This exercise is designed to enable students to delve more deeply into the theory and practice of political activism. If the class has already done one or both of the first two participation exercises, then students will already have an issue or cause in mind in which to promote. The objectives of this activity are:

1. To explore ways to make effective contact with government officials in order that your voice be heard.
2. To seek out other like-minded groups or individuals to form coalitions for change.
3. To attract media attention for your cause, then try to use the spotlight as leverage for persuading government officials to your cause.
4. To research studies, professional opinions, and other data that support the validity of your claims.

Access is important in political advocacy. A group can almost always find ways to publicize its issue but, at some point, it will want access to those officials who have the formal power to act on the issue. This access is sometimes easily achieved but not always. Top officials, whether they are in government, business, or the university, typically have frantic work schedules and are overwhelmed with requests of one kind or another. Even if a group arranges a meeting with an official and gets an implied promise of some kind of action, nothing may happen. It is rare when an official will look a group straight in the eye and lie. But over-promising is nearly an occupational hazard of those in power, and a group's request may lose out to a competing demand or get set aside temporarily and then forgotten.

For such reasons, a group may have more success if it takes an indirect route to the top. In seeking help from a member of Congress, for example, it may be more important in the beginning to have the backing of a key staff member. Staff members are directly involved in setting policy and priorities and have ongoing access to decision makers. They are also much easier to reach. Another indirect route to the top is to identify other officials and associates who have regular access to a top official and are known to have influence with him or her. At a college or in a community, a few inquiries are usually sufficient to locate someone who might be persuaded to intervene with the official on the group's behalf.

In the mapping of power, it is helpful to try to see the world through the eyes of those with the power. To whom do they owe their power?

Groups that seek a major change in the status quo can confront yet another type of situation and it's the most difficult of all to map. It involves what Peter Bachrach and Morton Baratz call "the other face of power." It's the face that keeps certain issues from receiving serious consideration. Attempts to move the issue along always fail. This situation is typically a result of entrenched power that is steadfastly opposed to a change.

The Mechanics of Change

• Discuss the various government offices you can contact for help with your chosen issue. Select people to begin making inquiries. Try to set up a meeting with a government official. Keep a record of your attempts and, of course, your successes.
• Begin to think creatively about all the possible ways you might be able to attain your goals. If you have an idea, throw it out to the group - no matter how silly it may seem to you. Group brainstorming is a good technique for discovering unconventional, yet often effective ways for solving problems.
• Assign members of your group to contact the media about your cause. The more sources the better. Keep a record of all your attempts and where you have succeeded.

Citizenship: Getting Involved

Groups and Social Capital

When the Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville came to the United States in the 1830s, he marveled at the abundance of civic and political groups and concluded that they were the underlying strength of American democracy. Little has happened in the nearly two centuries since to change this conclusion. Recent research, in fact, confirms it. In his pioneering Making Democracy Work (1993), Harvard University's Robert Putnam found that the more abundant a society's voluntary associations are, the more likely it is that the society's institutions will act in the public interest. Putnam uses the term civic community to describe a society in which voluntary associations flourish.

Citizens should participate in voluntary groups. By doing so, they contribute to improvements in their community, whether it be a college campus, town, state, or the nation. Moreover, the relationships that develop among people as a result of civic participation enable individuals to better understand the opinions and values of others.

These benefits are substantial. Democratic theorists such as Rousseau, Jefferson, Mill, and Dewey argued that communities should be constructed in ways that encourage the individual to participate as fully as possible in civic affairs. The theorists' assumption was that citizens "invest" in a community when they are an integral part of it. The theorists also assumed that participation expands the individual's vision, giving him or her the capacity, in Rousseau's words, for "seeing things in general." Said differently, civic participation enables individuals to surmount a narrowly self-interested view of what is best for society.

Putnam argues that America has undergone a long term decline in its social capital (the sum of its civic relationships). In Bowling Alone (2000), Putman presents evidence that indicates Americans are now less involved₁ in community groups and other forms of social interaction. He attributes the change to television and other factors that produce social isolation. Not all scholars agree with Putnam's view of the trend (some indicators point toward a rise in certain types of group membership), but no one has challenged his assumption about the importance of maintaining high levels of civic participation. The relationships fostered by this participation are a foundation of democratic life. And no democratic theorist has suggested that there can be "too much" civic participation. The higher the level, the firmer the democratic base.

From page 288 of Patterson's American Democracy 7^th edition

<a onClick="window.open('/olcweb/cgi/pluginpop.cgi?it=jpg::::/sites/dl/free/0072955686/259128/why_should_logo.jpg','popWin', 'width=573,height=163,resizable,scrollbars');" href="#"><img valign="absmiddle" height="16" width="16" border="0" src="/olcweb/styles/shared/linkicons/image.gif"> (7.0K)</a>

The Revolving Door: Officials and Lobbyists

As government has grown increasingly complex, people in Washington who know how the system works have become increasingly important actors. Not surprisingly, a revolving door has developed between positions in government and positions in lobbying groups. For example, Representative Bob Livingston, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, resigned from Congress in 1999 and soon thereafter started the Livingston Group, which lobbies Congress on behalf of business firms.

High-level officials and top lobbyists are familiar with the policy process and the issues within their sphere of responsibility. These skills are easily transferable from one type of job to the other.

The revolving door has obvious benefits. Policymakers need to be knowledgeable about public policy problems and need to have access to groups affected by these problems. The complexity of many issues today is such that it is impossible to make good policy decisions without detailed information about them. Moreover, because the U.S. governing system itself is complex—a result of its size and the division of powers—it is difficult for individuals to accomplish much of anything unless they know how to work the system.

Nevertheless, the revolving door between government and interest groups can result in abuses or power. former lobbyists, when they take a government position, can do special favors for the groups they once represented. Former government officials, when they take a lobbying post, can use their contacts within government to obtain favorable treatment for the groups they now represent. To guard against unwarranted influence, there are some restrictions on those individuals who pass through the revolving door. The 1978 Ethics in Government Act, for example, prohibits former executive branch employees from lobbying their former agency for a year after leaving it and for two years on any matter that came within the employee's area of responsibility. There is, however, no such limit on former members of Congress. Moreover, they have the unique right to go directly onto the floor of the House or Senate to speak with current members. Former members usually represent groups with which they had close ties while they were in office.

The news media and public interest groups such as Congress Watch have taken on responsibility for guarding the revolving door. When they see a lobbyist-official relationship that has become too cozy, they try to bring it into public view. However, much of what transpires between lobbyists and officials takes place in private. What do you think should be done to ensure that the revolving door works to the public's benefit?

From page 290 of Patterson's American Democracy 7^th edition

Internet Resources

Yahoo Guide to Interest Groups
http://dir.yahoo.com/Government/U_S__Government/Politics/Interest_Groups/

Yahoo Guide to Political Issues
http://dir.yahoo.com/Government/U_S__Government/Politics/Political_Issues/

NetAction's Virtual Activist Training Course
http://www.netaction.org/training/index.html
Detailed course on how to be an activist.

Web Directory: United States Supreme Court Links
http://www.romingerlegal.com/supreme.htm
Variety of links on federal and state laws.

Office of Government Ethics
http://www.usoge.gov/

Regional Councils of Government
http://www.abag.ca.gov/abag/other_gov/rcg.html
Comprehensive list of both United States and world councils of government, regional commissions, metropolitan planning organizations, regional governments, and agencies.

Government Resources on the Web
http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/govweb.html
Annotated list of federal, state, international, foreign, political science, and statistical resources. (University of Michigan)

Infomine
http://infomine.ucr.edu/Main.html
Scholarly Internet Resource Collections (University of California)

College Newspapers
http://newslink.org/statcamp.html

Yahoo's guide to College and University radio stations
http://dir.yahoo.com/News_and_Media/Radio/Stations/College_and_University/

Searching for the Meaning of: The American Democracy
Connecting the text and classroom with first-hand experience

1		Is the issue you have chosen one that appears to be solvable in the short term, or are you moving against forces of entrenched power? What are the reasons for your conclusions? (see pgs. 235-237)
2		What are the ways in which you have been most successful in gaining a voice with those in power? (see pgs. 289-294)
3		When collecting data to support your cause, what have you found to be the most effective avenues and why? What role has the media played, if any? (see pgs. 313-329)
4		In regard to your experience, what do you believe to be "wrong" with the system, and what parts do you feel have worked well for you? What are your suggestions for improvement? (see pgs. 292-293)
5		As a citizen of the United States of America, do you feel that you have legitimate access to your elected officials? Do financed lobbyists have more power than you do? How do you feel about that? (see pgs. 279-303)