What Members of Congress Do All Day and Night

The Congressional Management Foundation recently released a thought-provoking report on Life in Congress from the perspective of Members of Congress.  This survey of legislators may surprise many citizens, even those who are sure legislators and staff sit around all day doing nothing but figuring out new ways to irritate the American people.  Highlights include:

·         They spend the majority of their time in D.C. on legislative policy work and constituent services:  In fact, these activities take up fifty-two percent of their time while in the capitol.  Campaigning, on the other hand, takes up 17%.  If you don’t believe that the substantive work is more important than campaigning, try calling your legislator’s office, explaining you’re a constituent and asking for a few minutes of a staff person’s time to discuss the policy issues you care about.  You’ll get that time, particularly if you’re polite. They may not always agree with you, but they’ll listen.

·         They spend an average of 40 weekends per year in their districts:  These are those infamous “recesses” or “district work periods” that everyone thinks are vacations.  They aren’t.  They are opportunities for constituents to connect with legislators at town halls and through district meetings.   There’s a two week work period coming up the weeks of March 25^th and April 1^st.  You can make a difference by contacting legislative offices this week to ask when they’ll be having a town hall or community meeting in the district.  Then take the time to go.

·         The vast majority believe they are performing a public service and are invested in their work:  Why would you stay in a job where hardly anyone likes you and it’s impossible to get anything done despite the excessively long hours?  For legislators it’s because they believe in what they’re doing.  In fact, they believe so much that in many cases they are unable to give up principles they hold dear.  Take a minute to look up the bills they’ve introduced at www.congress.gov to learn a little more about what they care about.  You’ll be surprised.

I’m not naive enough to believe everyone will be convinced by this study.  Many citizens may agree with one commenter who asked:

“[a]m I supposed to be impressed? If I had an employee who put in so many hours and accopmlished [sic] so little of value I would fire tham [sic].”

Before you get on board with that sentiment, let’s try to be fair.  If I had a job where I had to get 270 people with vastly different views to agree with me before I could get anything done, I’d leave.  Yet legislators stay because they believe that they are representing the views of their constituents -- and with incumbent re-election rates consistently in the 90^th percentile range, it appears that many are.  Constituents support their Congressperson because he or she reflects the values of the district they represent.  It’s all those other people who are the problem.   That’s the nature of representative democracy.

If we’re going to make our way out of the mire of our current partisan political environment, perhaps the message from citizens should be “let’s all unbend a little,” not “you’re all jerks who never listen.”  It can only help.

***The Following article was written by Stephanie Vance, The Advocacy Guru. Follow her on Twitter.

REM (and Policymakers) Say "It's the End of the World as we Know it."

Or is it?

At this point I will be very surprised if Congress comes up with some last minute deal to stop sequestration from happening.  I've been wrong before many times (and on many subjects).  But with members of Congress leaving this afternoon for their districts I don’t see much hope.  And when the Speaker of the House says "[w]e should not have to move a third bill before the Senate gets off their a** and begins to do something," (as quoted in the Detroit Free Press) that’s never a good sign for either bipartisan or bicameral action.

No matter how frustrated we are with process, however, it’s important to remember that the question of whether these cuts stick – and for how long -- remains up to the American people.  Legislators will be back at home over the weekend, so now’s the time to tell them what you think.  Following are some tips on how to so to:

• Be clear about your position: At a minimum be clear whether you’re “OK with it” or “not OK with it.”  If you’re not OK with it, why?  Are flight delays really getting you down? (full disclosure, I’m flying on Sunday – hopefully).  Have the cuts impacted your job?  Your family?  Your health?  Your leisure time?  The weather (hopefully not).  Whatever it is that’s bugging you, tell that personal story.

• Recognize that reasonable people can disagree:  Because of the way district lines are drawn, many legislators represent citizens on just one end or the other of the political spectrum.  For example, there are some real differences between residents of the 12^th district of California (Rep. Pelosi) and the 8^th district of Ohio (Rep. Boehner) in terms of education level, occupation type, language spoken, commuting patterns – the list goes on and on.  I know this because I did a little research on www.census.gov.  In short, day-to-day life is very different for the citizens of these two areas.  Their political views, as well as the views of their representatives, reflect those differences.  So no matter how frustrated you are, remember that members of Congress are trying to reconcile the widely varying views of the American public. 

• Finally, please, please, please know what you’re talking about:  To paraphrase cartoonist Walt Kelly, “we have seen the enemy, and he (or she) is us.”  Why do I say that?  Well, according to Pew research polls (and as reported in this US News and World Report piece), “. . . two weeks ago, 72 percent of Americans cited reducing the deficit and cutting spending as items that should be the president and Congress's top priority. However, this week, when specifically asked what to cut, Americans polled didn't want to cut much at all! As a matter of fact, many programs they wanted to remain funded as is or to increase, with the exception of a small percentage that wanted less funding to go overseas for foreign aid.”  Sorry everyone, but “foreign aid” is less than .5% of the overall Federal budget.  It’s not going to make a dent.  We find more change in the couch cushions in Washington, D.C. than that.  Please don’t suggest this as a solution.  

Perhaps the best advice I can give is to be nice.  In politics, as in life, the person who disagrees with grace and respect gets the most attention.  They’re much more pleasant to deal with.

***The above article was written by Stephanie Vance, The Advocacy Guru. Follow her on Twitter. 

Three Messages that Work with the 113th Congress.

Did you know that of the 10,445 bills introduced in the 112^th Congress (2011-2012), only 284 became law?  If I did my math right, that’s less than 3%.  And a chunk of those were about renaming Post Offices and federal buildings.  Yeah, I know: that’s not very encouraging.  In defense of policymakers, however, those numbers do not include any bill-based amendments members of Congress may have attached to moving legislation.

Still, it’s pretty clear Congress is completely and totally inefficient. And to some degree it’s supposed to be.  Trying to get 271 people (1/2 the House plus ½ the Senate plus the President) to agree to the exact language of legislation before it becomes law is no easy feat – especially when those legislators represent widely varying constituencies.

That said, some might argue that the gridlock has gotten a bit out of hand.  The good news is that some messages still resonate with both sides of the aisle.  For example, it won’t shock you to hear that “saving money” and “cutting budgets” arguments carry a lot of weight these days.  But besides these somewhat obvious tactics, what other approaches have been working recently?  Here are three options to consider:

• Compromise / Bipartisanship:  Of the 284 bills that passed in the 112^th Congress, 105 were from Democrats, 176 were from Republicans and 3 were from Independents.  Frankly, these numbers surprised me. They reflect a higher degree of bipartisanship than I anticipated.  Perhaps more important, of those that passed the mass majority were cosponsored by both Democrats and Republicans.  Advocates who can argue that their perspective is shared by legislators on both sides of the aisle will likely have more success than others.

• Government Reform:  “Government Operations and Politics” and “Congress” are the top two categories of bills (as defined by the Library Congress) that have been introduced so far this year.  Policymakers really like being associated with legislative initiatives that allow them to appear to be “solving the problems in Washington.”  Does your proposal help achieve this goal?  If so how?

• “Must Pass”: Of the 1,476 bills introduced so far this year, three have passed.  They were bills to a) raise the debt ceiling before the U.S. government defaulted on its loans, b) provide relief for Hurricane Sandy victims and c) raise limits on the National Flood Insurance program (in the wake of Hurricane Sandy).  Most legislators and citizens saw these as must pass, emergency items.  Now, I’m not saying you should make your issue sound like a crisis.  But you should consider whether your issue connects to and/or can help address a current crisis.  By framing your message in that way, you may get the attention you deserve.

Above all, don’t despair.  You may be up against tough odds, especially if you want to move something through the process.  The way to overcome those odds is through persistence, vigilance and strategic messaging.  Hopefully these ideas will help you on your way!

***The above article was written by Stephanie Vance, The Advocacy Guru. Follow her on Twitter. 

Congress Prevents The Fiscal Cliff By Creating Another Cliff

Early in the morning on New Year's Day, Congress passed legislation to avert the ominous "fiscal cliff", a combination of spending cuts and tax increases that could have reverted the nation into a recession. The bill is now on its way to President Obama's desk to be signed.

In the Senate, the bill passed by a vote of 89-8 with 3 Democrats and 5 Republicans voting against the bill. The House passed the bill by a vote of 257-167 with 16 Democrats and 151 Republicans voting against the cliff deal.

The fiscal cliff deal, officially H.R. 8, The American Taxpayer Relief Act, includes the following provisions:

- Permanently extends Bush tax cuts for the majority of taxpayers. Taxes will increase on individuals making $400,000 or more and couples making $450,000 or more.

- Taxes on capital gains and dividends will remain the same for individuals making less than $400,000 and households with an income of less than $450,000. The top tax rate of capital gains will increase from 15% to 20%.

- Tax exceptions will be phased out for individuals making $250,000 or more and families earning more than $300,000.

- Delays sequestration cuts for 2 months. The delay will be paid for with savings from adjustments in federal pensions as well as cuts in discretionary and military spending.

- One year extension for unemployment insurance.

- One year "Doc Fix" that prevents 27% cut in physicians' reimbursement for Medicare.

- Estate tax will increase from 35% to 40% for the first $5 million in assets.

- Alternative Minimum Tax will permanently be tied to inflation.

- Five year extensions of the American Opportunity Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

- Business tax breaks.

- Nine month Farm Bill extension.

- Congressional pay freeze.

Although the nation did not fall off the cliff, the fiscal cliff deal may have setup a future crisis that the 113th Congress will need to tackle in the coming months. The crisis will be the simultaneous enactment of sequestration cuts and the debt limit expiration. Additionally, the FY13 budgeting CR will expire a few weeks after.  Prepare for the fiscal cliff 2.0.

Which Pink Unicorns to Watch During Debates on the Fiscal Cliff

Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform, made the shocking revelation today on NPR's Morning Edition that pink unicorns do not exist and neither does a potential sequestration deal that would significantly raise taxes.  As the author of the "no new taxes" pledge that, in the 112th Congress, all but 6 Republican members of the House and 7 members of the Senate signed, his views carry some weight.  Although many in D.C. believe that tax increases on at least some portion of the population must be included in any fiscal cliff deal, there's been no wave of defections, as of yet, from Norquist's pledge.

This matters because it means that the partisan impasse that has plagued Congress over the last few years will continue for the next few weeks.  Remember, the members of the 112th Congress are still the ones calling the shots, not the newly elected 113th.

Let's look at the raw numbers for efforts to pass a deal:

• 218 votes are need for any deal to pass the Hous
• The Republicans hold 242 seats for the remainder of 112th (far more than needed)
• Of those 242, 236 have signed the "no new taxes" pledge (again, more than needed to support passage of a deal)
• 51 votes are needed for a deal to pass the Senate floor (or in the case of a filibuster, 60)
• The Democrats hold 53 of those seats (including the Independents) for the remainder of the 112th
• Of the 47 Republicans in the Senate, 40 have signed the pledge (i.e., 1 vote shy of the votes needed to break a filibuster)

It may seem like too much math, but these numbers, along with the tax pledge and the President's strong message that any deal must include tax increases on the wealthiest of Americans, lay out some interesting scenarios.  They seem to suggest that everything could boil down to the decisions of a few key Republicans in the House and Senate -- those who did not sign the tax pledge.

So who are these about to be inundated legislators?  According to the Americans for Tax Reform site, they are:


HOUSE
NY-24 Richard Hanna
GA-07 Rob Woodall
PA-19 Todd Russell Platts
VA-01 Rob Wittman
VA-10 Frank Wolf
KS-03 Kevin Yoder

SENATE
IN-Sen Richard Lugar
IA-Sen Charles Grassley
ME- Sen Olympia Snowe
ME- Sen Susan Collins
MS-Sen Thad Cochran
WY- Sen John Barrasso
ND-Sen John Hoeven

And remember, again (I promise it will be the last time I mention it), even though some of these people will be leaving, they are still sitting members and will be part of the upcoming negotiations.

It's going to be hot and heavy in the next few weeks -- particularly in these offices.  I feel sorry for the staff.

The Lame Duck Session Begins

Official Page

A week has passed since the election, and five House races still remain uncalled. You can view full election results and 113th Congress member list here. As the votes continue to be counted in these races, Congress returned to work today in what could be the busiest lame duck session in recent memory.

The most pressing issue confronting the 112^th Congress continues to be the impeding fiscal cliff, a collection of automatic budget cuts and tax increases that will take effect in January and that could have a major negative impact on the economy. In a recent article, Politico outlined five scenarios in which this crisis can be resolved. In addition to the fiscal cliff, Congress still has to deal with payroll tax cuts, unemployment benefits, disaster assistance, and the farm bill.

Although this is a busy lame duck session, it is essential that your issues remain relevant to legislators and that you begin to prepare your organization’s advocacy strategy for the 113^th Congress. Advocacy Associates partners Jason Jordan and Stephanie Vance, The Advocacy Guru, will be featured in the second free webinar in the series “Winning, No Matter Who Wins” on November 15 at 3:00pm. The webinar will provide post-election analysis that will help you understand the new dynamics of the 113^th Congress and what you can do today to be better prepared to get results in the next Congress.

For more details, visit the official page or register here.  

***Follow Nick on Twitter

How to Trick Your Legislators into Doing What You Want - Even in an Election Year

The Guru as the Queen

If you think about it, isn’t Halloween really about using your influence to extract resources from people in authority? We can all learn a great deal from some of the 7-year olds in our communities, particularly in their approach to the time honored tradition of trick-or-treating. How?

Be Adorable: I’m not really the most “kid-friendly” person, but I must admit that when a small child of between 4 and 10, dressed as a fairy princess or spider man or even George Will (I live in DC, remember) comes to my door on Halloween, I can be suckered in — especially when they approach all breathless with anticipation at the very idea of coercing candy out of mean old Ms. Vance simply by lisping “trick or treat.” After dumping half the candy bowl in their sacks, I’ve heard these same sweet little cherubs run screaming down the stairs saying, with no discernable lisp whatsoever, “Yo, yo, yo — I got some awesome candy at that mean lady’s house.”

While I’m not suggesting that you dress in a fairy princess costume to meet with your legislators, I do suggest that you figure out how to be most appealing. Walking into a members’ office and demanding that since a) you pay their salary with your tax dollars and b) they work for you, they should c) do whatever you say without question or d) you’ll fire them is not so adorable. Try suckering them in with a positive approach – then hit them up for all the candy in the candy bowl.

Stand Out From the Crowd: How many Vampire outfits do you think you’ll see this year? Wouldn’t it be nice to see something different? I remember one year I went trick or treating as Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz. OK, not so unusual except that I took my Irish Wolfhound Megan as Toto. I cleaned up. I was eating free candy for months (or at least what I could extract from my mother). The point is that I stood out from the crowd.

How do you stand out from the crowd of people communicating with legislators? Simply by doing things other people rarely do, such as expressing an interest in the legislator’s issues, telling a personal, thoughtful story (instead of a mass-produced e-mail or postcard) and timing your communication so that it coincides with a decision point in the process. In so doing, you are tricking the system they have in place for dealing with the thousands of communications they get per week — and you will in turn gain more personal attention.

Don’t Be Greedy (Or, As a Corollary, Be Grateful): Everyone has had the experience of having a trick-or-treater at the door that wants more than his or her fair share — and actually has the gall to ask for it. While I’m a huge fan of “making the ask”, I’m not a huge fan of asking for too much. Frankly, it turns me off when, in reaction to my presentation of an appropriate amount of candy, a trick-or-treater says “geez, is that all? Mrs. Jones down the street gives everyone five pieces.” It doesn’t make me want to hand out more candy. It makes me want to reach into their snot-nosed little candy sack and take back what I already gave (see, I told you I was mean).

 Anyone “trick or treating” at their legislatures should practice making the ask and then saying “thank you” for what may be received. Effective advocates will wipe that disappointed frown off their face and maintain a positive relationship with elected officials — next year they may be able to be more generous.

Maintain a Reputation for Having the “Good Stuff”: The “good stuff”, in this case, is the really good candy. You know what I mean. Real Snickers’ instead of the Costco brand generic “Snuckers”. Popcorn balls dripping in honey. M&M’s, Starbursts, Hershey’s Chocolate bars — mmm, I’m getting hungry just thinking about it. Just as candy is the currency for Halloween, information is the currency for the policy process.

As an advocate, it is important to have quality information on the issues you care about. This includes whatever national facts, figures and trends you can get from a national group, state-level information and, most important, stories and statistics about how your policies impact people on a district-by-district basis. Your legislators are eager to know people in their districts who can answer their questions on specific policy issues. Become one of those people by doing your research — and developing a great reputation as a repository of good information.

See? Who knew there was so much to learn from Halloween? Now get our there and engage in a little trick or treating of your own with your legislators — you may be surprised at what treats you’ll get if you ask!

***For more tips and strategies after the election, sign up for our FREE webinar, "Winning, No Matter Who Wins" on Thursday, November 15. More information here.

Congress Sets Spending Levels for First Six Months of FY13- Learn How to Prepare Your Advocates for FY13 and Beyond

Immediately prior to adjourning until after the election, Congress approved a six-month spending bill that will keep the government running when the current fiscal year ends on Sunday. Join Advocacy Associates on Thursday for the first of two free webinars on how to prepare your advocates for the election season, the new fiscal year, and beyond. Registration is now open.

The continuing resolution sets spending levels until March 27, 2013 at the $1.047 trillion level agreed upon in the Budget Control Act, the deal reached last summer to raise the debt ceiling. The spending cap for FY13 is slightly higher than FY12 levels, which will boost programs by .621% across the board and will allow $1.992 billion in additional funding to go to various projects and disaster relief.

The agreement marks a compromise between the House and the Senate, which based its individual spending bills on wildly differing topline levels. Conservative members of the House had been pushing the budget resolution introduced by Vice Presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), which would have lowered overall spending for FY13 by $19 billion. The Senate, on the other hand, supported the topline numbers agreed upon in the BCA.  In what seemed like a contradictory vote, the bill passed handily in the House, but passed by a narrower margin in the Senate. The President is expected to sign it into law this week.

After the election, fiscal issues such as sequestration, tax reform, and deficit control will dominate the lame duck session of Congress. Join Advocacy Associates for two free webinars to help you prepare your advocates and policy issues for the election season and beyond, regardless of the outcome of the election. Register here. 

The August Recess- Why It Exists and How to Advocate During the "Vacation"

It's August, the time when Congress is out of session for a month and everyone in the country asks, "Why the @#*^! are they taking a break?!" I understand the frustration, especially since issues like sequestration, tax reform, the several other issues remain unfinished.

Historically, 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 OUTRAGEOUS. As a result, the House and Senate would adjourn for the month of August to run home just as the awful humidity began. 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. Especially during an election year.

Regardless of how you feel about the recess, this can be a great opportunity for you to advocate for your issue. I would highly advise against having a lobby day, congressional briefing, or a meeting with congressional staffers in DC during August. Now is the time for your organization to turn its focus to creating a better relationship with the legislator IN THE DISTRICT. 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 very busy session that is anticipated to occur once Congress returns.

***Follow Nick on Twitter

The Advocacy Guru Discusses Special Interests

Stephanie Vance, aka The Advocacy Guru, sat down for an interview with professional keynote speaker and entertainer Craig Price. As a former Capitol Hill staffer and lobbyist, Stephanie shares her insights into how Washington D.C. works. She debunks myths about lobbying and describes what a "special interest" really is. The podcast will also provide you with tips to influence the decisions made in a Congressional office.

Listen to the blog cast here.

If you wish to learn more about influencing a Congress, visit Stephanie's blog based on her new book, The Influence Game. Follow Stephanie on Twitter.

House Budget Proposal Calls for Dramatic Cuts in FY13

The latest step in the process to determine federal funding levels for next year came this morning when House Republicans released their vision for the FY13 budget. (You may remember that the appropriations process kicked off with the release of the President’s proposal in mid-February and has continued with hearings by the Budget and Appropriations Committees of both chambers.)

Today’s proposal—announced by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI)—calls for a dramatic reduction to the overall FY13 discretionary spending limit set by the Budget Control Act last August. It proposes setting the limit at $1.028 trillion, which is $19 billion lower than the level agreed to during the debt ceiling debate.

To achieve these deficit reduction goals, the plan outlines a wide range of suggested entitlement, educational, welfare, and tax reforms. It also targets examples of what House leaders have characterized as “wasteful spending.” Overall, it attempts to place the burden of deficit reduction on domestic programs while prioritizing the preservation of defense funding.

Although it is highly unlikely that this plan will be enacted, the Ryan Budget would have resounding consequences for domestic programs. Advocacy Associates takes an in-depth look at the specific effects of these proposals on federal sustainability programs in our new subscription-based resource, the Smart Growth Reporter. This product is designed to assist smart growth organizations and sustainability-focused offices in local government with gathering, analyzing and understanding the key policies, bottom-line numbers and historical implications of the budget and appropriations process.

Sign up now to receive complimentary access to the analysis & insight included in the first report of the FY13 budget cycle.

Not Again! More Good People Leaving the Congress

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

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.”

Is Bipartisanship Still Possible in 2012?

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.

2012: A New Legislative Hope

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!

Shocking New Information: Electorate Disappointed with Government

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.

The 2012 Senate Calendar has been Released!

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!

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 Clock is Ticking: The Super Committee's Timeline

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.

Ethics Gone Wild?

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?