|
|
|
|
The New Rules of Advocacy Have elections become too important to leave to the candidates?
By Alvin M. Hattal
(Published in Trend Letter)
Traditional methods of influencing policy makers and voters have given way to a new, vastly different brand of advocacy. Beyond employing the usual tools of advertising, marketing and public relations, interest groups of every stripe have invented a raft of innovative ways to get their views across to consumers, lawmakers and the media. Their techniques range from traditional, no-nonsense approaches to more ingenious ones, but all are carefully crafted to reach precisely the right audiences with the most persuasive messages. Behind the trend is a fundamental assumption on the part of power brokers: Elections have become too important to leave to the candidates. Deep-pocketed corporations, associations, unions and nonprofits are playing an increasingly large and aggressive role in the shaping of public opinion on issues ranging from business and government to education and religion. As a consequence, candidates' importance is now largely measured in the votes they can deliver for the advocacy groups that back them. Needless to say, not all candidates are thrilled by this expanding intrusion. Indeed, many fear being hit by friendly fire—from groups that put their own interests first—almost as much as they dread attack from the opposition. And it's not always clear to voters watching a televised political message or listening to the radio or reading a newspaper ad or direct mail piece just whose message they're getting; they don't always notice the tiny disclaimers or catch the subtle difference between the message from a candidate and that of an interest group. Targeting the Future It's the high-tech tools of the `90s, of course, that account for much of the success of these new pressure tactics. With a communications .evolution underway, television net-works, newspapers and magazines are being challenged as the main sources of information by the Inter-net, whose stupendous growth has resulted in part from the Balkanization of interest groups and issues over the past 20 years. The World Wide Web and email are among those tools. Many interest groups use the Internet for grass-roots political organizing by ere: ting their own Web sites. And visitors to those sites are encouraged to dash off letters to their representatives. The Petroleum Marketers Association of America, for example, uses a software program called CapWeb to coordinate its members' letter-writing efforts. Members can now knock off letters to their representatives in about a minute—no need to sit down and think about what they'd like to say and how to say it. If legislators and the general public are fair game for opinion-shaping, schoolchildren are more controversial. Examples include Exxon's distribution of a video portraying the cleanup of its disastrous 1989 Alaska oil spill as a model of its environmental concern. Dow Chemical sent science teachers an MTV-style video that touts the benefits of chemicals in teen favorites such as fast food, perfumes and color TV. Chevron gave schools an instructional video about global warming, emphasizing that the theory is open to question. Though lobbyists say their aim is to get youngsters to influence their parents' views, another, unstated goal is self-evident: to create a favorable image in the minds of future decision makers. Enter Silicon Valley It took a few political disappointments to galvanize some once-naive Silicon Valley executives into joining forces to pressure for legislation they wanted. By campaigning together against a California initiative that would have eased the way for share-holders to sue companies that suffer abrupt devaluations in their stock price, they put their collective byte—and their money—where their mouths were. Even Bill Gates has learned that his colossus Microsoft must work the Washington opinion-making ma-chine to prevent critics from pressuring Congress to interfere with its business. Several capital based firms have been lobbying Capitol Hill for Microsoft on matters including encryption, Internet taxation, China trade policy and advanced TV And the company's chief operating officer has joined the GOP's Team 100, whose members donate at least $100,000. Welcome to the brave new world of lobbying. TREND IMPLICATION By identifying common goals and pooling resources and expertise, an alliance of entrepreneurs and technology executives will rewrite the political ground rules, providing advocacy groups with an arsenal of electronic tools to use to influence the public, the media and lawmakers at all levels. Their greatest immediate challenge will be to use those tools effectively without renewing calls for tighter restrictions on their lobbying efforts. The New Language of Lobbying > Soft money is a contribution from a group or individual to a political party, ostensibly to finance party-building activities. Since it's not sup-posed to fund federal campaigns, it's not subject to the limits imposed on federal candidate contributions ($1,000 for individuals, $5,000 for political action campaigns). It's also not restricted as to source. > Hard money is cash raised by candidates or parties under a 1974 law that limits contributors. Used for campaign expenses. > Issue advocacy is the promotion of policy viewpoints through advertising, public relations, voter education and grassroots mobilization, often with tax-exempt funds. As long as the ads and materials don't "expressly advocate" a candidate's election or defeat, they're not considered a campaign contribution or subject to donation limits. > Independent expenditure is a political activity paid for by individuals, interest groups and party committees to influence an election. It is protected by First Amendment rights but must not be made in conjunction with the campaign of the candidate it's intended to help.
|
|