Tag Archives: politics

Elections matter (aka “If they can do it in Rwanda”)

Posted on January 11, 2010 by melindaklewis| Leave a comment

If I had a dollar for every time, while registering voters, someone had said to me, “it doesn’t matter who wins, they’re all the same”…well, I’d still be sitting here writing this blog post, honestly, but I would have given away more money last year and I’d be drinking the larger size Diet Dr. Pepper. I have simple needs.

But, seriously, social workers are often guilty of this “they’re all the same” mentality when it comes to elected officials, too. And I can understand it, really. On many issues that we care about, there is not that much difference between the views of ‘mainstream’ members of the two major U.S. political parties, and it’s easy to see our issues pushed entirely off the agenda and conclude that all of that electoral work was for naught.

But, now, we have some data that can actually demonstrate that who’s in office CAN make a difference, at least if that who is a woman. Below, I’ve uploaded two publicly-available academic studies that document, empirically, the difference that increasing the density of women elected officials in local communities. Interestingly, the same effects are not found for women elected to higher posts; there is some speculation that this is because of the corrupting effects of the accummulation of sufficient power to mount a national campaign (note for U.S. activists, too?).

These studies found that, when a change to the Indian constitution required that one third of villages (chosen randomly) have the position of chief reserved for women, spending priorities and governance processes were markedly different in the villages with female chiefs: more water pumps and taps, fewer bribes, and better overall infrastructure (as a side note, can a researcher imagine a better set up than random distribution like this? truly manna from heaven). You can read the studies for yourself.

Then check out the story of Rwanda, which I really knew nothing about until I read Half the Sky (you remember that–it’s the book that you all read last fall! :) As of September 2008, Rwanda became the first country in the world with a majority of female legislators. The constitution requires that women make up at least 30% of Parliament; partially because of necessity (after the 1994 genocide, women are 70% of the population) and partially because the population saw electing more women as a sort of safeguard against a reprise of that horrific violence. Once women were elected, voters lost some of their reluctance to elect more, and, as a result, Rwanda is now hailed by many observers as one of the best-governed, most economically promising countries in Africa and, indeed, in the developing world.

And, here’s my New Favorite Thing: Women’s Campaign International. This is a global organization dedicated to helping grassroots women leaders run for office, win elections, and serve effectively. It fulfills this mission by providing technical assistance and capacity building to local women’s organizations, supporting advocacy and grassroots campaigning, and directly increasing women’s incomes through entrepreneurial strategies. They include the U.S. and our rather dismal representation of women in politics nationally as part of their concern, and their website has a blog with current news and some exciting success stories.

Check them out and, then, find a woman candidate locally whom you can support. Ask her how you can help–fundraising, publicity, issue research, voter contacts…hey, watch her kids or clean her house so she can get more campaigning in. Or run for office yourself! Social workers have been highly effective members of local, state, and federal government throughout our profession’s history, and we have an important role to play today. This is the beginning of a critical election year, and we have a lot of work to do between now and the spring local elections, summer primaries, and November general election.

Just think, if they can do it in Rwanda…

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Analysis and Commentary, My New Favorite Thing

Tagged ,

Top 10 Things we should be paying attention to in 2010

Posted on January 4, 2010 by melindaklewis| 4 Comments

Photo credit, NYClovesNY, via Flickr Creative Commons

So, yes, I realize that, for the past month, everywhere you’ve looked, you’ve seen lists. Highlight lists, ‘best of’ lists, trend lists, lists, lists, lists. Lists looking backward, and lists looking forward. Lists for everything.

Well, this is the list for things that, for the most part, aren’t making any of those lists. The list of the Top 10 Things we SHOULD be paying attention to in 2010, but aren’t, with a little commentary on what we’re paying attention to instead.

We know that there’s only so much “room” on the agenda. And there are some big things taking up a lot of that space right now: climate change, health care reform, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And those issues are, absolutely, very, very important.

But they’re not the only important issues we face today. By a long shot.

And, so, I bring you my totally unscientific, admittedly biased list of the Top 10 Things that we Should be Paying Attention to in 2010, but are not (yet). These are in no particular order, but I’d certainly welcome your comments about those two or three that you find most pressing. And, of course, the dozens that I’ve left out, including those that you think belong on such a list more than those that I included! A caveat: this is a “domestic” list–I haven’t included many things that are vitally important on the world scene and deserve more attention than they’re receiving: democracy in Russia, global literacy, the political crisis in Honduras, the debacle that is our ongoing drug war in Latin America. Maybe that will be next year’s post, since I’m sure (wink, wink) that this list will jumpstart a ton of movement on these issues within the United States.

Part of our challenge as social justice champions, I believe, is figuring out how to create room on the agenda for some of these concerns without detracting from those “big ticket” items that do deserve our attention (because, of course, there are a lot of things soaking up space in the public’s mind that DO NOT deserve our attention, but that’s a whole other post). The key, perhaps, is in pointing out what will be obvious to many of you in even skimming this list: that many of these issues are linked in multiple causation to the issues that are front and center on the agenda, in some cases, in ways that could suggest alternative approaches to tackling those problems that have already found a space.

  • Political redistricting: While it may seem that it would be impossible to draw the legislative maps (nationally and within many states) any more illogically and transparently partisan than they already are, that is, in fact, what some political operatives are planning for the redistricting process to follow the 2010 Census. There are some folks paying attention at the national level, but the process is starting here in Kansas, too, with committees named to begin the deliberations. The outcome will determine, to a large extent, not only who can be elected in a given district, but also, perhaps more importantly, how young people and new voters will interface with the electoral process, since nothing discourages civic engagement like having an election essentially decided long before Election Day.
  • Tuition hikes in higher education: Tuition prices are increasing at institutions around the country, scholarships and financial aid are declining, and students, perhaps more than others in the social policy sphere, recognize the implication–higher education is poised to become, again, an elusive rite for only those with significant personal fortunes to sink into the prospect. The potential impact on the social work profession is especially dire, as we unequivocally cannot afford to become a profession even more out-of-touch with those we serve.
  • School segregation: As you know, I’m very concerned about the entrenched nature of school segregation in this nation. But, today, with all of the focus on public education directed at No Child Left Behind or, overwhelmingly, the impact of serious budget cuts on classroom resources, few policymakers or even social justice advocates seem to be talking much about the inherent wrong of having children of different races go to different schools. I don’t know whether busing or intense resources for housing desegregation, or a radical shift in the way we fund public schools, or some of all of the above, is the answer, but I know that we don’t want to be the nation we will be if this status quo continues.
  • Long-term care: Yes, there’s a ton of talk about health care, but very little of it relates to long-term care. There are almost no substantial long-term care reforms in the health care legislation, despite the fact that long-term care eats up ever-increasing portions of Medicaid, long-term care costs can easily bankrupt older adults, and few Baby Boomers have made provision for their long-term care needs. Again, I don’t know what the answer is, but with an aging population, we have to carve out some room in the discussion about “productive aging” to deal with the reality that many older people get sick or develop disabilities and, when they do, we need a coherent and adequate system to take care of them.
  • Prison conditions: I would say that I am fairly appalled and alarmed by the conditions in most U.S. prisons. It seems like every week or so I hear something awful, about serious overcrowding (especially in California) that threatens the life and safety of those incarcerated (and, of course, their jailers), or just atrocious conditions that in no way prepare people for success after they leave prison. I know that there are few target populations less sympathetic than prisoners, but I also know that we lock up a lot of people in this country, and most of them get out at some point, and (very compelling human rights arguments aside) there are some very important reasons that we should all care about how they’re treated while they’re in.
  • Creeping exploitative free-trade agreements: Even some of the most die-hard free trade proponents can’t argue that the North American Free Trade Agreement has brought what it promised (um, an “end to illegal immigration”, anyone?). Yet the policy under the Bush Administration was to pursue expanded free trade agreements, first throughout Central America, and then on an ad-hoc basis with countries around the world, after the Free Trade Area of the Americas was derailed. So far, the Obama Administration, despite some campaign rhetoric about fair trade, hasn’t made changing trade policy much of a priority. But if we’re going to address human rights, moderate migration, stem rising global poverty, and stop massive U.S. job loss, we’ve got to write trade agreements that prioritize values other than maximum profit for powerful corporate interests. We need a fair trade agenda, and we need it like 30 years ago.
  • Rising global food prices: One of the most tragic paradoxes of this current recession has been the increase in food prices, even as prices for many other goods (and, of course, wages) have fallen. Many factors contribute to this phenomenon, including the impact of climate change on agriculture, rising demand for biofuels, speculation in agricultural markets, population growth, and increasing urbanization. Inflation in food markets is not, of course, just a matter of idle consideration. People, especially children, starve to death when food prices increase dramatically. Especially if they increase while wages fall. Especially if trade agreements (see above) are structured so that those benefitting the most from the increases don’t live in the same countries where people are mostly hungry.
  • School board and Secretary of State races: From the profound to the seemingly banal, I know, but I keep wondering how many times I’m going to have to (very nicely, I think) ask people to please pay attention to who’s running for Secretary of State and school board (local and state levels) in their jurisdictions. What if I say “pretty please”? Remember the role of the Florida Secretary of State in the 2000 Presidential election? Remember how that one turned out? Here in Kansas, we have our own, very important, Secretary of State’s race. And school board races are always tremendously important, not only as the battleground in which decisions about sex, money, religion, and the future of our nation (you know, minor things) are fought out, but also as the launching pad of many elected officials who eventually obtain higher office. Most states will have at least one of these elections in 2010, and advocates for social justice need to show up, as candidates, volunteers, and voters.
  • Pro-parent social policy reforms: Yes, I’m a mom. And, yes, that probably drives a lot of my thinking about social policy related to parents. But it was really my volunteering at the Christmas Bureau over the holidays that reignited my thinking on this. For the most part, the people I helped were pretty extraordinary parents–working, sometimes two jobs, often by single parents, and very, obviously, totally committed to their kids. And I reflected on how very little we do as a country to validate and support their role as parents. I mean, we have children’s policies and family policies, but really very little attention to parents and their needs as parents. I haven’t fleshed out all that pro-parent policy would include, but good maternity and paternity policies would be a start; followed by flexible leave; publicly-supported emergency childcare and respite services; and meaningful child support enforcement. Raising kids is really, really hard. And there are a lot of parents working really hard at it. Instead of assuming that what everyone needs is a parenting class, we need to find ways to invest in parents’ potential.
  • The corrosive effects of ballot measures: So, yes, I save the most controversial for last. I know that I’ll hear from some “power-to-the-people” folks who think that everyone should have a right to vote on everything, but I just don’t agree. I’m tired of seeing that one state or another has passed another horrible referendum on gay marriage, or some terribly short-sighted tax limitation, or some disguised attack on Affirmative Action (“civil rights initiative”, anyone?). We have elected representatives because they are supposed to decide the hard policy questions facing our nation, and we certainly have a role to play in making that happen (including electing people we think likely to make wise decisions on our behalf). But popular sovereignty was the wrong path in 1861, and it’s largely the wrong one today. We need state-by-state reform of the laws governing the use of the ballot measure, and then we need to redouble our efforts in legislative advocacy in support of progressive policy reforms.

    Thoughts? What would you add? What would you take off? What would ‘move the needle’ on any of these issues? What role can/should social work play?

    • → 4 Comments

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary

    Tagged ,

    The voices, votes, and value of nonprofit organizations

    Posted on November 11, 2009 by melindaklewis| 1 Comment

    I love it when I come across a scrawled notation in one of my notebooks that, upon examination, turns out to be something pretty awesome.

    This is an example of that.

    From some notes I took in a meeting with our local chapter of Nonprofit Connect (formerly Council on Philanthropy) in September, I found “V3 Campaign” and the url. I visited the site yesterday, and found that it’s a national effort to: “make the voice of the social enterprise and non-profit movement heard, its value realized, and its votes counted in EVERY election.” Hurrah!

    So the goal, as they state it, is “to develop a new generation of political leaders who understand the economic contributions of social service organizations, who recognize the potential of social enterprise and micro-credit to reinvigorate communities and who include the sector in their plans to rebuild the economy.” They do this through a three-fold strategy (hence the V3 name): using data to demonstrate the value that nonprofit organizations add to the economy (they, like many of us, are struggling with the term to use to define this sector, exactly), to help nonprofits understand how to make their voices heard in the political process (including advocacy, nonpartisan voter work, and media campaigns), and getting nonprofits engaged in direct electoral work, to the extent allowed by law.

    They’re using videos, candidate questionnaires, fact sheets, and coordinated candidate forums to do this, and they take a long view: that by exerting the social change sector as a voting bloc, we can, over time, influence who is elected and, therefore, change public policies that impact our organizations and the people we serve.

    The impact of the project is far from known at this point–they’ve got a 10-year timeline, and it’s a new effort. And it remains to be seen if V3 can get nonprofits as energized about the core social and economic (and political!) issues we address as we often are about our own survival–yet it’s precisely those issues that we most need elected officials to address; we’re in the social change business, not the nonprofit sustainability one.

    But, still, I’m really hopeful. The vision behind V3 is Robert Egger of the DC Central Kitchen, an innovative and pretty inspirational social service organization. He gets this, and that bodes very well. And, truly, this is the first time that there has been an effort like this to translate the moral and economic weight of nonprofits into a political force. Even if it doesn’t totally succeed, that would not be failure.

    Visit V3. Sign up for updates. Send your elected officials questions about how they will respond to the needs served by the social service and social enterprise sectors. Register your nonprofit coworkers to vote. Host a candidate forum for the 2010 elections (they’ll be here before we know it!). Make your voice, vote, and value count.

    → 1 Comment

    Posted in My New Favorite Thing

    Tagged ,

    Behind the curtain: Obama for America’s New Media Triumph

    Posted on November 4, 2009 by melindaklewis| Leave a comment

    obama

    In spring 2008, one of my savvy students asked for part of our ‘open lecture’ during the Advanced Advocacy & Community Practice course (I left one week open for students to request content related to skills/themes that they had particular interest in or wanted to develop more, in preparation for practice) to be dedicated to discussing the successes of the then-Barack Obama campaign in the area of technology and grassroots organizing.

    Now, with the advantage of hindsight, I thought I’d mark the one-year anniversary of President Obama’s election with some thoughts about how that campaign changed how political campaigns in the future will use social media and other emerging technologies and, more importantly, the lessons for any community organizer/aspiring activist that can be culled from an evaluation of Obama for America’s efforts.

    Helpfully, some of the folks that ran the new media components of Obama for America worked with independent consultants to prepare a report that attempts to quantify and describe the return on investment of various components of that strategy and (thanks to having a former community organizer for a President?) draw conclusions for nonprofit advocacy organizations.

    Even a year out, it’s still pretty amazing to reflect on what Obama for America was able to do–an email list of 13 million people? More than $500,000,000 raised online? They’re careful to offer the caveat that, of course, Barack Obama had something to do with that success (not exactly replicable by every nonprofit organization!), but there’s a lot that’s tremendously helpful here. It’s worth reading, and it includes examples of email texts, screen captures, and other archival material that illustrates their key points.

  • Email, email, email. I have to admit, I’ve bought into some of the hype that email is overrated (because it is so vulnerable to spam, and many people don’t read mass-generated emails), but it is clear that the Obama operation viewed collection and exploitation of email addresses as the central task of all of their online activity. They raised most of their money and recruited most of their volunteers through email. They deployed thousands of volunteers at mass events to collect emails, and they turned those emails into volunteers and ongoing donors. I am convinced.
  • Online organizing does not replace old-fashioned grassroots door knocking. The core campaign folks emphasized that the field program deserves much credit for the victory; those relationships and 1:1 conversations still matter very, very much. They had 4000 paid organizers on the ground, plus many volunteers, and that made a huge difference. Still, it’s worth noting that HALF A BILLION of the dollars that paid for those field organizers came from online, which is not an insignificant contribution.
  • Test, measure, adjust. They used analytics to test everything: language on emails, the color of the ‘donate’ button, whether that button actually said ‘donate’ or ‘learn more’ or ‘join us’, which picture of Obama generated the most response, whose signature was most popular, etc… and they ditched what wasn’t working as well and switched to higher-yield tactics. So smart.
  • Use video and images to tell your story. OK, so ‘our story’ isn’t necessarily quite as compelling as ‘elect Barack Obama’, but it’s still important, and how we tell it matters. They made a point of using video to highlight those in the movement, not to just push Obama as a product, and this increased views and drove people to volunteer. Their YouTube content (official campaign stuff only) generated the equivalent of $46.9 million in paid advertising exposure. For very little money.
  • Be nimble. One of the main advantages of new media is that we can use it to respond rapidly, to changing events or new information or a rumor or whatever. But we lose that advantage if everything has to be vetted through 2 Board committees and a lawyer on retainer and so on. We can scoop traditional news by producing our own content, but only if we get it out there quickly.
  • We need to be disciplined in our communication. Make sure that your writing is excellent, and stay on message. Maintain a narrative arc across appeals, be concise, be personal, embed graphics and video for impact. Only send what is of value to your audience (no, your prospective donors don’t want to know which Disney princess you’re most like…). Invite people in to a conversation. Be authentic. Stay on message (still). They found that they could send up to three emails per day if they were well-crafted; nonprofit organizations in the middle of an urgent campaign could likely increase their frequency too, if we maintain quality.
  • Online advertising works. The Obama campaign had three times the return on investment for their Google advertising. **Watch next week for a post on Google grants to see how you can get that same kind of advertising for free!** They particularly had success with interactive ads, like the ‘calculate your tax cut’ calcuator.
  • Give people something they value. People used the vote for change voter registration tool to download voter registration applications, and then Obama for America captured those email addresses and used them for GOTV.
  • There is tremendous potential in mobile text messaging to reach those who are not online, but this tactic is still undeveloped, and technology impedes full utilization (because of costs associated with receiving texts). This is an area, like Twitter and Facebook, that have evolved considerably even in the past year.

    The conclusion of the report reiterates that virtual field organizing is no substitute for ‘boots on the ground’ work, but rather a supplement that can add significant value when strategically implemented.

    And that brings me to my final point, that electioneering is no substitute for old-fashioned agitation. The saying is that we only get the government we deserve–many people worked hard to elect Barack Obama president. Now, if we want to live up to the promise, we have to keep working just as hard to ensure that we earn the victories we deserve on the many critical issues facing our country.

    Consider your rearview mirrors adjusted, and let’s move forward.

    • → Leave a comment

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary

    Tagged , , ,

    On privilege and leadership: Que viva Kennedy

    Posted on August 27, 2009 by melindaklewis| Leave a comment

    So, I know that blogs and traditional media outlets have been inundated with coverage of Senator Ted Kennedy’s life, public service, and death. Certainly many who knew his work and life much better than I have provided ample tribute and considerable analysis.

    I just have two things to add.

    I remember a rally for immigrant rights on the lawn of the U.S. Capitol building, listening to him speak and then to the rather amazing (it still brings tears to my eyes) sound of thousands of immigrants, most of whom spoke English as their second language, shouting “Kennedy” in a dozen different accents. Most didn’t know much about his family, or his legacy, but they knew what they heard and what they sensed: that, here, was a public official who wasn’t talking about ‘touchbacks’ or ‘guest workers’. He was talking about ‘justice’ and ‘America’ and ‘rights.’ That’s my first reflection on his role; at least from my encounters with him and with his office, while he was quite a pragmatic politician, he also had an understanding of his power, his electoral invincibility, and the freedom and responsibility that they bestowed on them. It was the only speech I can remember during my campaigns with immigrants hearing a member of Congress speak (in English, at least) about immigrants the same way that immigrants speak about, and to, themselves. It was pretty uncensored, and, to a community deluged with negative attacks and half-hearted ‘help’, it was renewing, invigorating, and redeeming. It was like a gift that he knew he could give to us, one that we very much needed. He did it again, later, on a conference call during some of the ugly negotiations over legislation, negotiations in which he central. He reminded us of the horrible stories he heard during hours talking with survivors of the New Bedford, MA ICE raids, and reminded us that that’s why we were in this fight, and he pitched himself as our ally in that struggle. When he left the call, there was an audible exhale and some nervous laughter, letting off steam. We were restored to fight on. That, to me, is about understanding your power and privilege and using it for good. Unpacking it, so you can exploit it. And it’s inspiring.

    My other memory of Senator Kennedy was in a town hall-type event on immigration. He made a point of shaking the hands of several of the immigrant kids who were there with us, including one that had come with me. She asked me about him later–who he was and why he cared. In talking to her, I was struck about how much his life was not about the American Dream of ‘anyone can be a leader’ but a lot more about the idea that some have special responsibility to lead, and what it means to live that weight. And we talked about the scandal that had touched his life and career, about how he had almost thrown away his place in politics. And she was quite comfortable with the idea that, as she put it, we’re all human, and it’s what we do to make up for our mistakes that distinguishes us much more than making them in the first place. And I thought about that this week, when he is remembered much more for the good that he has done with his legislative career than for the tragedy of Chappaquiddick, even though that tragedy echoes still. If we hold that only those public figures without flaw are worthy of revere, then we’re, by extension, excusing from courageous service all of us who are flawed. We can’t afford to bench that many of our allies. We need accountability, we need transparency, we need honesty, but we also need space for redemption. In my memory, the student’s brow furrowed for a minute upon hearing the story, and then she returned her gaze to watching Senator Kennedy embrace immigrant families, nodding as she watched good decisions atone for the past.

    We obviously can’t all be Kennedys, but we can all leave our mark–using the power that we accummulate as a force for good, refusing to be sidelined by the mistakes we’ve made, living up to our destiny to lead even as we’re still creating it.

    → Leave a comment

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary

    Tagged , ,

    My Two Cents: Health Care Reform and What I Did

    Posted on August 13, 2009 by melindaklewis| Leave a comment

    I heard a great piece on The World tonight about the health care debate: specifically, they talked about how the controversy over the proposal(s) is receiving a lot more media attention than their substance (similarly to how media often cover the ‘horse race’ aspect of elections more than the issues) and about how Britains are using Twitter to defend their national health system. They also made the point that the UK’s NHS has become a straw man in the health care debate in the U.S.–its weaknesses exaggerated and then conflated with President Obama’s plans.

    After I got home, I sat down and wrote handwritten letters to my congressional delegation. I’ve been wanting to do more; I haven’t been to any town halls yet (if they think those are rowdy, try being a pro-immigrant advocate on an AM talk radio show!); I haven’t made any phone calls; I haven’t even talked about it that much with friends or colleagues. But, I pulled out some of my few remaining (totally awesome) Truman Scholar notecards (the ones with a painting of the Lincoln Memorial and a speech by RFK–the ones that I have now moved 5 times and can hardly bear to part with) and wrote letters.

    The text of each was different. To Congressman Moore, I stressed his concern for working people and the importance of seizing this rare political moment. To Senator Brownback, I talked about his respect for life and the importance of protecting each person’s health. And to Senator Roberts, I talked about how Kansas, and Kansans, need health care reform, in towns large and small. In all, I identified myself as a mom and a citizen and, honestly, someone with decent health care who still cares very much about what we are not doing for those who have not.

    Do I harbor any belief that these letters will be the defining act in the debate that is raging in our country? No. But do I feel a whole lot better now that they’re in the mail? And am I looking forward to explaining them to my son tomorrow morning? Absolutely yes.

    If you live in my part of the country, here are the addresses I used (the best ones for this August recess):

    Congressman Dennis Moore
    500 State Avenue, #176
    Kansas City, KS 66101

    Senator Sam Brownback
    11111 W. 95th Street, Suite 245
    Overland Park, KS 66214

    Senator Pat Roberts
    11900 College Boulevard, Suite 203
    Overland Park, KS 66210

    → Leave a comment

    Posted in Events and Calls to Action

    Tagged , , ,

    Social Workers and the Politics of Budget Cuts

    Posted on July 23, 2009 by melindaklewis| 2 Comments

    The economy is bad. It is. And that means that some pain, including not only that which is visited upon the people we serve directly but also that endured by our nonprofit organizations, is inevitable.

    But inevitability is vastly overstated.

    Social workers run the risk, I believe, of depoliticizing the current battle over investment in our nation’s future and commitment to the most vulnerable by brushing away important questions and needed outrage with a white-washed, ‘the economy is really bad’ explanation that, really, doesn’t explain anything.

    There is nothing inevitable about budget cuts when state revenues are declining. There are, obviously, other alternatives–raising taxes chief among them–and the fact that those alternatives are not chosen says a lot more about the political decisions being made (and the people making them) than it does about the state of the economy. We could be choosing to invest more heavily in programs for people living in poverty (which would make sense because more people are poor), in education (because it’s the most direct link to future economic development), in infrastructure (because it puts people to work while meeting our needs).

    And the fact that we’re not, that we’re slashing spending in ways that mean longer waiting lists for Medicaid waivers, more kids in every classroom, less outreach for children’s health care, fewer supports for vulnerable seniors–that is a fact that is much more political than economic.

    So the next time that you find yourself (or a colleague) bemoaning cuts and their impact and then blaming that vague nemesis–the economy–ask instead about the choices that determined, when presented with a couple of different forks in the road, which one to take. Find out who is responsible for choosing that path, and hold them accountable. Use it as an example that our clients can understand: tough times come into everyone’s (and every state’s) lives, and when they do, we have choices. We can’t control the situations in which we find ourselves, but we can control how we respond. And, when we respond in ways that are harmful to others, there will be consequences.

    → 2 Comments

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary

    Tagged , ,

    Melinda’s Blog Roll

    Posted on July 16, 2009 by melindaklewis| Leave a comment

    I definitely do not spend as much time as I would like keeping up with the excellent blogs out there regarding nonprofit advocacy, or at least containing content that is in some way helpful to nonprofit advocates. While I’ve not found anyone writing specifically about social work advocacy (which, really, is a big part of why I write this!), there are so many fantastic people putting forth good information and thought-provoking ideas that I could literally spend hours every day reading their stuff. Except, of course, that I have three kids to raise, a home to maintain, classes to teach, and organizations here to help. So, I take advantage of feed services to have digest versions of several delivered to my inbox and make a point of going through them at least a couple of times a week. Often, something there sparks an idea that leads to something new to include in a class lecture, an idea to try with an organization with which I’m working, or something that I want to share with you all here.

    And, while I of course hope that you’ll keep reading here (smile), I thought that some of you may want to see some of the other blogs that I read, so here’s a ‘highlight’ list/blogroll–this is a work in progress, and I expect that I’ll revisit this topic occasionally as I add more. I’d love to hear from others regarding the blogs that you make a point to read regularly, related to organizing or advocacy or nonprofits/social work in general. I’m always looking for new reading! What authors do you find most insightful? Have there been particular posts that you have enjoyed? I’m especially interested in any blogs from nonprofit/public interest lobbyists, because the few lobbying blogs out there are mostly from the perspective of more corporate-minded lobbyists.

    A. Fine Blog: Social media and social change

    Beth’s blog: Long-running blog on social media and nonprofits

    Have Fun Do Good: I’ll admit that I don’t get some of the popular culture references here, but it is a fresh approach to social change and a needed reminder that we have to make our work attractive if we expect others to join us.

    Kansas Jackass: They’re on hiatus right now, but this is one of my ‘leisure’ activities–very timely and often hilarious commentary on Kansas politics, from a progressive viewpoint

    Social Work Blogs: This isn’t a blog itself but a directory of social work-related blogs, and, while there is relatively little advocacy content on here, I find it a good place to check out what’s going on in the field and, me being me, to raise the advocacy banner with my fellow social workers!

    Rosetta Thurman: I SO wish that I actually knew her and that (maybe) she would be my friend…as it is, I just pretend, and read her commentary on nonprofit management, leadership, and young professionals’ roles in nonprofits’ futures. I’m so grateful to my friend and former boss, Ian Bautista, for pointing her out–I read her every day now.

    Happy reading, and don’t forget to share your links!

    → Leave a comment

    Posted in My New Favorite Thing

    Tagged , ,

    Courage of Conviction

    Posted on June 16, 2009 by melindaklewis| Leave a comment

    I have been thinking A LOT about Dr. George Tiller since his assassination on May 31, 2009. I’ve had a lot of time to think about him, too, since I’ve been marathon-painting my daughter’s bedroom until the early hours every morning, after the kids go to bed. I can’t listen to my iPod or I won’t be able to hear the kids if they need something, so I paint and think. And paint and think.

    I’ve thought about what his murder says about the state of the abortion battle today; how we have yet to hear a strong statement from the current Kansas Governor denouncing this political killing; how each side will or will not attempt to use his life and death to advance their cause; how the coverage (besides Barb Shelley) in the Kansas City Star reflects the cuts in investigative reporting at that paper and others (the statements that they let go unchallenged were apalling); how I’m glad that Lenny’s book is done so that he can draw attention to some of the linkages between the extreme anti-abortion groups and militias and white nationalists.

    But mostly, I have thought about courage. I have thought about how Dr. Tiller went to work every single day knowing that many, many people in this country wanted him dead for doing what he believed to be right. And I’ve wondered if I would have the courage to do the same.

    I’m no stranger to harassment for my beliefs. When I was a leading advocate on behalf of immigrant rights, I received dozens of nasty emails and phone calls, and a few long-winded hand-written letters, calling me all manner of ugly names (“Communist Mexican-lover” was one of the more colorful, non-profane ones). People told me to go back to Mexico, which was a little funny. They called my office late at night, intending to leave a mean message on my machine, and hung up when I answered at 10:30PM. They called my answering machine at home and hung up, sometimes 20 or more times a day. Occasionally, they even made some vague threats, which prompted Lenny to give me instructions on how to handle threatening mail (he made me keep Zip-lock bags in my desk) and worried my police chief friends. Once I was listed on a website that was something about ‘enemies of America’, and it even gave my address, which was kind of scary.

    And none of that made me even think about stopping. My husband used to laugh at the idea that having to delete a bunch of hang-ups on our answering machine would somehow make me quit (“that’s the last straw,” he’d laugh). Mostly I was annoyed, sometimes sad, only occasionally a little scared. I was never singled out, and I was never really threatened. I was always, honestly, glad to receive any of the negative attention, because I figured that it was better for me to be the target than immigrants who lacked the security and protection that I have as a citizen of this country.

    But since May 31st, I’ve been wondering, what if. What if I had been threatened more directly? What if I had actually been targeted? Would I have had the strength, the courage, the moral outrage in me to be ever-emboldened by that hatred to continue my life’s work? I honestly doubt it, and that realization has been the focus of my ruminations these weeks while I paint and think.

    I didn’t know Dr. Tiller. I don’t even know a lot about the procedures he performed, and this isn’t a post about abortion politics, anyway. But what is obvious is that he understood the risks, lived with them every moment, and had long ago made peace with the idea of sacrificing himself for a cause in which he very much believed. He did so consciously and very, very bravely. While I don’t believe there’s evidence that he considered himself a martyr, and I certainly don’t think he wanted to die for this cause, he was willing to do so if that’s what it took…or, maybe more accurately, he was just unwilling to let his opponents intimidate or silence him. And that’s a powerful witness. One to which I (and maybe you, too?) can only hope to aspire. And that’s a lot to think about.

    → Leave a comment

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary, Inspiration and Examples

    Tagged ,

    It’s Public Information!

    Posted on June 3, 2009 by melindaklewis| Leave a comment

    I’m in lecture-revision mode, reviewing lectures that I gave last fall for the Advanced Policies and Programs course to add in new readings, change sections that didn’t work too well, and highlight changing realities. Inevitably, I add, add, add, and then I am stuck in the fall figuring out what to cut out so that my students don’t have to listen to three hours of straight commentary from yours truly!

    Some of the pieces that I add in, though, are those that I have found myself consistently marking in the margins as questions or concerns from students, and so I want to incorporate content related to those items to better aid them in their policy work. Yesterday, when I was working on the lecture that provides the backdrop for the discussion of Congress and how to interact with the federal legislative system, I added one such piece.

    Every once in awhile, you stumble on something about our government that works so beautifully, and so easily, that you just have to say a quiet ‘thank you’ to the bureaucrats who make it happen. The folks at the Federal Elections Commission have earned such appreciation from me on multiple occasions, when I’ve found very useful information about who gives to which candidates, or about the activities of specific Political Action Committees, all from the comfort of my own Internet connection!

    Social workers, and social work students, tend not to think about the ways in which such information can help them in their policy work; it’s the ‘dirty money’ side of politics that we prefer to avoid. That’s a shame, though, because there are many ways in which such intelligence can enhance our work.

    Some examples from my own practice:

  • Figuring out which candidates are receiving money from anti-immigrant political action committees, particularly those linked to organized hate groups (neutralizes them by exposing their moral illegitimacy on the issue)
  • Choosing spokespeople for an economic development campaign based on which PACs/high-profile individuals were the biggest donors to our target elected officials
  • Exposing potential conflicts of interest (based on donors) that, in at least one case, led to a member reconsidering his position on a piece of legislation

    What about you? How might you use information about who’s giving to whom to inform your own targeting and messaging? Spend a few minutes today (it can be addictive, so beware!) looking at the link below to explore the candidates/political action committees that are of most interest to you, and see what you discover! It’s free, and it already belongs to you. Thanks, bureaucracy!

    Federal Elections Commission Disclosure Database

    • → Leave a comment

    Posted in Background Reading, My New Favorite Thing

    Tagged , ,