As a new presidential election campaign picks up speed, an old question is being raised by the news media and the voters. Do political consultants enhance or degrade the democratic process? And, are they necessary?
Those were the issues address on Talk of the Nation, an hour-long program on National Public Radio, by Virgil Scudder, president of Virgil Scudder & Associates, and Ron Fauchaux, editor in chief of Campaigns and Elections magazine on November 8, 1999.
Triggering much of the discussion was a series of reports that Democratic hopeful Al Gore's campaign was paying controversial author Naomi Wolf $15,000 a month to advise Gore on feminist issues. That sum, later reduced to $5,000 a month, is more than Gore makes as vice president.
Both Scudder and Fauchaux defended the Gore campaign's right to pay Wolf whatever campaign officials believed her advice was worth. Neither would voice an opinion as to whether the money was well spent since news accounts don't tell the whole story of a consultant's worth.
As to criticisms that Wolf was hired to teach Gore to be a more macho man, Scudder said, "anyone in the consulting business can be ridiculed at times based on one small part of a large, and perhaps sound, body of advice."
Fauchaux told program host Melinda Penkava, "a candidate is not likely to get elected to major office without consultants because technology has changed campaigns. Among the advances he cited were satellites, CD ROMs, software for telephone banks, predictive dialing technology, and computers to edit television."
"Image is critical," said Fauchaux. There are many technical things candidates have to learn. So, they go to people like Virgil Scudder to learn how to put their best foot forward and how to understand the rules of the game."
Effective use of media, especially television, is essential, Scudder commented. "It's a critical area, he said, and it's not something you're born with. The New York-based media consultant cited Democrat Walter Mondale's lament after his landslide loss to Ronald Reagan in the 1980 Presidential campaign: "I never learned how to use television".
Why are political campaigns so expensive? Fauchaux pointed to the new technology: broadcast media, computers, cable TV channels, targeting, and polling, saying it's given people tools to do mass communications and to do research. If you don't use them, you're at a disadvantage. Consultants are people who can use those tools.
Several callers to the program lambasted consultants, saying they are detrimental to the democratic process and the country would be better off without them. Both of the program guests dissented. "Everybody takes advice from someone", said Scudder, "whether it's a spouse, a business partner or a paid professional", adding, "at least, I hope this is true. The consultant is an advisor with experience".
Fauchaux declared: "There have always been political consultants. Jefferson acted as one when he wrote the Declaration of Independence, positioning the colonies for their fight against England. Modern political consultancy really arose and developed with television and the electronic media because it required special expertise."
The entire Talk of the Nation
program may be heard on NPR's web site by visiting http://www.npr.org,
accessing the programs area, choosing Talk of the Nation, hitting archives,
and finding the November 1999 section. The program was the second half
of the November 8 broadcast.
Or click here to jump to the program: http://search.npr.org/cf/cmn/cmnpd01fm.cfm?PrgDate=11/08/1999&PrgID=5
SCUDDER GIVES ADVICE TO CANDIDATES
What capsule advice would you
give the forerunners in the Presidential race?
That was the question NPR's Melinda Penkava asked Virgil Scudder
when he appeared on her Talk of the Nation radio program in November.
Following is a summary of Scudder's responses.
GEORGE W. BUSH
Come out with positions that show more substance. Produce some substantive
issue papers and come clean on the drug issue to get it off his back.
JOHN McCAIN
Get testimony from other people that his temper is not a problem; keep
making solid, friendly TV and public appearances.
AL GORE
Concentrate on presenting a clear, forceful, easily understood message.
Find ways to loosen up that come out of his own experience, rather than
trying to adapt a different personality which can make him look ridiculous.
BILL BRADLEY
While not very exciting, he is playing pretty well on an anti-Clinton
feeling that Clinton is a little too smooth, too slick, a little too ready
with an answer. Should try to come off less as a detached scholar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YOU'RE
ON IN 30 MINUTES
How to meet the challenge
By Ken Scudder
"The executive management
team is in the fourth-floor conference room, and they just asked for an
update on the Hanson project. Can you give them a five-minute overview
in half an hour?"
This is you: Gulp!
Most speechwriters would shrink from the assignment your boss just handed
you- or, at the very least, bill you for seven hours of prep work. But
if you live and breathe the topic, giving a short speech isn't that big
a challenge. Any speaker who knows the subject well should be able to
put together a credible short presentation in a matter of minutes. How?
Just follow these steps:
1. LOWER YOUR STANDARDS
No manager in her right mind will give you a 30-minute deadline and expect
the Gettysburg Address. Accept the fact that you will not be able to say
everything you want, that you won't tell the perfect opening anecdote,
and that you can't show the slides you just sent to your Miami office.
Then get to work. Worrying about falling short of perfection leads either
to paralysis or to sloppy work, neither of which you need right now. The
key is to work quickly, not hastily.
2. DETERMINE YOUR OBJECTIVE
View your talk as an opportunity, not a chore. Ask yourself, If I had
requested this meeting, what would I want to get out of it? Have a firm
objective in mind and write it down. If you get writer's block later on,
go back over that objective and ask yourself what you need to say to achieve
it.
3. ASK YOURSELF QUESTIONS
Think for a moment about your listeners. Who are they? What are their
priorities? What will they most likely want to know about your subject?
What concerns do they have? Once you've figured our their mindset, you
can give a talk that speaks directly to them.
4. CREATE THREE KEY POINTS
Asume that one member of your audience is going to recap your talk for
a colleague. Pick three short, declarative sentences you want this executive
to say in describing your presentation -for instance, "We expect
the project to meet its deadline"; "The project will generate
a 15 percent increase in sales next year"; "Other departments
will find it easy to implement similar projects." Write down these
points (which should logically build to your objective) and make them
the backbone of your talk.
5. GET BACKUP INFORMATION
If you have a good staff, use them here. While you are creating your masterpiece,
get as much relevant information as you can. Find numbers that prove your
points. A short talk doesn't need a lot of statistics, but a few good
ones will help convince your audience: "Our customer-approval rating
went up 27 percent after we adopted these guidelines."
6. PREPARE AN OUTLINE
Take a fresh sheet of paper and, leaving space at the top and bottom,
write down your three key points in the order you'd like to say them.
In between, write down your backup information.
7. FIND ENHANCEMENTS
Can you quickly get your hands on a chart or graph that proves your point?
Do you have any graphics that will bring your message home? Did you just
remember a story that supports your thesis? Use them. Again, no one will
expect you to produce the perfect graphic or story, but a little bit of
"color" will help your audience retain your message. Think,
too, of how you want to open and close your talk, and add notes about
these "enhancements" to the top and bottom of the paper you
created in No 6.
8. GO GET EM
Five minutes or so before you're scheduled to go on, give yourself a calm
moment to close your eyes and rehearse your key points. If you have a
space where you won't be heard, go there and practice your speech at full
volume - or try it on a friendly co-worker who can identify points at
which you're going above the audience's head. Just before you go into
the conference room, remind yourself that a single speech isn't going
to make or break a career. A good performance on short notice, however,
makes you someone to watch.
98 NOVEMBER 1999/ PRESENTATIONS
WWW.PRESENTATIONS.COM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEGISLATURES CHANGING DRAMATICALLY, SAY LOBBYISTS
Significant changes are taking place in the way state legislatures
make laws, according to panel of expert lobbyists, and business is going
to be affected dramatically by the new environment.
That's the conclusion of key members of The Advocacy Group, a network of top lobbyists in the 50 U.S. states and several other countries.
Among the recent changes they cite are increased power of the news media, a greater degree of political partisanship, more influence by coalitions and special interest groups, new uses of technology, and a loss of many excellent public servants. The latter is blamed on negative campaigns, scandal-hungry media, and legislative term limits.
Too many good people refuse to run because every single detail of their privates lives is scrutinized; notes John S. (Trip) Martin III of Georgia Public Affairs in Atlanta. There seems to be a higher moral standard for a legislator than for a preacher.
Dennis Loper of Capitol Strategies Group in Sacramento, California, agrees, noting's harder and harder to get good people to run; Another factor that is diminishing the quality of legislators in California, he said, is term limitations. "How many people will run for a job knowing that the day they start they are a lame duck?" asks Loper. The result, he said, is thatwe see more ideologues in office; He added that single issue candidates are increasingly crowding out people who really believe in public service.
Linda Hull, a Colbert, Washington, attorney and lobbyist who is chairman of TAG, says technology is also quickly changing the way legislatures operate. She comments, anybody with a computer who knows how to use it can make himself look like a large, credible organization. And, a flood of e-mail messages can change the way legislators vote on a bill. The dynamics have changed.
Knowing how to use the media is also changing the lawmaking process, according to Dick Ingram of Polan Ingram Advocacy Group in Austin, Texas. Three guys standing on the steps of the capitol holding signs can get news coverage and have a powerful influence on the passage of legislation, says Ingram. Those on the opposite side need to get their people out in front to get equal media coverage.
Polls are increasingly deciding what bills get passed and which get killed. The panel agreed that there is an increasing tendency for legislators to vote on the basis of polls and pressures more than their own convictions. Georgia's Martin expresses this fear; When computers get on every legislator's desk, will they punch in, dial up the latest poll and vote accordingly? It's a concern.
Lobbying today is a complex business, agrees the panel. More than anything else, the job of the lobbyist is to educate overworked legislators about a client's positions. That requires research, some articulate persuasion and, very often, convincing the businesses affected to send out convincing spokespersons to explain an issue to the public.
One veteran lobbyist sums up his field this way: It's not about bucks, booze, and broads anymore if it ever was. It's about technology, coalitions, polls and public opinion.
The comments above are taken in part from statements made at a panel discussion at TAGís national conference in Atlanta in October and in part from separate interviews with those quoted.
Georgia's Capitol Report is a weekly subscriber-based publication that tracks government, politics and business. Its editor, Tim Bentley, is an award-winning journalist and former gubernatorial press secretary. Its web site address is www.capitolreport.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third Floor - Vol. 1, No. 39
NOT JUST "BUCKS, BOOZE AND BROADS" ANYMORE
Lobbying: Forget Business
as Usual
The
Internet and a citizenry that uses it to lobby, sunshine laws, more and
increasingly powerful female legislators, even-steven party makeups in
legislatures around the United States, solons who flip-flop on promises
to kill bills, and even a prime minister that determines the fate of all
legislation were just some of the trends discussed recently at a meeting
in Atlanta of more than 50 government relations professionals.
Moderator Virgil Scudder, a New York media trainer, began the session
of The Advocacy Group by relating the story of an old codger lobbyist
who said of the lobbying profession, "It's not just 'bucks, booze
and broads' anymore."
Indeed. To hear panelists in the group's "21st Century Legislative Environment" forum tell it, an entirely new influence-seeking profession is developing. And while these lobbyists expect to master their skills in the new environment, a read between the lines might find all lobbyists in somewhat of a brave new world with uncertain outcomes.
The ever-increasing partisan tightness in legislaures around the country is making it more and more difficult to kill bills, the panelists agreed. "It's really nothing new on the national scene but I think it's something new on a lot of the state scenes," said Dick Ingram, TAG president and a principal in Polan Ingram Advocacy Group in Austin, Texas. "As we become more of a two-party state in a lot of places where traditionally it hasn't been, you see a whole new atmosphere, especially I think in the idea of killing bills. We all know that in Washington they wake up every morning and the leadership passes out a list: here's the Democratic issues and how you're going to vote on them and here's the Republican issues and how you're going to vote on them. The worst trend on the state level is that as we get more partisan it seems like you can't hardly kill a bill anymore; it's always alive and its always still moving."
Both Ingram and TAG Chairman Linda Hull, a Colbert, Washington, attorney, have had committe chairmen change their tune about keeping legislation from reaching the legislative floor. "Shame on me the first time, but the second time this won't happen," said Hull. "The individual in the district who had wanted the member to sponsor the bill got on the Internet and contacted friends, neighbors, relatives etcetera within that district who maybe didn't know a single thing about the issue. The committee members had gotten so many email messages that all they wanted was a hearing. They got their hearing."
Ingram added that the new influence of the Internet, which allows even the smallest citizen lobbyist with a knowledge of graphics to produce Web pages and emails that pack a punch, requires more traditional lobbyists to focus even more strongly on the basics of grassroots and phone banks to provide "cover" for the legislator to vote against a bill or, if a committee chair, kill a bill.
Another trend being seen by some lobbyists in states with serious term limits is an increasing power of the bureaucracy. The government employees are likely to hang around longer than any given legislator, and in serious fights they may need only wait for the legislator's term to end to be successful.
Also in term-limit states, a problem of inexperienced legislators is causing grief for lobbyists, as it's taking time for those new legislators to trust what one panelist called "the third house." Institutional memory of the legislative process in those states is practically non-existent.
Another issue that will be faced in Georgia that has already been faced in other states is the fact that legislators are about to have laptop computers on their desks. Strict limitations have been placed by some states on what those legislators can review during a session on their laptops, often limiting access only to internal information systems such as the text of bills and contacts with other state agencies. The issue concerns lobbyist Trip Martin of the GeorgiaLink Public Affairs Group. "On today's Internet, the constituency is online and they know immediately what's going on at the Capitol and are in much better contact with the members of the Legislature," said Martin. "When those computers are at the desks of legislators, will they, as issues come up, punch in, dial in and find out what's the latest poll on that particular issue and vote accordingly? I'm fearful that we won't have that interaction necessary and the dialogue on issues as opposed to just putting the finger in the wind and checking the latest poll on an issue."
Powerful women caucuses are also somewhat of a new phenomenon in legislatures around the country. As more and more women are elected, they are successfully banding together on a number of issues.
The state of Washington's legislature has more women than any other state in the nation, and Linda Hull remembers when they first became a powerful force. "One of the biggest kicks I got was when one of the old boy lobbying firms started looking around and said, 'Gee, we've got to get a chick, uh, lady, on our business team because we've got to have someone who can talk to these women legislators.' I said, 'What, you don't know how to say good morning? Or good afternoon?'"
Surprisingly, the panelists said they have had no real problems with disclosure laws and limits on gifts to legislators. In Hull's Washington, lobbyists have to tell how much they are paid by the clients they represent and, as a cross check, those clients are required to also file what they spend on lobbyists. The top 100 are even posted on the Internet. It provides a whole new meaning to competitive pricing, as clients are able to see what they likely should be paying a lobbyist by comparison and lobbyist, likewise, are able to compare what they should be charging clients. Lobbyists in the group whose states don't require that type of disclosure admitted they wouldn't be that comfortable with having to do that.
One of the more entertaining panelists was Stephanie Ayres of GJW Government Relations in London. She made it clear that things were changing in that Prime Minister Tony Blair decides what's going to happen and that Parliament is simply a rubber stamp. "It's important that your clients don't focus on the UK as sort of 'Oh my God. We've got an issue and we've got to get over there,' because they'll arrive, they'll get off the boat and they'll look around and say, 'This is a very different place.' They need to be in quite early and realize that it's a whole different ball game. It's much more cosmopolitan, urban, bright young things. The establishment ... is on its way out."
Panelists didn't seem to have a problem with the question of whether they should be more aggressive with the media --they don't think they should be. "I think there's probably more need for a spokesperson, but frankly it ain't going to be me," said TAG President Ingram. "The companies or clients or whoever it is are going to I think have to be more aware of getting that spokesman out there to address those key issues."
In the United Kingdom, the media is essential, said Ayres. "The media becomes very important," she said. "We can encourage our clients to talk to journalists off the record. I think we're seeing a lot of democracy devolving down to journalists, which is scary because many of them don't have the sort of moral fiber we have."
And just what about journalists' penchant for the underbelly of lobbying? Said media trainer Scudder, a former editor, producer and on-air talent at NBC, ABC and Westinghouse Broadcasting, "There is a sense on the part of journalists, and I was one for many years before I went over to the other side, that they have a right to know anything and everything about you and your business. That, of course, is nonsense. But that is the sense they have. You can often deflect it with a little humor. I've used such techniques myself. When I get asked how much I make I say honestly, 'More than I used to because I think you're underpaid,' and, secondly, 'I make more than a cub reporter and less than Sam Donaldson. So you can figure somewhere in that range. I will tell you that it's not a bad life.'"
1999 Georgia Journalism Network
Copying of any content, including text, photographs, and graphic design, in any form is strictly prohibited.
____________________________________________________________________________
E-mail us with your comments, suggestions
or questions
Contact us at: Virgil Scudder & Associates, Inc.
103 Fifth Avenue-5th Floor
NY NY 10003
Call us at: 212.627-4400 (fax: 627.4875)