmas (happy holidays to all!)

If this special committee is any reflection of Congress at large then it goes without saying that they have a bumpy road ahead of them. With six republicans who have all gone on the record against any revenue increases and democrats that have strongly resisted cuts to entitlements, this group could easily fall into the same political stalemate we have all been losing sleep over for months (or is that just me?). Here’s hoping they can turn over a new leaf and actually work together on a compromise. Goodness knows I could use the extra beauty sleep.

Here’s the full list of Members on the bipartisan panel:

Rep. Van Hollen (D-MD)

Rep. Clyburn (D-SC)

Rep. Becerra (D-CA)

Rep. Camp (R-MI)

Rep. Upton (R-MI)

Rep. Hensarling (R-TX, co-chair)

Sen. Baucus (D-MT)

Sen. Murray (D-WA, co-chair)

Sen. Kerry (D-MA)

Sen. Portman (R-OH)

Sen. Toomey (R-PA)

Sen. Kyl (R-AZ)

Advocacy Tips: Capturing the Attention of the All-Important Youngster Demographic

2011-08-11T07:37:00.000-07:00

I recently attended a conference about professional speaking, and as I was listening to speakers speak about speaking (confusing, I know), a resounding theme seemed to pop up: it’s time to start appealing to a younger audience, aka the Millennials or Generation Y. To offer an extremely loose and clichéd definition, Millennials are those individuals born between 1980 and now, and they tend to be technologically savvy, media junkies, and a crazy combination of easily-distracted multitaskers (I’m definitely guilty of the last one). When they’re not busy getting distracted by shiny things (guilty again), the truth is these young adults are quickly dominating the market, the workforce, and even politics. So how does anyone trying to sell their message, whether a professional speaker, a grassroots campaign manager, or an advocate meeting with those super-young staffers on the Hill, appeal to their sensibilities? Here are a few thoughts:

Millennials enjoy multiple stimuli. Millennials can watch the news, check their Facebook, play Angry Birds, tweet about playing Angry Birds, and listen to music all at the same time. And while it’s true that everyone has more information flooding their brains from various sources compared to a decade ago, Millennials are generally more active about seeking it out. This inevitably causes them to filter the information they take in (as impressive as it would be, they don’t actually retain every tweet they read). So with these subconscious filtration systems set in place, what ends up standing out? How do you get them to remember you and your message? One of the answers is repetition from multiple platforms. Create a Facebook page, a Twitter account, a YouTube channel, a blog, and interconnect them whenever possible. If you write a blog entry, tweet and post a status update about it. Tweet your Action Alert multiple times throughout the day using slightly different messaging each time. Don’t just give that twenty-something Hill staffer your business card; make sure they have access to all of these additional resources.

QR codes are the next big thing. I’m willing to bet my future puppy on it, and anyone who knows me knows that’s a big deal. Not only are QR codes the next big thing, but they have “Millennial” written all over them (I assume you know I don’t mean that literally). For those of you that aren’t in on this growing fad, QR codes are those funny-looking black and white boxes that you scan with a smartphone app and a website pops up (like magic!). They are free to create on websites like qrcode.kaywa.com and qrstuff.com; simply enter in the website you want to pop up when people scan your QR code, hit go, and BAM, a custom code shows up on the screen. Now just start plastering it on all of your business cards, one-pagers, advertisements (tattoo it on your body, create custom jewelry out of it, shave it on your head..), and you’ll not only share your resources more effectively but you’ll also be super hip.

Be entertaining and engaging. Just because you are in a one-on-one meeting with a young Hill staffer doesn’t mean you have their undivided attention or that they agree with what you are saying. When you’re speaking to a younger audience it becomes more important than ever to find ways to catch and keep their attention, make creative and compelling arguments, and truly engage them with your message. Once you’ve done that, just hand over your QR code-embellished business card and you will be so in.

Congress- Now Available via Smart Phone

2011-08-10T11:56:00.000-07:00

Do you ever find yourself riding home on the Metro, suddenly overwhelmed by the urge to know what bills were introduced in Congress today? Do you get irritable if you don’t have an instantaneous way to find out who represents the 99203 zip code in Congress? If you’re anything like me, and I bet you are, those situations plague you on a nearly daily basis. Fortunately, if you have a Droid or an iPhone, there is an app for that.

Droid owners are in luck; the “Congress” application by Sunlight Labs is by far the best available on any platform. To find it, search in the marketplace for “Congress.” The application allows you to search for members of Congress by name, state, current location and zip code—perfect for enlightening those unenlightened friends who don’t know who represents them in Congress (you’re going to be so popular!). The application also allows you to search bills and laws, and gives details such as who introduced it, current activity and bill text via Thomas.gov. Once you find an interesting bill, you can share the information easily via Facebook, Twitter, text message or email. It also tracks votes in Congress, gives committee member listings for all committee and lists upcoming hearings. And if all of those features weren’t exciting enough, you can also create personalized alerts to be notified of activity for any bill. Now, you have no excuse to be caught off-guard when your local post office is renamed!

The applications available to iPhone users aren’t as comprehensive as the “Congress” application for Droid. Sunlight Labs does have a iPhone version of “Congress”, but it only has House and Senate floor updates, Whip notices (as nerdy as I am, I’m not entirely sure I would ever look at Whip notices), hearing information, and miscellaneous Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports and other governmental documents. The application is fantastic if you want to see how a certain bill was scored by the CBO, but less helpful if you want to know basic information, such as who is the at-large Congressman for Montana (Rep. Denny Rehberg, by the way). If you’re looking for a basic Congressional guide, your best bet is the “Congress 411” application. It allows you to search members by Senate, House and location. But, the bill information and video feed seems to be rather outdated, so proceed with caution.

However, iPhone users win overall with the C-SPAN app, which is currently unavailable on the Droid. And with C-SPAN radio, C-SPAN, C-SPAN2 and C-SPAN3, who needs Congressional directories when you can listen to history in real time?

Hey Nation -- How Are You Doing?

2011-08-08T15:15:00.000-07:00

This is an interesting question for a day when the stock market dropped another 600 points. Note to self: don't open my 401K statements for a year -- just like I did from 2008-2009. The Brookings Institution has an answer and, shockingly, it's "not well." There are some really smart people over there who looked at a variety of factors over the last five quarters to assess the state of the nation in terms of a) the general welfare, b) the common defense and c) the blessings of liberty.

If those words sound familiar they should. They're from the preamble of the Constitution. What I very much like about this report is the connection between the statistics surrounding current events and what we originally set out to do as a country.

Yeah, I'm not going to lie. According to these figures the news is not, ummm, great. But at least we know that if we're all depressed about the state of the nation, there's scientific evidence to back us up.

And, of course, I would not be the Advocacy Guru if I did not point out that there's something YOU can do about it! Remember that another part of the Constitution (first amendment, one of my favorites) secures to us the freedom of speech. So speak! Find out who your legislators are at http://www.congress.org/, attend their townhall meetings this August, get on their Facebook pages, sign up for their Twitter feeds and politely, but firmly, share your views.

The Social Congress

2011-08-02T09:21:00.000-07:00

All jokes about Anthony Weiner aside, a recent report from the Congressional Management Foundation (http://www.congressfoundation.org/) finds that "most members of Congress have thoroughly integrated social media in to their communications operations, and are using new media tools to gauge public opinion, communicate with constituents and reach new people."

The findings on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube were particularly interesting, with 64% of responding offices finding Facebook to be a somewhat or very useful tool for understanding constituent's views, while only 34% see YouTube as such.

Yet staff seem to realize that YouTube is the number two search engine after Google (really, it's true). A whopping 72% think that YouTube is an important mechanism for communicating their member's view. Notice the difference: 34% see YouTube as useful for receiving input while 72% see YouTube as useful for delivering messages. I'm not sure why that is, but it tells me we can be a lot more effective in using this tools to get advocacy messages across to members of Congress.

In addition, I'm curious about how the rise of social media will impact this little thing we call "constituency." When dealing with plain, old snail mail addresses, legislators and staff know whether the person they are communicating with is a constituent. Online, it's much more difficult. One of the first rules of advocacy is to be sure you can demonstrate why you're relevant to your audience -- and for Congress that means being a constituent. But will social media change this basic tenant of representative democracy? I'm not sure, but I'll be paying attention, I promise

Other findings suggest that many staff are concerned that their offices do not spend enough time on social media, with younger staffers find social media far more important to the operations than older staff do. This tells me that the use of social media will only rise as older staff retire and newer staff, with their social savvy, come to Capitol Hill.

What can we take away from this? Apparently the Internet is here to stay and we avoid it at our peril. Even if your demographic is older and your first thought is "well, my members won't use social media"," remember that your ultimate audience, legislators and their staff, do.

Are We Going to Hand Over the Pink Slip on the United States?

2011-07-26T11:58:00.000-07:00

People sometimes see me as an apologist for Congressional inaction. I tend to go on and on about how the founding fathers actually WANTED to structure a government that can't really get anything done except in times of great distress (think Roosevelt's New Deal, for example.)

I've asked people to recognize that the vehement differences between members of Congress who represent very rural Alabama versus those who represent urban New York, as examples, will sometimes put the U.S. Congress in a giant game of "chicken" as legislators do their best to represent their constituents' views.

The responsible way out of this game is through compromise. After a variety of shenanigans we usually get out of it, but I'm not so sure about that this time.

It seems to me we have two options:

• Option One: Refuse to compromise, let the government default, see our credit rating decline and, eventually, be unable to pay our bills because no one will give us any money. Umm, not optimal. If we're worried about spending cuts and/or revenue increases now, we're sure not going to like the depth and breadth of them when we go bankrupt.
• Option Two: Agree to compromise on spending cuts that are less dramatic and revenue increases that are manageable, see our credit rating decline slightly (probably can't avoid it now) and recognize that in taking these steps now we'll have more control over what happens to us in the future.

Yes, I know that some members of Congress ran on a commitment to balance the budget immediately if not sooner. Frankly, this was never possible. Governing is very different from campaigning and it is folly for citizens and elected officials to think differently.

Next time a politician tells you "I won't raise taxes and I'll balance the budget" I suggest you point out that those responsible for protecting the long term interests of the United States may need to compromise -- and ask them what their plan is for building bridges, not burning them.

In fact, I encourage you to deliver this message now which, given the state of the Capitol switchboards, it appears thousands are already doing. You can figure out who your legislators are at www.congress.org, e-mail them through that site or call the Capitol at (202) 224-3121.

Unless we want to give someone the pink slip on the United States, we've got to tell the leadership on both sides of the aisle to stop letting their fringe hold the rest of us hostage in this debate.

If we think government is broken, It's time for the American public to fix it by being the grown ups in this situation. Call or write your legislator today and let them know compromise is OK and even expected. Apparently, only we can solve this problem.

Nero Fiddles While Rome Burns: Or, What the HECK is Going on in DC?

2011-07-22T08:26:00.000-07:00

Doesn't it seem like the heat wave here in Washington, DC may be seeping into the brains of our elected officials? I'm guessing that the real problem here is that people are suffering from heat exhaustion. I know I'm exhausted just hearing about it!

While Washington literally burns in 110 degree heat, you've probably heard that we have a little debt ceiling situation here in Washington, DC and that Republicans and Democrats are in just a bit of a stand-off. Some want dramatic cuts in discretionary programs. Some want tax increaes. Some don't. No one wants to make significant changes to Social Security or Medicare. Every wants their specific perspective to be the ONLY one adopted.

For example, earlier today we learned that the Senate rejected the House proposal for "cut, cap, balance" and then left for the weekend. For the uninitiated, "cut, cap, balance" is a proposal to require Congress to dramatically cut and cap spending and then proposed an amendment to the Constitution that would require a balanced budget.

I'm not a fan of cut, cap, balance for a variety of reasons (many of which are outlined in this CNN Money report), but the main thing that bugs me is that all the votes on it are a complete waste of time. The House shouldn't have passed it and the Senate shouldn't have taken it up (hey, if they did nothing it wouldn't have become law anyway!) It was obviously a non-starter for a variety of reasons, one of which is the balanced budget amendment.

Last time I checked, it takes a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate (which would have been totally impossible, I might note) to even PROPOSE a constitutional amendment to the states and then three-fourths of the states must agree. People have been trying to do that on the budget issue since the Constitution was ratified. Absolutely nothing immediately substantive would come out of a balanced budget vote, so clearly the idea here wasn't to get something done. It was to make a statement. I don't think we have time for "statements" now. I think we need to get this thing taken care of.

One of the main problems, though, behind why members of Congress have no stomach for reducing spending is that the American people don't have the stomach for reducing spending, particularly on the big ticket items. There's a lot of talk about eliminating funding for a variety of programs that will have absolutely NO impact on the overall budget (public broadcasting, planned parenthood and the like). Taken all together, the two items mentioned here represent less than one one-hundredth of one percent of the budget.

We should be focusing on things that can really get us out of this situation even if, yes, that means raising taxes or messing with Social Security and Medicare. There, I said it. Citizens should tell their members of Congress that we should stop fiddling while Rome burns and get on with it!

Work on FY 12 Spending Bills Moves Slowly as Congress Tackles Debt Limit before Deadline

2011-07-19T13:31:00.000-07:00

The federal government is on track to reach the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling two weeks from today. The looming August 2 deadline means that most other issues on Capitol Hill are taking a backseat. Even the Fiscal Year 2012 appropriations process is partly on hold as everyone waits to see what deal congressional leaders will make to avoid the projected fallout of defaulting on federal debt. The current fiscal year will end September 30th, but this deadline is not always met by Congress. (Remember the near shutdown before a budget deal was reached in April for the current fiscal year? That was more than 6 months late.)

To date, only five of the twelve annual appropriations bills have been approved by the House and only one has been formally taken up by the Senate. Three bills—dealing with transportation and housing; the State Department and foreign aid; and labor, health and education spending—have not been introduced at all. What these three bills have in common is the likelihood of being targets for major reductions in funding if spending cuts are part of the debt deal.

Negotiations on a variety of proposals for handling our nation’s debt and future budgets are expected to continue right up until the August 2 deadline. Only after a short- or long-term compromise is reached, will we see final agreements on spending for FY 12. In the meantime, if you are confused about the deficit and what it means in terms of national spending, check out Five truths about the deficit and national debt.

Spring Lobby Days: The Art of Preparation

2011-07-15T07:21:00.000-07:00

I’m sure you have heard the old saying “The early bird catches the worm.” Well, this is especially true when it comes to planning your Advocacy Day on Capitol Hill. Spring is an extremely popular time for groups to come lobby their Members of Congress, and it’s not just because D.C. is beautiful in the spring (although that certainly doesn’t hurt). Aside from the lure of our famous cherry blossoms, springtime is when Congress begins debating budget resolutions for the following Fiscal Year (in theory anyway), and there are often new Members of Congress to start building relationships with. So while it may seem like March and April are far off in the distance, remember that those who plan in advance (and trust me, there is plenty to do) usually have the most success with their Lobby Day (i.e. catch the proverbial worm).

So what can you do to start preparing for your next Lobby Day now? I thought you’d never ask, but since you have here are 4!

Establish a date. The sooner you have dates, the sooner you can work logistics. You might want to run potential dates by your advocates and see what feedback you get in terms of availability. When are the best times to go? It’s impossible to predict the legislative calendar for next year because they don’t make it this far in advance, but be sure to avoid Mondays, Fridays, and weeks with federal holidays if you want to maximize meetings with actual Members of Congress. You might also look at this year’s Congressional calendar (available for the Senate and House) to get a sense of what might happen next year – although this can ALWAYS change!

Identify your policy issues. It’s never too early to start thinking about your approach for future Lobby Days. Here are some things to consider in the coming months. The appropriations process for Fiscal Year 2012 is currently underway. What happened/is happening to the programs you care about? What are your goals for Fiscal Year 2013 appropriations? What feedback did you get from your most recent Lobby Day? What seemed to work well in meetings, and what didn’t? How should you alter your strategy next time to be more effective? What were your legislative “asks” during your last Lobby Day? Did any Members of Congress follow through? Do you want to keep the same “asks” or alter them? Has any new legislation been introduced that is important to your members? What has your organization accomplished since your last Lobby Day, and would you want to highlight them in your meetings?

Identify your "advocacy footprint." While it’s important to build relationships with as many Members of Congress as you can, to paraphrase George Orwell, some Members of Congress are more equal than others when it comes to your specific policy issues. Since the most effective meetings are usually based off of constituency (legislators are always a little nicer to the people who vote in their district), one very important strategic move is to identify your biggest congressional targets and push for advocates living in their districts to participate in your Lobby Day. It may be helpful to see where your participants were from in previous Lobby Days. You can also find a person’s district by entering their zip code into http://www.congress.org/.
Think logistics. Start thinking about what group size you expect for next year (how many people attended last year?), how you are handling your registration process, and where you will be bunkered up in D.C. (maybe you want a closer hotel this year). Get feedback from your participants on these issues.

Get your advocactes fired up early. Keeping advocates actively engaged year-round is almost as difficult as keeping your Members of Congress actively engaged year-round. If you are finding that your members are starting to lose their fresh-off-a-Lobby-Day buzz, start getting them excited about next year’s event. Host a webinar about planning for next year or about the importance of following up after a Lobby Day. Plan a policy call to keep your members in the loop about what’s going on in Congress. And if that doesn’t work, just send out fliers for D.C.’s 2012 Cherry Blossom Festival and let them come to you.

Helping Advocates Help Themselves

2011-07-12T14:44:00.000-07:00

In a dream world, all citizens are excited and enthusiastic about communicating with legislators. They join interest groups to be updated on all the latest and greatest policy information and use every tool at their disposal to call, write, visit and send carrier pigeons to members of Congress or the state legislature.

While this is certainly the case with some groups, others struggle with getting their members to engage. There’s often a disconnect between what members would like to see happen from a policy perspective in Washington, DC and their understanding of the critical role they play in achieving those goals.

So if you’re leading an advocacy effort, how do you address this disconnect? In the next series of blog posts we’ll look at five barriers, specifically:

I don’t have time to advocate

My voice won’t make a difference

Isn’t advocacy what we pay our lobbyists for?

It seems like we’re always advocating and never getting anywhere

I don’t agree with the organization’s policy position

If your grassroots are wilting as a result of any of these issues, stay tuned! For now we’ll look at the first, “I don’t have time to advocate.”

Far and away, this is what I hear the most. If you’re working with individuals who also have lives away from politics (generally everyone outside Washington, DC), they may feel that they don’t have a lot of extra time to devote to advocacy.

One solution is to identify a few quick, easy and meaningful activities to get them started. These might include putting together a short pledge for them to print out and sign as a reminder of their commitment, asking them to join your advocacy network and agree to take action through that network, providing information and links for them to post on social media sites or creating a petition for them to sponsor while encouraging others to do so as well.

Now, don’t get me wrong. These are not “busy work” activities. We’re all too busy for busy work. What you’re really doing is helping activists recognize the ways in which advocacy can be integrated into their everyday lives. Sometimes they want to be active but don't know what to do. As an advocate leader, you can follow-up directly with those who have taken that small action to help them with more. Once they’ve done one thing, they’re more likely to find time to do another.

In short, when you learned to swim (if you did) did someone throw you into the deep end and expect you to succeed? Well, come to think of it, I have heard of that strategy. I’ve just never been a fan. I prefer taking a few steps at a time to build expertise and confidence – and only then being thrown into the deep end.

Back to Basics: Old-Fashioned, But Very Effective, Approaches to Advocacy

2011-07-08T12:32:00.000-07:00

When faced with the daunting task of creating a strong grass roots campaign, I found that many people are unsure of where to start. The task seems more overwhelming when looking at large grassroots campaigns implemented by groups such as the AARP or the Tea Party activists.

Many of my fellow generation y-ers often start with a Facebook page and invite all their friends, who in turn invite all their friends to join the group. I am a strong believer that the social media tools that exist today are game changers in contemporary politics, i.e. Arab Spring Revolutions. Unfortunately, a large Facebook group, frequent tweets, and entertaining YouTube videos aren’t enough to mobilize the effort you need to be successful in your campaign to influence legislators. So in addition to the new technologies that are available, let’s turn to some classic advocacy strategies that we have refined based on our work with our clients.

1. Information Gathering- Perhaps the foundation of any campaign. It’s not enough to get a large quantity or the obvious, but you need to get the RIGHT information. This information should enlighten what the situation is across groups, organizations, and activists involved in the process. Questions may include: frequency of outreach to legislators or public, who has done outreach, what methods have been used in the outreach, and what research has been done (such as looking at FEC reports).

2. Organization- After deciding what information needs to be gathered, the organization of that data is the next step. Being one of the young guns at Advocacy Associates, I prefer to use online contact forms to complete this. Websites such as Wufoo.com will allow you to build a form that has the questions needed to capture the information that you will synthesize later either into charts, graphs, or statistics. Remember: “The secret of all victory lies in the organization of the non-obvious.” -Marcus Aurelius

3. Old-Fashioned Phone Calls – Even with all the tools at our disposal to communicate with others, sometimes a phone call is the best way to reach out. I found this to be true working on a political campaign as well as with our clients. First, it’s much more difficult to blow someone off on a phone call vs. an email, Facebook message, or general tweet. Also, believe it or not, people appreciate the gesture of making a personal phone call to reach out. Who doesn’t like to feel special enough for a phone call? A corollary to this, ALWAYS return a phone call and ALWAYS call when you schedule a call. Not doing either will convey a message that you are either lazy or unreliable.

Apply these three strategies in the beginning of your campaign and I promise that you will have the solid foundation needed to have a strong influence over legislation.

***For more tips and strategies, follow Advocacy Associates on
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
LinkedIn

Conventioneers Everywhere!

2011-07-06T10:59:00.000-07:00

The Washington Post had a fun and "tongue in cheek" article recently about conventioneers in Washington, DC. Basically, it outlined how you can know who's-who when those large groups come to town -- and how to tell if you're a Washingtonian. You can read it at http://tinyurl.com/6fj2c6l. Turns out, I'm not a Washingtonian, but I've been here for only 22 years, so that makes sense.

Kidding aside, it's important to remember that many of those groups are coming to DC to talk to their elected officials and their staff. These meetings can be really effective or, well, not so much. If you're going to come to Washington, DC you'll want to be sure you're prepared for the DC environment. Frankly, it's crowded, chaotic and, in the summer months, unbearable hot in Washington, DC. So in addition to packing the shorts and flip flops, be sure to be prepared for meetings on Capitol Hill (including, but not limited to, don't wear your flip flops).

Advocates can get ready by:

Learning a little about the legislators you'll be meeting with (try the House and Senate sites at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov). Review their positions on your issues (if applicable) as well as their overall political perspective. In addition, it's always good to know what bills they've introduced, which you can find at www.congress.gov

Developing your personal story, with an understanding particularly of how it connects to the policy issues that will be discussed. For example, patient advocacy group advocates should understand how to connect requests for more funding and/or better coverage to their own personal experience.

Reviewing some of the logistics before coming to Washington, DC (see metro maps at www.wmata.com and Capitol Campus maps at www.aoc.gov). Having these facts down will reduce the stress associated with navigating an unfamiliar city and allow advocates to focus more on their messages.

As an advocate coming to Washington, DC you'll want to not only be heard, but to be agreed with as well, right? So take some of these steps before you come and you'll be a "Washingtonian" in no time. Oh, and don't stand to the left on the escalators.

Leadership and Congress (or Lack Thereof)

2011-06-29T11:12:00.000-07:00

On June 27, the Post published a piece from former Senator Tom Daschle regarding the dirty leadership of Congress. You can read more about it at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-leadership/washingtons-leadership-failure-on-the-debt-ceiling/2011/06/27/AGciIsnH_story.html?hpid=z5

As we watch the talks on the debt ceiling and deficit reduction slowly and painfully start to fall apart, I think this question of leadership is paramount. For those who, thankfully, don't follow the day-to-day drama in Washington, DC, here's the scoop: First of all, there's a group of Senators (or is it a gaggle of Senators? I'm not sure) working on a cadre of proposed cuts designed to keep everyone equally satisfied enough to vote increase the so-called debt ceiling before the U.S. defaults on its loans. The group used to be called the gang of six, but, since one gave up and left, are now the fabulous five and, no doubt, will become the fearsome four soon.

Meanwhile in the House, a bi-partisan group has been trying to come up with a bazillion dollars in cuts in the federal budget, but everyone git cranky with each other over the question of taxes, so people their ball and went home. If it sounds like a schoolyard (or a soap opera) it kind of is.

So in my opinion here's the real problem: while our system of government is designed to encourage all the infighting and arguing, the Founding Fathers had some hope that someone would step-up and bring all these factions together. Unfortunately, right now everyone is sticking like glue to their side, with little thought of compromise.

For advocates, this means that maybe we'll have to be grown-ups. Maybe it means that we should let our legislators know "Hey, compromise is OK, it's how it's supposed to work." Too many people spend too much time telling elected officials that it's "my way or the highway." The only way we're to get out of this mess is if we we work together and maybe we as citizens need to set the example. If you'd like to do so, go to www.congress.org, look up your legislators and let them know what you think!

Advocacy, Advocacy Everywhere

2011-06-20T11:43:00.000-07:00

I had the pleasure of being in Oklahoma (Norman, to be exact) during the tornado "outbreak" that occured several weeks ago and had my first experience with tornado sirens, shelters and the like (shout out to the Oklahoma Mental Health and Substance Abuse Service to whom I was speaking: it wasn't your fault!). What was perhaps even more disturbing than spending an hour in a concrete bunker was the fact that our impending doom was discussed for hours ahead of time on the local news.

However, one positive thing I got from all this was an understanding of all the various ways to describe "twisters" (as we tornado afficianados call them). These include maxi, grinder, multi-vortex, wedge, barrel, rope, elephant, stovepipe, EF4 and EF5 (and presumambly lower EF's), meso cyclones, tornadic super cells and, my favorite, "very well organized." Thank goodness. I don't want my tornadoes to be a mess.

All this made me realize that there are dozens of different ways to describe advocacy: grassroots, grasstops, education, public relations, lobbying -- the list goes on and on. So I took a moment to think about some of the general approaches I think are important to know about and to provide some definitions, as follows:

Education: We often talk about the need to "educate" elected officials on the issues, but what does that mean? To me that means making sure they know who you are and what you do. It's a very important first step in effective advocacy, but it's only a first step. Sometimes we make the mistake of thinking "hey, once they know what I do they'll be supportive." Not so much. You'll need to take a few extra steps to make that happen.

Public Relations: Once your legislators know what you do, you want them to feel positively about it, right? That's where public relations comes in. These activities might include media outreach, advertising, coalition building or even community organizing. It's a critical step to getting legislators on your side.

Advocacy: Advocacy is all about getting your legislators to take a specific action. It could be a policy action, like support a specific bill, or it could be a relationship building action, like come visit our facility. Either way, the most effective way to be sure your policymakers "get it" is to get them engaged.

Lobbying: A lot of people think lobbying is a dirty word, but really it's not. To me, lobbying is all about the nitty-gritty of the legislative process (e.g., following the thousands of bills introduced or tracking down what section 672 of code number 435 will do), figuring out the specific ask, pulling together facts and figures on the issue and then putting together all the pieces for building support (citizen advocacy, education, PR, PACs, etc., etc.). Most citizen advocates will likely not be engaged in "lobbying" but you'll want to double-check the laws in your state because I don't want anyone to go to jail.

While these are just a few terms, I hope they're useful for making your advocacy approach as powerful as (and please not as destructive as) a tornado. Happy advocating!

Scandals, Twitter and Congress

2011-06-17T06:29:00.000-07:00

Unless you've been living under a rock (and no, I don't want to insult rock dwellers) you've probably heard that a certain Congressman used a certain social media outlet to send pictures of certain parts of his anatomy to certain women. I realized that I can't type all the particulars because so many of them contain words that might be censored, particularly the Congressman's name.

In this whole situation there is one entity that I think needs defending -- and that is Twitter. To paraphrase an adage about guns (i.e, guns don't kill people, people do), "Twitter doesn't embarass people: people do." If there is any lesson to be learned from this whole sordid affair, it's that we all should be careful about a) what we post on the Internet and b) monitoring what others post because it's out there forever. The alternative is to not do embarassing things, but that doesn't seem like a very viable option for most of us.

I'm guilty of this too, of course. There are certainly unflattering pictures of me all over the Internet. I thought I was safe because these were taken before digital cameras (yes, I'm that old), but it turns out you can scan these pictures into a digital format and post them. Who knew?

All that said, social media approaches can be incredibly useful in grassroots advocacy efforts (as the advocacy guru you knew I'd get around to this). Once you stop snickering at the recent scandals (I admit, I'm not there yet), take a few quick and easy steps to use some of these outlets to promote your policy cause, including:

1) Facebook: Find your legislators on Facebook and "like" them. You don't have to actually like them, but it's a great way to keep track of what those legislators are up to as well as their general perspective on the world -- always good to know when you're advocating at them.

2) Twitter: As we've seen, sometimes legislators send out something totally inappropriate and that's always fun. But Twitter is also a good way, like Facebook, to learn more about their representatives' policy views.

3) You Tube: I learned recently that YouTube is the number two search engine after Google. Not only did this make me feel old (what are the kids doing these days?) but it made me realize my current videos are terrible. We're fixing that, but I think you'll find that many members of Congress have already figured this out and have many useful videos posted on their YouTube channels.

4) Linked In: Always a great resource for finding connections between your network and those you're trying to reach. Imagine the power of contacting a legislator through a mutual friend. The legislator is far more likely to take your call and perhaps even meet with you.

5) Two Way Street: No, that's not a social media channel, but it's always a good idea to ask legislators and their staff to follow you on all your own channels. You can make it even more appealing to them by posting videos of your meetings with them, positive updates about their work on your Facebook page and notes on your Twitter feed.

Take just one of these steps and you'll be using social media for good, not evil, in no time!

Tips from Congressional Staff

2011-06-14T07:31:00.000-07:00

I had the opportunity to attend a Women in Government Relations breakfast this morning where four Congressional staff offered their insights into what works and what doesn't on Capitol Hill. Following is my own list of "Top 7 Do's and Dont's" based on their insightful comments:

1. Identify the purpose of the meeting before going in: Whether it's helping them understand an issue, inviting them back to the district or making a specific policy ask, staff appreciate it when you know what you want to get out of the meeting.

2. Do your homework: Staff and members alike want to know how your issue relates to the state or district they represent. You must be able to answer the question that is in your audience's mind, which is "why would I want to meet with this person?" The reason they want to meet with you is because you represent the interests of constituents. As one staffer put it "I will always find a time to meet with a constituent: with a lobbyist? Not so much."

3. Don't be scared to talk about what the opposition is doing: Congressional offices will always find out what the other side is saying. Getting that information from you leaves them with the impression that your arguments are strong enough to stand up to criticism.

4. Start with the proper legislative staff: As on staffer put it "[a] request for a meeting with the member of Congress should come last, not first." You want to build your relationship with the staff person who handles the issues, as they will be the ones the member of Congress turns to at the last minute to make a decision.

5. Don't bring in a large group: Every staffer mentioned this rule. Congressional offices are tiny. There's no space for a large group and certainly no time for 30 people to talk at once. If you do have a large group, be prepared to have one or two people act as spokespeople.

6. Don't ignore district offices: Important relationships can be formed with the staff in the district offices. If they think well of you and your issues, it's far more likely that the DC staff will as well.

7. Remember that Congressional staff are people too: Staff people are eager to learn about the issues, but they need to have technical issues explained, as one staffer put it, in "clear simple English." Imagine you were explaining this issue to a vary smart person who has no experience with it -- because that is often the case. In addition, turn your meeting into a conversation. If you're a constituent, or you represent the interests of constituents, they want to know you, not just your issue.

Use these tips to build quality relationships with Congressional offices. If you do, you'll be an effective advocate in no time!

Budgets, Budgets Everywhere!

2011-04-12T08:36:00.000-07:00

You've probably heard that the government was going to shut down. Then not. Then it would. Then it wouldn't. Well, Congress has finally APPEARED to reach a deal for the current Fiscal Year (FY2011)(emphasis on "appeared") and you can read the text at www.congress.gov. To access it, under the search button select "bill number" and then type in H.R. 1473. There's also a PDF version at http://tinyurl.com/3c33wuv, but it's a PDF which, frankly, I find a little hard to read.

In addition, the text of the proposed budget resolution for FY2012 (the fiscal year starting on October 1st), is available at http://tinyurl.com/3dwmhah. Yeah, I know: which one means what? Following is a brief summary of three things it's good to know about the budget process:

The difference between the Presidential budget process and the Congressional budget process

First of all, the Administration’s proposal, which comes out every February, is simply that – a proposal. What Congress, as the branch that has the true “power of the purse strings,” decides is a totally different matter. When the person occupying the White House and the leadership of the House and Senate are of the same political persuasion the budget numbers may be somewhat similar. However, when the President and the Congress don’t see eye-to-eye, the President’s proposal becomes less a signal of where there are agreements and more a sign of what items will be most in contention

The differences between “budget,” “appropriations,” and “authorization”

Frankly, advocates and professionals alike are often confused by the differences between a) a budget blueprint, b) language allowing a program to exist (authorization) and c) the actually funding for that program (appropriations). Just think of it as it applies to your personal life: your budget gives you a sense of what you might spend on various items throughout the year; your bills (utilites, car payment, etc.) are your "authorizations" for programs to exist and the checks you write (or the wire transfers you authorize -- for those who don't remember checks) are your "appropriations."

Discretionary vs. Non-discretionary Spending

As anyone working on Federal funding issues knows, the VAST majority of federal spending is on what are known as “non-discretionary” programs, such as Medicare, Social Security and interest on the national debt. In essence, these programs are not truly non-discretionary: Congress could pass policy language making changes that would reduce or increase spending in these areas. However, major changes to these programs are few and far between. Most yearly funding battles are oriented around the one-third of the budget that is considered “discretionary.”

Advocates need to understand these differences for two reasons. First, to help rationalize (if the word “rational” can be used as it relates to the budget process) the yearly battles over funding for favored programs and second, to emphasis the fact that the funds available for domestic discretionary programs are decreasing, while demand is increasing.

In addition, it's important to recognize that when we propose cutting funding for programs like public broadcasting or the arts, we're not making even a dent in the budget deficit. We're barely making a discernable scratch. To make real progress, we'll need to look at those "non-discretionary" items, which will be extremely difficult politically.

So it will be a fun few months in Washington, DC as they rangle all this out. Hopefully, these few points about the budget process are useful as you "go forth and advocate," even in this confusing (and frustrating) process.

Civic Discourse

2011-01-09T18:19:00.000-08:00

Many will say the shooting spree at Rep. Giffords' "Congress on your Corner" session in Arizona was not the direct result of a specific political perspective and I'm not going to argue with that. That this was the act of one crazed person cannot be disputed. Nor should anyone suggest that one party or another condoned yesterday's tragedy.

That said, there are those, from both sides of the aisle and from all walks of life, who must take some responsibility for allowing and even establishing an environment where unstable and confused people think it's OK to walk into a building and start shooting because they are angry at government.

In the coming days there's going to be a lot of talk about the toxic political tone in Washington, DC and around the country. Some will wave the banner of "free speech" to suggest that there's really nothing we can do to tone down the vitriolic rhetoric.

I love free speech. I'm doing it right now. I agree that we should "defend to the death" (as Volatire would say) the rights of others to disagree with us. We should even defend the rights of others to really, really hate government or individuals in government or anyone for that matter. Passionate, vehement, biased, incorrect and even angry rhetoric can and must be tolerated.

At the same time encouragements toward violence and death threats need to stop. We may not be able to stop them through legislative or judicial action, especially merely implied suggestions of violence. So we'll have to stop them through the powerful instrument of public opinion. In short, we all have the responsibility to challenge those who take their disagreements to that next level of violence.

Clearly, whether it was the attempt on Republican Tom DeLay (or, really, anyone who happened to be in the Capitol) that resulted in the tragic death of a brave Capitol Hill security guard in 1998 or the attempt on Giffords that killed six people in Tucson yesterday, those who argue that the populace should be in a state of war with anyone in public office occasionally get what they want. And for these people to step back and say "oh, wait, that's not what we meant" is unconscionable.

The founding fathers set up our current system of government to avoid exactly this type of vigilantism. One of their many goals was to make these brutal actions unnecessary because people would be given the right to express their views in an open and fair environment.

I recognize there are those who feel this goal has not been met or that the system has become so corrupt that we must have another violent revolution to "take back our country." I disagree. I think we -- as in "we the people", not "we the pundits" or "we the political establishment" -- should take back our country from those who encourage not-so-random acts of violence.

It makes me sad that I am questioning whether it is good advice to suggest that constituents attend Congressional townhall meetings. Clearly this is a free speech issue. It's OUR free speech issue. I, you, the guy or gal down the street should be able to support or oppose a candidate or a policy position without fear of death or physical injury. It's incumbent upon us to protect that right. If we don't, we will all lose the ability to speak openly, freely and without fear.

Never Too Young to Start Advocating

2010-05-17T07:38:00.000-07:00

I attended a climate change forum a couple of weeks ago hosted by Climate One to discuss how younger people are taking action to cut carbon emissions in their communities. The students that were participating had unique approaches to how they were taking on climate change in their community but they all understood the power of advocacy and raising awareness for their issue. Advocacy can take many forms from doing student projects that raise awareness for their issue to talking to the decision makers in their community about making changes that will help reduce their carbon footprint. Take a look at how these students are making a difference in their communities through their innovative advocacy efforts.

Grassroots Code of Ethics: Round 2

2010-05-13T12:20:00.000-07:00

A couple months ago, I posted information about a grassroots advocacy code of ethics that I and several colleagues in the community are developing, in concert with anyone who wants to be involved. A recent column in Roll Call, authored by Amy Showalter and Kelton Rhoads expresses their point of view. The piece, titled "Mis-Trust Unavoidable in Grassroots Efforts" suggests that a grassroots code of ethics that stifles free speech won't help either the industry or civic discourse.

I couldn't agree more, which was why I was completely mystified by their arguments. While they have suggested a more nefarious motive for our work, those developing the code are interested only in stopping egregious practices that make everyone look bad, such as sending fake letters to Capitol Hill -- a subject of recent Congressional hearings -- or creating coordinated campaigns where citizens make death threats to legislators in townhall meetings.

Because we have a difference of opinion on the basic point of whether mistrust is avoidable or not, and because there were some factual errors in the column, several leaders in the grassroots advocacy community joined together to co-author a response. The letter (which you can access here) was signed by myself, Anne Darconte (in her role as a long-time leader on these issues), Les Francis of the Washington Media Group, and Christopher Arterton in his role as a Professor of Political Management at GW.

In addition, our friends at the Congressional Management Foundation's new Partnership for a More Perfect Union crafted a response based on their unique perspective and scientific research on this issue. You can read their response here.

I hope you'll take a moment to review ALL the arguments and, if you feel so inclined, to comment on the code itself at www.gspm.org/ethics. All perspectives, whether complimentary or not are very welcome.

To Paraphrase Stephen Colbert: I AM The Government -- And So Are YOU!

2010-05-04T14:48:00.000-07:00

Over the weekend President Obama delivered a commencement speech at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor in which he, in the words of reporters covering the story, offered a "spirited defense of government."

Personally, I think that headline doesn't tell the whole story. Duh. It's a headline. Of course it's not going to tell the whole story. What I mean, though, is that Obama didn't just offer what some people are saying was a spirited defense of his government, or this particular iteration of government. No. He gave a spirited defense of the very concept of government -- of the idea that "...there are some things we can only do together, as one nation."

If you think about it, the people who formed our current system of government had reason to be pretty skeptical of the idea that a centralized authority would be anything but a big bunch of trouble. They may even, dare I say it, have been more skeptical than tea party advocates are today. As you may recall, our founding fathers had just fought a war to get rid of a monarchy they weren't all that fond of.

Yet they went ahead and formed this suspicious organization called a "federal government" anyway and, one can argue, this bold act marked the turning point of our history as a nation. Why did they do it? Because they recognized that together -- even when we disagree with each other -- we're stronger than when we're divided.

Now, I'm not saying that we shouldn't remain vigilant or that we shouldn't question whether "government" is doing the right thing. But we should remember that this "government" thing we're often frustrated with is us -- it's you, it's me, it's your neighbor and it's your cranky Uncle Bob who you never agree with but you tolerate for the sake of family unity.

If you haven't reviewed the speech, I hope you'll take a minute to do so -- and I hope it will make people on BOTH sides of the aisle think about how they present their heartfelt, passionate views that, believe it or not, other people will have the audacity to disagree with.

As citizens, I think we have a responsibility to recognize that we're all in this together. And we should ask ourselves, as Obama asked the Michigan class of 2010, "[a]t a moment when our challenges seem so big and our politics seem so small, how will you keep our democracy alive and vibrant?"

To quote the kids these days, IMHO we can all keep our democracy alive and vibrant by continuing to express our views. At the same time, we must remember that others have every right to disagree with us. And, as the founding fathers discovered, somewhere in the middle is a solution everyone can agree with -- or at least equally hate.

And Now for What Citizens Can Do...

2010-04-28T08:35:00.000-07:00

I've been writing this week on the recent Pew Study about the fact that most citizens do not trust their government. And, like Sisyphus and his impossible task, I'm having the temerity to suggest improvements. Yesterday I made some suggestions for politicians. Today I have some ideas for citizens.

Know the institution: When I was on the hill we received numerous letters about foreign aid (yes, I know I'm dating myself: for those who don't remember letters they were communications sent on paper through an institution called the U.S. Post Office). The writers were almost uniformly outraged at the huge percentage of the federal budget spent on foreign aid. In reality, the percentage was Â½ of 1%. Granted, these writers probably didn't want any money spent on foreign aid, but under no construction could this be viewed as a "huge percentage of the Federal budget."

Or what about the constituents that I talked to who owned a deli in our district? They were moving their business and wanted our office to arrange to move several federal agency offices so that they would have better foot traffic at lunch. Not really a reasonable ask of a Congressional office.

Clearly these are extreme examples, but what about something simple? The people who used to call our office after a vote to express their extreme frustration with us could have been far more effective if they'd called BEFORE the vote. We still might not have agreed with them, but it's always best to tell Congress what you think before they take action.

From knowing what Congress can actually do for you to knowing your issue, citizens can help enhance trust by knowing what they're talking about.

Know how to advocate effectively: Your communications must be relevant, personalized, thoughtful and specific if you want to have a prayer of being taken seriously. Sure. The Constitution and the general idea of a democracy give you every right to fire off an angry e-mail to every member of Congress you can think of, and if it makes you feel better go ahead. But in a representative system, it's the officials that specifically represent the area where you live or work who really care what you think.

If you want to advocate in support of an appropriation for a specific program, your best place to start is with the elected official who represents the area where you live, work or serve people. If that person happens to serve on the appropriations committee great, if not, it's still best to communicate with your own legislator and ask him or her to reach out to the appropriators. If you aren't sure who they are, go to www.congress.org to find out.

Once you've gotten passed the relevancy hurdle, you need to think about how your communication can rise to the top of the thousands that are received in a Congressional office everyday. You do that by being specific about what you want, being thoughtful in your arguments and, most important, by telling a personal story. Personalized communications have far more influence with a legislator than form communications. Period.

Understand the difference between "being heard" and "being agreed with": In many cases the problem is not that your opinion isn't heard. Rather, it's that either a) the legislator doesn't really agree with you or b) the legislator doesn't have an opinion on your issue. So yelling louder probably isn't going to be effective.

If they don't agree with you, you might be able to turn things around. See if there are some "baby steps" you can take to help them understand the issue better and, perhaps, change their mind. These might include srranging site visits or attending townhall meetings. If that doesn't work, it's time, on your end, to decide whether this is a deal breaker and vote accordingly in the next election.

If it's simply that they don't have an opinion yet, targeted follow-up that addresses the legislator's concerns and connects the issue to the people he or she represents will be more effective than more yelling.

Building Trust Between Citizens and Their Government

2010-04-26T13:54:00.000-07:00

Following up on last week's blog posting regarding the Pew Study with the shocking findings that citizens don't trust their legislators, today's post is the first in a two part series on what politicians and citizens can do to improve the situation. Today I'm focusing on politicans. Tomorrow I'll focus on citizens.

So, without further ado -- three things politicans can do to move themselves up on the trust ladder.

Improve constituent communications: Time and time again I have advocates tell me "I wrote a letter to my Congressman about issue X and I got a form letter back about totally-unrelated issue Y." No wonder citizens feel that politicians aren't listening! However, rather than assuming politicians and their staff are sitting around eating bon-bons all day and sending random letters, let's look at the reasons behind why this happens. In fact, in most cases, what it boils down to is a resource problem. Did you know that since the advent of the Internet, constituent communications have at least quadrupled? Yes, you read that right. And yet the resources available to deal with those communications have remained virtually unchanged. Members of the House, for example, have the same number of staff as they had before the Internet. While Congress has certainly become more efficient in managing these communications, the panacea of "increase efficiency" can go only so far. At some point, it's time to get more people and systems in place to manage the problem.Although it would be wildly unpopular, members of Congress should use their own advocacy skills to make the case for additional funding, and then apply those funds to solving this urgent issue.
Be clear about why you're in Congress: Every elected official has his or her own reason for enduring the grinding 24/7 schedule and constant stream of abuse that, these days, is the hallmark of a Congressional career. 99.9% of the time it's not "because I like to be powerful." For the most part, it's because they want to achieve some specific policy goal or because they want to help their legislative district or state. Members of Congress need to be clear ? to themselves and to their constituents ? what their proactive agenda is, even in the midst of partisan bickering and infighting.
Stop adding fuel to the fire: Hopefully it goes without saying, but for heaven's sake politicians should please stop any unethical, shading or just plain disgusting dealings that make the whole institution look bad. Former Rep. Massa, I'm looking at you.

Tomorrow -- what can you do to make a difference? Read the blog to find out!

Can You Trust Your Legislators?

2010-04-23T14:06:00.000-07:00

The answer, according to a recent Pew Research Survey, is a resounding "no." In fact, just 22% of respondents believed that they could trust government in Washington all or most of the time.

This saddens the Advocacy Guru for a number of reasons, the most of important of which is that effective advocacy requires an environment of mutual trust. In other words, to achieve your policy goals, your legislators must trust that you are giving them good information. At the same time, you must trust that your legislators can and will do what you identify as "the right thing," especially after you've made your case

But how is this trust possible when a majority of Americans (52%) believe that the political system can work fine, it's the members of Congress that are the problem? Or when at least 76% believe that elected officials in Washington 1) care only about their careers; 2) are influenced by special interests; 3) are unwilling to compromise, and 4) are profligate and out-of-touch?

There's a glimmer of hope, though, in the findings. That glimmer is the fact that most Americans (56%) find themselves to be more frustrated with government than they are actually angry. This to me is a good thing because, frankly, there's something I can do about frustration.

So, how can we fix this? Next week I'll post information on what politicians and citizens can do to improve the level of trust. So stay tuned! In the meantime, if you're interested in this topic, check out the new Partnership for a More Perfect Union. They might have some answers!

Happy Tax Day! Why Americans Should LOVE Paying Their Taxes

2010-04-15T00:01:00.000-07:00

Ah, April 15 th . A day when the thoughts of many Americans are focused, like a laser, on the money we personally spend for the "public good" (or the "public bad", depending on your perspective).

Whether you're grumbling over your morning tea or joining a tea party protest today, if you're not skipping merrily down to the post office today all excited about the investments you get to make in our nation's infrastructure just repeat to yourself one (or all) of the following mantras. You might not wind up skipping, but hopefully you'll feel a little better.

I'm Investing in My Country

Do you like roads? Parks? Mail? The job our military does to keep us safe? Health care for the poor and elderly? Food stamps? Public broadcasting? Whatever your particular interest is, some portion of your tax dollars are going toward that project. If you're curious as to where your tax dollars go, check out the National Priorities Project and their interactive tax chart . Here you can enter the amount of taxes you actually paid (if it doesn't make you cry) and determine where those dollars went. Then, as you're filling out your 1040, pretend to yourself that you're making a donation to the programs you love best. You can even include that in the "memo" portion of the check - believe me, IRS workers have seen it all. That might ease the pain a little.

I'm Investing in Myself

If you're not convinced by the broader benefits to society that paying your taxes brings, think about it from a purely selfish perspective. Every minute of every day you are impacted positively by government actions. Think about it. Did you wake up this morning? If you did and heard the clock radio alarm or watched television, you were affected by FCC regulation of the radio spectrum. Did you take a shower? Clean water regulations (hopefully). Have some coffee? Trade tariffs on coffee beans. With cream? Dairy price supports. Use the restroom? You better hope there are combined sewer overflow regulations in your area. Drive on a road? Well, you get the point.

If you want to test this out, pick a day when you'll stop every few moments to write down how government impacts you (you can even use Twitter, if you're so inclined). Then, imagine that your personal tax dollars are bringing you these benefits. In fact, I'll be doing this through my Twitter feed today, so sign up to follow AdvocacyGuru and see what I come up with!

I'll Gain Access to Potential Perks

You know the old adage "you've got to spend money to make money?" Well, that definitely applies in the tax world. This year, thanks to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and other recently passed bills, Americans can claim all kinds of credits on their returns. The catch is, you've got to file to get the cash.

For example, if you bought a car or a house, credits may be coming your way. There are more education and energy efficiency credits as well. So take a careful look at all the existing and new deductions and credits. You may be surprised at what you'll gain!

I'll Avoid Public Humiliation and Additional Fees (and possible Jail Time)

Famed mobster Al Capone wasn't sent to jail for the many violent crimes he allegedly committed. No, what brought him down was tax evasion. And, although they certainly shouldn't be equated with mobsters, tax problems have dashed the career hopes of everyone from cabinet nominees like Tom Daschle to the coffee shop owner here in DC who just didn't pay his local taxes for about ten years. With penalties and fees, his tax bill topped $400,000 - and now he's out of business.

Whether you're concerned about how your tax situation will be addressed during your nomination hearing, or just want to avoid losing your business, it's important to stay on top of your tax obligations. In fact, many employers now look at how individuals manage their finances as one important hiring criterion. You don't want to lose your dream job because you just couldn't bring yourself to write that check on April 15 th .

I Have the Right (and Responsibility) to Advocate on Government Spending

"But wait," you're thinking. "The main reason I don't want to pay my taxes is because government spends my money on things I don't like." Sure, it's all very well and good to imagine that you're spending money ONLY on those government programs that make sense to you. But as a practical matter, that isn't really the case, is it?

Well, here's the most wonderful thing about our tax system and our overall system of government. If you don't like where your tax dollars are being spent, you have a right and a responsibility to let your elected officials know! For example, if you paid $5,000 in taxes, you'll find out that $1,470 went to the military and just over $1,000 went to health services. For some people those ratios are just fine: others believe that more should be going toward non-military programs. Wherever you stand on the spectrum, let your elected officials know what you think we should be investing in as a nation. How cab you do that? Here are four simple steps:

First, make sure you know what you're talking about. Don't rant about the huge portion of the budget being spent on foreign aid, for example. It's ÂÂ½ of 1 percent. Try a site like www.usaspending.gov to be sure you've got the latest information.
Second, be clear about what you want. If you want a specific program cut, say so. If you want a specific tax increased or decreased, be explicit. Don't simply say "we need to pay less in taxes."
Third, be able to answer the question "why should this legislator listen to me?" You'll be far more compelling and persuasive if you are a constituent, if you represent constituents or if what you want connects with policy issues the lawmaker is interested in.
Finally, connect your "ask" to your personal story. How would what your asking for you benefit you and other constituents?

You can find your legislators and e-mail them directly through a site like www.congress.org .

When All Else Fails...

If things get too stressful just try to be thankful that at least you've got some income to pay taxes on, right? There are too many Americans struggling to make ends meet (especially in this economic climate). So sit back and relax with a glass of wine - and who knows? That Cabernet might not have made it to your glass without some sort of taxpayer investment.

New Report on Congress Disproving Everything I've Ever Said

2010-04-01T05:20:00.000-07:00

I want to be sure tipsheet readers know about a new report on Congress that runs counter to everything I've ever said about effective advocacy. Among other things, this report suggests that:

Members of Congress pay most attention to the people that live outside their district, not to their constituents.
Citizens should never send personal letters. Petitions and form communications work just fine.
The staff people for elected officials actually like it when you treat them badly and suggest that you're disappointed to be meeting with or talking to "just them."

April Fools!

OK, there is no such report. In fact, all the evidence suggests the contrary. But, in honor of April Fools day I thought I'd imagine what the world of advocacy would be like if we turned some of the fundamental rules on their head.

Imagine, if you will, a world where...

Constituency Doesn't Matter: Everyone and their mother would want to meet with Speaker Pelosi, other members of the leadership and the chairs of important Committees. What would the remaining members of Congress do? Seriously, though, the principle of constituency helps us identify which elected officials are supposed to care what we think - even if it doesn't always feel like they do.

The point: Consider the "power of constituency" as one of your important leveraging tools - and learn how to use it effectively.

Form Communications Really Work: The world where members of Congress pay attention to form letters is the same world where you pay attention to junk mail - it simply doesn't exist. If you think about it, what would you rather have: Members of Congress that can be swayed by a handful of identical communications or a system where personal communications, a little hard work and perseverance actually get more attention?

The point: If you can take an extra five or ten minutes to personalize your communications you will gain far more attention than those who aren't willing to take the extra step. And isn't that a good thing?

Staff People Enjoy Being Treated as Unimportant Underlings: Ah, yes. They love it when the people they're meeting with say "but I thought I'd get to meet with the Congressman. I don't want to meet with 'just you'." They also like it when advocates go "over their head" to the "really important people in the office."

The point: Treat the staff as you would any other person that can help you achieve a goal. They can become your strongest ally in getting what you want out of the Congressional office.

Members of Congress Stopped Arguing All the Time and "Got Stuff Done": Right now, Congress passes only about 4% of the 10,000 bills that are introduced. But in our imaginary world, they might get a much higher percentage passed, including bills like the "Military Toy Replica Act" or the "Nanotechnology in the Schools Act" (are we for? Against? I'm not sure).

The point: Our system of government is not designed for speed and efficiency for moving things through. It's designed for caution and deliberation. Sure it's frustrating when it's YOUR program that's being stopped, but at least be thankful that a lot of other crazy stuff isn't being passed (I know, I know, my friends in the military toy world are going to come after me on this one.)

Now get out there and enjoy your April Fools Day. You can start by reading about the Top 100 April Fool's Hoaxes of all time

Is Government Broken?

2010-02-24T17:51:00.001-08:00

I know you'll be shocked to hear that most Americans (86%) think so, according to a recent poll noted in this CNN piece.

Now, before we blame "government" for being broken, I think we should take a step back and look at how we as citizens contribute to the problem. Sure, there are a lot of things that could be fixed about what "those people in Washington, DC" are doing. But there's also a lot that can be fixed about what citizens around the country are doing (or not doing) when it comes to our democracy.

This isn't a popular perspective, obviously. But I think we should think positively about what we as a citizenry can do to improve our own involvement with and understanding of government.

So, what can we do? Well, here's a start:

First, I think that a big part of the problem with government is that citizens have an inaccurate perception of what it's supposed to do. It's actually supposed to be completely and totally inefficient. In fact, the Founding Fathers set up a system designed to encourage argument and dissent. They did a fabulous job. So, citizens really need to lower their expectations of what's possible from our government. Imagine running a business with 535 people on your board of directors. How much would you get done? And yet we think government is broken if Congress and the Administration can't solve major problems like climate change, health care reform and unemployment all in the course of a year.

Second, unfortunately numerous studies and my own experiences indicate that people do not know basic things about even the most representative of the branches of government, the Congress. Frankly, it's OK not to know these things if you're not really interested in the policy process. But it's not OK to complain about government being broken without considering our own lack of engagement and understanding. When a majority of Americans can't name their elected representatives in Congress, that's a problem -- and may, in fact, be one of the reasons why the system isn't working as well as we'd like.

We also need to stop sending mixed messages to our elected representatives. Many people say they don't want government to spend money on any programs -- until it's a program that they personally are interested in. We all need to recognize that everyone has different interests and the role of government is to do its best to amalgamate those interests into one cohesive whole. This takes an incredible amount of compromise and a really long time.

The good news in all this is that citizens actually have an amazing power to make a difference. They just need to know how to do it effectively. I've seen, time and time again, skeptical people who strongly believe they can't be heard be amazingly transformed after visiting with their elected representatives. Once they know a little about the process and their own role in it, they really begin to understand how they can influence policy. And that, to me, suggests that there's hope for government: even when it's at its most frustrating.

An Advocacy Plan for NO MORE SNOW

2010-02-16T10:08:00.000-08:00

Greetings from Washington, DC, where we have snow drifts of well over four feet, traffic jams of well over 4 miles and patience at an all time low. Seriously. Imagine living in a city where you haven't had mail for a week, where you take your life in your hands walking on the sidewalks and where you have to dig your way in to and out of any parking spot you're lucky enough to find (OK, I don't have to dig -- my husband does that -- but you get the point).

And I understand from the weather forecasters that it's not really over yet. There will likely be more snow before spring arrives.

Well, I've decided I won't participate in any more snow. I'm done with it. No more for me. To achieve that goal, I am implementing a four-step "no More Snow" advocacy plan based on the process outlined in my book Citizens in Action (like how I got the book in?). So, here it is!

Know What You Want: Well, I know what I don't want. I don't want any more snow. But that sounds a little too obstructionist to me -- a little too, dare I say it, "tea partyesque." So I'll say that I'm for clear skies, sunshine and 72 degree temperatures. That's my starting point. I can compromise from there but the issue of snow is absolutely non-negotiable.

Know Who You're Talking To: This is a little more difficult. Who is in charge of the snow? A higher being? The Republicans in Congress? The Obama Administration? I'm not really sure, but I'm tempted to blame the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). According to their website, "[o]ur reach goes from the surface of the sun to the depths of the ocean floor as we work to keep citizens informed of the changing environment around them." That sounds pretty comprehensive, so I'll go with that.

Know How to Talk to Them: I like to use what I call the "SPIT" method of message development. It's not pretty, but it gets the job done. S is for SPECIFIC. I SPECIFICALLY do not want any more snow. P is for PERSONAL. Telling a personal story is essential and I plan to develop a touching anecdote around the travails of my poor dog, Ozzie, in having to use the great outdoors as a restroom when it's all iced over. I is for INFORMATIVE. I'm in the process of developing compelling graphs, charts and one-pagers outlining the record breaking snowfall we've had this year. I will clearly and logically explain why continued snow is not an option. T is for Trustworthy. I'm not going to exaggerate or lie about the amount of snow. I don't need to. I will become the go to resource for reliable information on this critical issue.

Know How to Follow-Up: Now, I'm not stupid. I know that my first missive in to NOAA probably won't get the immediate response I want. Who knows? I might even be written off as a crazy person (hard to believe, but it's possible). So I'm going to start thinking now about how to follow up effectively. I think I'll invite NOAA staff to my neighborhood to see our unplowed streets, mounds of snow on roofs and poor, suffering puppies. Then I'll ask someone at NOAA to write an article for my newsletter, perhaps even ask a legislator on the appropriations committee to submit a statement to the Congressional Record about their support for the no more snow movement. And, of course, I'll post information to Facebook, Twitter and all the social networks to keep the momentum moving.

So, there it is. My four step plan. DC residents, are you in?

Nature's Filibuster

2010-02-10T13:44:00.001-08:00

We have lots of names for what's going on in D.C. right now -- snowpocalypse, snowmageddon, snowverkill. As I've been sitting here at home, trying to entertain myself with mail from last week and watching my husband dig snow out of our skylight before it crashes into our bathroom, I've been wondering why this feeling of being trapped and, dare I say it, "gridlocked" seems familiar...

Now, I'm not as clever as the people that come up with the names for storms (thanks Fox News, for "Blizzard of 2010", that took quite a lot of creativity), but I can say what this series of storms reminds me of.

It reminds me of the U.S. Senate.

How's that now? I'm glad you asked. I've got three main reasons.

First, there's the wind gusts of 65 miles per hour, which some Senators reach on a daily basis.
Second, the white out conditions in DC (literally can't see my backyard) seem to reflect the shocking lack of diversity in the U.S. Senate.
Third, and most important, there's the filibuster rule, which allows any Senator, through the mere threat that he or she might debate a legislative initiative to death, to bring the business of the Senate to a grinding halt. Without the 60 votes needed to invoke "cloture" (i.e., the ability to limit debate), Democrats in the Senate will be even more unable to move their legislative initiatives through the process. Kind of like how no one in DC can venture past their front yard.

Of course, some people think that's a good thing (the lack of legislative progress, I mean, not the being trapped in our house), and perhaps this storm is evidence that Mother Nature agrees. On the other hand, maybe this is her way of saying "Enough. Everyone needs a time out."

I suggest that everyone in the political world take a minute to take advantage of our time out, get away from the partisanship and sniping, retire to our respective corners for a little while and see if we can find a better way to move forward. This better way will need to depend less on the "I'll hold my breath until you let me have what I want" approach of the Republicans or the "You'll do what I say because I say so" approach of the Democrats. Perhaps we can even be civil to one another.

Or perhaps I've just been trapped inside for too long.

Is this really a "do nothing" Congress?

2010-02-05T07:23:00.000-08:00

A very productive Congress, despite what the approval ratings say, is the provocative title of a recent Washington Post column from Norman Ornstein, a leading Congressional expert. He argues that this Congress, despite polls suggesting that 58% of Americans consider it below average or one of the worst ever, is actually one of the most productive ever.

That's right, you read that correctly. According to Ornstein (who, believe me, knows what he's talking about):

"[t]his Democratic Congress is on a path to become one of the most productive since the Great Society 89th Congress in 1965-66, and Obama already has the most legislative success of any modern president -- and that includes Ronald Reagan and Lyndon Johnson."

If that doesn't seem right to you, consider the massive investments that occurred through the Recovery Act in our nation's schools, infrastructure and energy and environmental programs, including green technology. Then Congress passed children's health insurance, a law to regulate tobacco and a credit card holder's bill of rights, any one of which would be considered a major accomplishment. And all this within the course of the first year -- a legislative record that would put many 2-year sessions to shame.

Clearly, there's a disconnect between what Congress does and how we perceive its activity. A part of the problem, in my opinion, is that we as citizens don't really understand what Congress is supposed to be doing. As an institution, Congress is not designed to PASS legislation: it is designed to fight and argue and deliberate about legislation. Chaos and inefficiency are supposed to rule in our legislative environments -- and, clearly, they do.

Effective advocates will spend some time learning about the institutions they are trying to influence. One great resource is "Congress and Its Members" by Davidson, Oleszek and Lee. Or, check out the resources on the Library of Congress' "Thomas" website.

Happy advocating!

The Budget is Coming! The Budget is Coming!

2010-02-01T07:53:00.000-08:00

Today the Obama Administration is releasing its proposed Federal budget for FY2011, which begins October 1, 2010. Highlights include a "job creation" proposal that envisions small business tax cuts and new infrastructure investments designed to generate jobs. According to the release, the budget cuts over 100 programs, while also proposing a series of funding increases.

Now, before you get all enthusiastic about specific increases (or freaked out about specific cuts), remember that this is the first step in a very long process. The President makes his proposals -- and those proposals certainly reflect what he thinks government should focus on -- but Congress has to develop the spending and tax packages. Congress may decide to do very little of what the President suggests, or everything, or something in between.

The whole process is outlined in an interesting interactive chart on the Washington Post website. Yes, I'm playing fast and loose with the word "interesting." Be sure to have a strong cup of coffee before delving in to the details of the process.

If you're just interested in the general overview, highlights of the budget proposal include:

a freeze on discretionary spending and $20 billion in cuts to various programs
an increase in funding at the Department of Education by $2.9 billion or 6.2 percent.
a new $4 billion dollar National Infrastructure Innovation & Finance Fund to focus on infrastructure investments of national and regional significance
more than $6 billion in funding for clean energy technologies
the elimination of existing fossil fuel subsidies
an increase of $3.7 billion, or 6.4 percent, for civilian research and development
allowing the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts to expire only for those making more than $250,000 a year and reducing the rate at which these same households write-off itemized deductions
ending subsidies for oil, gas, and coal companies and closing other loopholes
a responsibility fee on the largest banks
a bipartisan, fiscal commission to look at a range of proposals and put forward a bipartisan recommendation to balance the budget excluding interest payments on the debt by 2015

Remember, the best way to preserve programs you're most interested in (or eliminate those you think are wasteful) is through advocacy. Frankly, the government is going to have no idea what is most helpful or harmful unless you share your views. So get out there and get advocating!

Ethical Lobbying: Really, it's Possible!

2010-01-22T11:39:00.000-08:00

If you’re based in the Washington, DC area and you haven’t signed up for the January 27th forum on grassroots ethics being held by the George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management, what are you waiting for? Take a minute to go to www.gspm.org/ethics and get registered for this free event! Go ahead, I’ll wait.

OK, you may be thinking “but ethics sounds really boring: why would I want to go to that?” Well, there’s a whole host of reasons! You should attend if:

you’re tired of snide comments about “all the corruption in Washington, DC” – and you want to be part of the solution.
you want to network with others engaged in grassroots advocacy activities – we have sponsors from all walks of life!
you want to learn more about techniques that work in grassroots advocacy – after all, what is most ethical is also most effective.
you want to make your mother proud by learning more about honesty, transparency and all the things that make us good people.

At the event, we’ll be discussing a proposed grassroots advocacy code of ethics. You can see the code and comment on it when you register at www.gspm.org/ethics. This is your opportunity to shape these ideals for generations to come – so don’t delay. Register today!

Open Government and Citizen Responsibility

2009-11-10T09:58:00.000-08:00

I had a couple things happen today that reminded me how the concepts of "open government" (or "transperancy") and "citizen responsibility" go hand in hand.

First, I was interviewed on a talk radio show in Michigan by a very thoughtful host (yes, they're out there) who wanted to know how people can be most effective in getting their message across to their legislators. He noted that many people are distressed about all the terrible things they hear about the major initiatives making their way through Congress (health care reform and climate change legislation being the most recent examples). How can an average citizen, he wondered, sort through it all?

The answer, quite simply, is they can't. Hey, I'm sorry to say it, but it's frankly impossible for anyone -- average citizen or nobel prize winner -- to sort through the thousands of bills introduced in Congress and understand and have a thoughtful perspective on all of them. It's hard for most of us to do that for just one bill.

Frankly, that's why we have (gasp!) special interests. The people within these organizations spend a great deal of time culling through all the various bills making sure that the people they represent aren't harmed (or are helped) by the bill. If you're employed by someone, a member of a group like the AARP, HSUS or even the NRA, have ever bought anything or, ummm, breathe, chances are you've got one of those special interests working for you. And that's GOOD news. Thanks goodness we don't have to track down all this stuff ourselves.

This perspective was further solidified when I listened in on the Kojo Nnamdi show's great session on Open Government (more information on the WAMU website). The guests (from the Sunlight Foundation and Adobe) talked about the work they're doing to make Congressional information more accessible -- and what can be done to improve access to that information.

I'm 100% in agreement that nothing should be hidden. Bills should be posted, statements should be made public, citizens should know what their money is being spent on. At the same time, I also think more needs to be done to explain the significance of the information we're so busy pumping out. All the best information in the world isn't valuable unless people understand it in the context of the legislative process.

In short, I'm all for open government. But with that openness comes, I believe, a measure of citizen responsibility. We must, as Socrates might say, know what we don't know about issues and be willing to learn and explore the various nuances. That will be far more productive, and serve our democracy far better, than angry outbursts at what we've "heard" about particular bills.

Working with the Scary Congress

2009-10-28T14:43:00.001-07:00

My thoughts turn to horror movies this time of year and, as a D.C. resident, I don't usually have to look much further than the Capitol for a good scare. Between arguments over health care reform, climate change and financial services, the legislative process seems a little frightening lately.

But have no fear! There are ways to "trick" your legislators into giving you what you want, and I discuss several of them in the latest edition of my Advocacy Tipsheet. Seven-year olds have mastered the art as part of their efforts to extract candy from strangers -- why shouldn't you?

Even if, in the spirit of the season, you're tempted to TP your legislator's offices, I encourage you to be the adult in this situation and rise above the process. You might just be able to make a difference -- check out my tipsheet to learn how.

Why "Reading the Bill" Won't Work

2009-09-28T07:53:00.000-07:00

I've blogged before about the impracticality of the "read the bill" movement. Many groups have joined together to demand that members of Congress read every bill that is introduced. Their argument is that lawmakers shouldn't vote to pass legislation they haven't read. This makes perfect sense, on its face.

Recently, the Post editorialized on this issue, pointing out the impracticalities of actually reading all 10,000 bills that are introduced in a two year Congressional session. Members of Congress and their staff would be doing nothing but reading whereas' and wherefore's until their eyes crossed.

I responded to the Post editorial agreeing with the impracticality argument. But in my opinion, the editors missed the main point, which is that reading the bill and understanding what the bill does are two entirely different things. You can read my response, which was printed in the Post on Saturday, here.

My main point is that the bill language isn't what legislators need to spend time reading in order to understand a legislative initiative. If they need to read anything, it's the biased and unbiased summaries from wide varieties of groups and individuals on their opinions of what the bill language might do in real life.

And beyond reading, they need to meet with constituents, knowledgeable citizens, subject matter experts, representatives of those "horrible" special interests like the AARP or the HSUS (tongue firmly in cheek) and even a lobbyist or two to have a complete understanding of how the bill language might impact the people they represent. Then, they need to balance the perspectives of all these groups and make decisions based on what they think will be best for their constituency.

The good news is that this is exactly what the vast majority of legislators and their staff try do every single day. So maybe this situation isn't quite as dire as some might have you believe.

News Flash: Politicians Like to Self-Promote

2009-09-21T10:59:00.000-07:00

A recent article in the Washington Post titled "Tweeting Their Own Horns" reports on a recent study from the University of Maryland on Congressional use of the micro-blogging service Twitter.

I know this will shock you: it turns out that politicians generally use Twitter to promote themselves. The researchers reviewed tweets through February, 2009 as well as postings in June, 2009 and August, 2009 to make comparisons about when Congress is in session versus out. According to the lead researcher:

"Twitter by its nature is a very self-absorbed service," said Jennifer Golbeck, lead researcher and assistant professor in the university's College of Information Studies. "Politicians are very self-important people."

Now, I think it's appropriate to cut our elected leaders a little slack. I'll bet that if you checked out most of the Twitter feeds out there, you'd find that the majority of users are focused on "self-promotion" versus "world peace."

While you can point to a few uses of Twitter as an interactive tool for promoting dialogue between parties, for the most part it is still being used by EVERYONE, not just politicians, as a mechanism for promoting a business, a cause or one's own daily routine. I'll confess that I use it (www.twitter.com/advocacyguru) to promote my particular cause (umm, and the services I provide around that cause) of making everyone on the planet better advocates. See how cleverly I snuck that in?

I guess my main point is that while the study does make for interesting reading, I hope people won't be using it as ammunition to feel even more cynical about our elected officials than we already do. As with all new technologies, it will take time to move Twitter from a promotional tool to an interactive tool. It's probably a good idea to think of Twitter as an evolution, not a revolution.

And if you're looking for ways to be part of the evolution, check out the TweetCongress site, which is working to connect citizens with their legislators in whole, new 140 character or less ways.

The "Emily Litella" Approach to Advocacy Strikes Again

2009-09-04T12:38:00.000-07:00

Last month I wrote a little about the "Emily Litella" approach to advocacy (generational alert -- if you don't know who Emily Litella is, go immediately to this video of her from SNL titled "violins on television.") The Litella-syndrome happens when someone gets all outraged about a policy issue and calls their legislators all in a huff -- only to find out that they misunderstood some fundamental aspect of the proposal. Having been on the receiving end of some of these calls myself, their response is usually something along the lines of "Oh. That's different then. Well, never mind."

I am reminded of Emily Litella when reading this article in the Washington Post on where the "Death Panels" rumor got started. For those living under a rock for the last month, this is the idea that health care proposals put forth by Democrats would establish death panels for rationing care to the elderly. Couple interesting points about the death panel phenomenon:

The hospital in Wisconsin where all this started is actually seen as a leader in identifying ways for people to have a very specific say about their own end-of-life issues, INSTEAD of having other people decide for them when they are incapacitated. Kind of sounds like the opposite of death panels to me.
Allowing healthy people to be more clear about their wishes also helps save money. According to the article, there's about $40 billion a year spent on Medicare services in the last month of the recipient's life. Apparently, letting people have directives about how much effort they want put in to their end-of-life experience results in lower costs. I thought the Republicans were for reduced spending?
Finally, and most important, Sarah Pallin was, as has been widely reported, the one who "raised the alarm" about the death panels. Seriously? We're taking our national health care advice from the woman who reads "... all [the newspapers] -- any of them that have been in front of me over the years" (as she told Katie Couric)

When I'm at the grocery store, the National Enquirer is in front of me, but I don't usually believe what it has to say about federal policy (it's usually right on about aliens, though).

Pallin-bashing aside (sorry, it's so easy), the point is that the death panel argument is one of the most aggregious examples of the Litella syndrome I've seen in the last 10 years. I call on all effective advocates to resist the urge to get all fired up about something they know nothing about -- and instead take some time to learn about the issues. THEN get fired up.

The downside of policy success

2009-09-01T07:38:00.000-07:00

In "Environmentalists Slow to Adjust in Climate Debate" David Farenthold of the Washington Post makes an interesting point about persistence, or the lack of it, within the environmental community when it comes to grassroots advocacy on climate issues.

While industry groups have continued in "campaign-mode" to highlight concerns about climate change legislation, even friends of the environmental community admit that they "slacked off" after the House passed climate reform legislation earlier this year, which may have been a mistake. As anyone can tell you, it's relatively easy to get a Democratically-controlled House to pass legislation associated with Democratic agenda items. It's the Senate where the real fun will begin during September, and it's the Senate where industry groups have focused their time and effort -- and money.

In fact, some might argue that money is the real difference between the two sides. Reason suggests that industry-types might have more money to pour into a campaign against climate change legislation and it is true that their investments have led to a series of television ads and much glitzier rallies and campaign "whistle-stops" than the ennviornmental community.

But the article points to another important element missing in the environmental communities' message -- passion. While the environmental coalition is running ads and holding events, they tend to be lower key, less enthusiastic and, thankfully, less shrill than what the industry is puting forth.

Perhaps the trajectory of this debate points to a political truism: it's easier to be passionate about something you're scared of than something you're for. And since passion for your cause is a critical component for persistence, it's no wonder that as the left gets more of what it wants from government (in health care, environmental protection and the like), they likewise become more complacent.

It's the downside of success that we all should be aware of, regardless of whether we're talking policy change, business success or plain old life!

Opinions are NOT Facts -- Especially in Advocacy!

2009-08-12T07:44:00.000-07:00

I am often asked to be a guest on talk radio shows around the country, and I'm surprised that I tend to enjoy them very much. Sure, I get the occasional somewhat "controversial" host, but I find most hosts -- even those I don't really agree with -- to be generally thoughtful people. We talk about things like "Why Congress is Designed to be Completely and Totally Inefficient" and, of course, how citizens can be heard.

This morning, for example, I spoke with Troy Derengowski of WHON in Richmond, IN. While he and I don't really see eye-to-eye on whether people in Washington, DC work hard or want to do good for the country (I'll leave it to you to imagine who takes what position), I did feel that we had a good back and forth discussion.

It's unfortunate, then, that some callers on this and other shows do not want to offer the same level of courtesy and respect for other's opinions. For example, did you know that I'm a communist who is an apologist for Congressional efforts to eliminate habeas corpus and euthanize seniors? (sorry dad)

That some people would make such strange accusations doesn't surprise me, naturally, but it saddens me. Why are the same people who are "disgusted" by the rancor, bickering and partisanship in Washington, DC so willing to engage in the practice themselves? Why assume that people in DC are evil, terrible human beings bent on making life miserable for average citizens?

Their response would, of course, be "but the people in Washington, DC are evil, terrible human beings bent on making my life miserable." This, my friends, is an opinion. And, get this, opinions vary from person to person. Some people actually truly and honestly believe that single-payer health care systems and financial services reform are good things. It is not a fact that "everyone hates everything Congress is doing," to paraphrase one of the recent callers on a show. That is opinion and effective advocates will be very careful in differentiating between the two.

I may be titling at windmills here, but I'd encourage anyone hoping to engage in civil political discourse to heed to words of Evelyn Beatrice Hall (as she describes Voltaire's perspective) "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

In other words, everyone is entitled to have (and to express) their opinion. No one should be shouted down or prevented from sharing their views. And we all should be thankful for and protective of the right to express our opinion freely -- while recognizing others have the same rights as well.

Wouldn't it be nice to see our democratic discourse work like that? Wait, I think I see another windmill over there...

... And More on AstroTurfing

2009-08-07T07:30:00.001-07:00

Sorry to anyone who is tired of fake grassroots, but it's just such a hot topic lately. Today's Post had an article about how UPS employees were forced to lobby against FedEx. The article suggests that rank-and-file UPS workers (drivers, office personnel, etc.) were told by their managers to send letters to members of Congress in support of more stringent labor rules for FedEx.

If true, this is certainly an example of astroturfing at its most egregious. Informing employees of an issue and allowing them to make their own decisions is one thing: sitting them down with a pen, paper, talking points and some not-so-veiled threats is entirely different. There is a right way to encourage employee and other citizen involvement in advocacy. What's described in this article is NOT it.

Perhaps even more significant is the fact that given how these letters were generated, I'm not even sure how effective they would be anyway! I mean, if you're going to strong arm employees in to writing letters you might as well have them be effective. Some key problems with these:

Umm, handwritten letters? So last century. Pieces of paper going to Washington, DC go through an irradiation process. They come out of that process brown, crunchy and smelling bad (not to mention 3 weeks late). Personalized e-mails or faxes are often a better way to go.
Apparently managers told employees to choose from a few "key arguments" that they were to copy verbatim. A more effective letter would incorporate personalized arguments and stories from the writer about how they've been harmed by the status quo and how the proposed policy change would benefit them.
Employees were apparently pulled from work activities and told to write these letters while on the job. While that's not illegal, it's certainly suspicious. Anyone wanting to solicit employee engagement should encourage them to participate in "off hours."

Again, engaging employees in legislative initiatives can be both effective and ethical. The key is to consider this work in the context of helping employees understand the issues and giving them the tools they need to participate should they choose to do so.

In short, follow these basic rules for better corporate advocacy -- Foster the efforts of your internal champions to tell a positive story, yes. Force people who don't want to be involved and don't want to write letters, no.

More on AstroTurf Lobbying

2009-08-05T09:49:00.001-07:00

There's more on the recent "astro turf" lobbying scandal in the Washington Post today. Turns out it was the pro-coal "American Coalitions for Clean Coal Electricity" who hired Bonner and Associates to generate grassroots / grasstops support for changes to the climate change legislation. The ACCCE did not, obviously hire the firm to do fake letters, but to me this just demonstrates what happens when organizations focus almost exclusively on the NUMBER of letters going to the hill on an issue as opposed to the QUALITY. In this case, at least 12 of the 47 or so letters generated by Bonner were fake. That's a 25% fake-to-real ratio.

Nothing excuses the firm in question or the staff person who allegedly put together these fake letters. But would this have happened if someone had said "hey, we don't care about the number of communications. We just want to be sure they come from people who really feel strongly about this issue?" The truth is that just one high quality, thoughtful communication will have more of an impact on a legislator than 10 or 20 or 100 luke warm communications -- no matter whose name is on the letterhead.

The practice at Bonner and Associates (according to some bloggers) appears to be the opposite. Clearly, the premium is on getting as many letters out as possible without regard for their accuracy or adhering to the basic principles of enhancing true citizen communication with Congress.

The silver lining here is that this demonstrates to me that generating grassroots / grasstops support for an issue CAN be a useful tactic for advocay success if done right. And by done right, I mean focusing on helping truly engaged citizens connect in a meaningful way with legislators. I do not mean making stuff up.

Astroturf Ruins it for the Rest of Us!

2009-08-04T13:35:00.000-07:00

There's a debate going on in Washington, DC (and has been for years) on whether so-called "grassroots lobbying" efforts should be included in lobbying disclosure regulations. This issue has come up again most recently in the context of organized grassroots campaigns, where an organization hires a company to generate grassroots communications into an elected official's office (full disclosure: our firm frequently helps organizations run these kinds of campaigns).

Sometimes a bad actor (or two or two hundred), generates grassroots communications that are less than genuine -- and gets caught, as noted in this Sunlight Foundation blog post. There's no way to defend this practice, of course. The whole POINT of grassroots organization is to inspire the delivery of quality, relevant and, most important, personalized communications from constituents. It is NOT to send fake communications in to a legislator's office. Not only is that unethical, it's not even effective. So why do it?

However, I do not think that the fact that there are some bad actors should automatically mean that anyone who does any grassroots lobbying should register. Naturally I would think that: it's in my firm's best interest not to have to go through the hassle of registering.

But, it's more than that. Believe it or not, I think that the vast majority of organized grassroots campaigns have honorable intentions. In most cases, their main goal is to give citizens the tools they need to connect in a meaningful way with their elected officials on issues those citizens truly care about. This, to me, is a practice that should be encouraged, not discouraged.

The problem with requiring some sort of registration for these types of campaigns is that if the net is cast too wide, such a requirement might limit true citizen participation in the political process. Imagine the citizen advocate who wants to rally people in his or her neighborhood to argue for (or against) health care reform. They decide to show people what to do, set up a "do it yourself" website and make some flyers to encourage people to attend townhall meetings. Should that person be required to register as a "grassroots lobbyist?" What if they take small donations of $20 bucks per person to defray expenses? Or hire a web consultant to help them put together a website? Would other people be less likely to participate if they thought they had to register with a government entity?

Sure, there are a lot of big players out there, some of whom are spending millions of dollars on these efforts (not with us, unfortunately :)). But how do you draft language that gets at just the "big guys" and leaves the smaller, citizen-based coalitions alone?

It seems to me that the danger of limiting citizen participation is much higher when it comes to registration requirements for grassroots campaigns. Therefore, it makes significantly more sense to tread much more lightly, to combat bad actors where they are found, and to redouble our efforts to encourage open and honest citizen to government communication.

http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com/2009/07/31/when-lobbying-is-fraud/

2009-07-29T15:38:00.001-07:00

Transparency, Accountability and Citizen Responsibility

I just attended a terrific presentation by Julie Germany of George Washington University's Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet (http://www.ipdi.org). She offered a range of useful facts and figures designed to make the point that in today's super-charged, technological world, citizens expect more relevant information and more interactivity from their elected officials than ever before -- and they want it about 100 times faster than they've ever wanted it. Anyone who has worked in a Congressional office (and lived to tell the tale), can attest to the truth of these increasing and some might say overwhelming expectations.

Increased government transparency, specifically in the form of getting more information about what government is doing (dollars spent, meetings held, bills introduced and considered, etc.), is catering to that desire. Let me start by saying I have no
objections to sharing this information. In a "government by the people," (believe it or not, we're still that) citizens have every right to all the information they want about what government's up to (or isn't). It shouldn't be a secret.

At the same time, though, I think it's incumbent upon those demanding the information (or complaining about all the "secrets" in Washington, DC), that they make an effort to understand the content and relevance of the information once they get it and have some sense of what to DO with what they've learned.

All too often there's an "Emily Litella" quality to citizen communications with elected officials. For those under the age of 40 who are reading this, Emily Litella was a fictional character played by the late, great Gilda Radner on Saturday Night Live (back when it was funny). She would get absolutely OUTRAGED about things like "violins on TV," until someone told her it was "violence on TV" and then she would say, as only she could, "oh! well, never mind." Believe me, it's funnier when you see it, which you can on You Tube.

How many times a day do people misinterpret what they read on the Internet (or believe without question) and then decide to contact a Congressional office in an outrage? Enough to shake the foundations of Congress with a loud chorus of "never minds."

Granted, fear mongering is a tactic sometimes used by the unscrupulous to inspire action -- but don't succumb! The next time you're tempted to be outraged about something, make sure you really should before you call all in a huff. And if you have ample reason for outrage, then figure out how to approach your legislators in a way that will capture their attention. If you need some help with that, check out articles on my site at http://ping.fm/YH5sZ

Hope this helps, and happy (thoughtful) advocating!

2009-07-23T12:28:00.001-07:00

No Senate vote on health care before the August work period: what does this mean for you? It means there will be some perfect opportunities to share your views on this and other critical legislative initiatives (financial services, for example) while members of Congress and their staff are at home during the August district work period. Here are three quick and easy things you can do in the next few weeks to enhance your advocacy efforts by leaps and bounds.

1. Attend a townhall meeting: If history is any guide, your legislators will be holding what are called "townhall meetings" left and right during August. These are two to three hour sessions hosted in the community where the legislator provides information on what is happening (or not happening) in DC and constituents have an opportunity to comment and ask questions. Call your legislator's office (you can find contact information at www.congress.org or call the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121) and ask them when they will be holding these meetings. And then go!

2. Ask your legislator or a staff person to visit your facility, group or project: Pictures often speak louder than words, so consider whether you can actually show a legislator something in the district that demonstrates why you feel so strongly about the policy issues you're advocating on. If you can't get the legislator, get a staff person -- they actually handle most of the day to day work and it's essential to build a positive relationship with them. For tips on setting up site visits, visit my FAQs page at http://ping.fm/f7HkJ

3. Do your homework: August is almost always a good time to "catch up" on paperwork, projects, etc. Why not use a few minutes of that catch up time to learn about your legislators? Go to www.congress.gov, for example, to look up the bills they've introduced. Once you know some of the policy issues they care about, you'll have a much better shot at drafting a message they might find compelling.

Don't get caught up in the "Dog Days of Summer" (unless there are actual puppies involved). Instead, take some time to connect with legislators while they're home. You'll be ready to hit the ground running in September after taking a few steps today to prepare.

2009-07-20T16:58:00.001-07:00

The SPIT Technique for Advocacy

I'm a big fan of acronyms as, frankly, they're the only way I remember things (I used to be better about remembering, but something has happened to me in the last few years). Knowing that people of my generation may have the same problem, I figured it would make sense to share this with you and see if it's useful. So here goes!

S is for Specific. When developing a message for legislators and their staff, you should be very clear about what you specifically want them to do. It might be a legislative ask, like sponsoring a bill, or it may be a relationship building ask, like attending an in-district meeting. Whatever it is, have a goal for your communication. Otherwise, you won't get the attention you deserve.

P is for Personal: Advocates bring a great deal to the influence equation including, perhaps most importantly, their personal stories. Telling an elected official why a proposed policy change is important to you personally can have a tremendous impact.

I is for Informative: Legislators and staff are looking for solid, reliable information and citizens are some of the best sources because they know how a certain policy change will impact people on the ground in the legislator's district. The most important thing to remember about the "informative" rule is that if you don't know the answer to a question, just say "I don't know, but I'll get back to you" -- and then do it!

T is for Trustworthy: It hopefully goes without saying that you should never lie to a legislator. Consider taking your "trustworthiness" a step further by actually telling them about what the other side has to say about an issue. They're going to hear it anyway -- wouldn't it be better coming from you?