Winning, No Matter Who Wins

It's frustrating to see constant poll results identifying our nation's "most important problem" when the word bank voters are given to choose from is really small. What about improved transportation choices? Library funding? Stroke prevention? Workforce development? What about your issue?

In addition to worrying about whether the right issues are being discussed, there is the problem of identifying and electing the best advocates for your cause to Congress or City Council. At this point in the election season we are inundated daily with messages proclaiming doom if "the other guy" wins. It can be tempting to spend time calculating the exact results necessary on Election Day to ensure your organization's cause has a chance.

Advocacy Associates believes that with the right preparation, you can have your issue and advocates winning, no matter who wins. With a combined total of over 50 years of experience in grassroots communications and government relations, Advocacy Associates wants to help government affairs and grassroots professionals prepare their advocates and issues for election season and beyond.

This fall, we are providing two free webinars to help your organization get started mobilizing advocates, increasing issue visibility, preparing for post-election turnover, understanding what's at play during the Lame Duck, and defining your legislative strategy while everyone else is focused on the political.

Thursday, September 27, 3:00pm ET
Pre-Election Preparations
Register Here


Thursday, November 15, 3:00pm ET
Post-Election Strategy
Register Here

We look forward to talking advocacy with you!

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

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.

Helping Advocates Help Themselves

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

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

Grassroots Code of Ethics: Round 2

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.

Ethical Lobbying: Really, it's Possible!

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:

1. you’re tired of snide comments about “all the corruption in Washington, DC” – and you want to be part of the solution.
2. you want to network with others engaged in grassroots advocacy activities – we have sponsors from all walks of life!
3. you want to learn more about techniques that work in grassroots advocacy – after all, what is most ethical is also most effective.
4. 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!

... And More on AstroTurfing

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

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!

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/

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

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

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

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

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