Tag Archives: social policy

A Diary of a Social Worker in the Political Arena

Posted on October 17, 2011 by | 2 Comments

**Note from Melinda: I asked Becky Fast, whom I have known since my undergraduate days (when she was my boss!) to write a reflection about her decades as a professional social worker immersed in the political realm, always with a laser focus on upholding the mission of our profession and advancing our collective values. I am honored that she agreed to do so and thrilled to share this inspiring post with you. Becky has graciously agreed to share her email address, too, for those interested in pursuing this path–I can say from personal experience that she is an excellent mentor! blfast at msn.com

My venture into politics began advocating for the rights of my brother with Downs Syndrome to access regular education. At a young age, I observed first-hand how public laws and regulations excluded full participation of women, minorities, and persons with disabilities.

I was attracted to the profession of social work because of my desire to be a social activist. I had a desire to change the world in such a way that others wouldn’t have the childhood experiences that I had. I was attracted to the mission of the profession to uplift people and to improve the quality of their lives.

Social work when practiced at its best is about social change and social justice. Yet – I was greeted with mixed reactions from my social work colleagues when I decided to detour for 12 years from direct practice to a career in political social work as an aide to a U.S. Congressman. I found it perplexing to encounter a long-standing and pervasive belief that social workers are to be apolitical in their approach to professional practice. I found social workers embracing public service, volunteerism, and community organizing but they were conflicted about direct involvement in politics.

The Institute for the Advancement of Political Social Work Practice at the University of Connecticut-School of Social Work under the leadership of Dr. Nancy A. Humphreys helped me to see that I wasn’t abandoning my profession by working as a political social worker. I began to see that everything I learned through my MSW education and field practice experience is what exactly a politician needs to be successful. Over the years, I found my professional knowledge critical to candidates for office and elected officials as they formulate social policy decisions.

In my role as the Director of Casework for a U.S. Congressman, I handled individual and community problems with federal policies and programs including Medicare, Social Security and Veterans Benefits. When individuals or groups would have similar problems, it was my responsibility to report to the Congressman and assess if a change in federal legislation was needed.

Our daily lives as social workers are often based on actions taken in the political arena. My current job as a hospice social worker is dependent in a large part upon helping families access the Medicare hospice benefit. Our nation’s support for housing, health care, childcare, and education for the disadvantage and vulnerable are all made by politicians and government officials. As programs and services are slashed and cut from the statehouse to the white house, social workers involved in politics are needed now more than ever as our clients lose their jobs, housing, and health insurance from financial insecurity. Many of our clients with the least amount of resources carry the heaviest social and economic burdens.

Politicians change policy that either will help or hurt our profession and our clients. Social workers working on the “inside” as elected officials, lobbyists, campaign workers, staff and as a part of coalitions are needed to insure political empowerment of the populations we serve.

Empowering ourselves and our clients by becoming more active in political processes is a core tenet of social work and what political social work practice is all about. More politically empowered social service professionals and clients will improve the public policy decision-making and the services provided.

Being involved in politics doesn’t have to be a career it can also be as simple as writing an email or making a phone call to an elected official about a proposed budget cut. If you are considering getting involved in political advocacy please join me because only together can we effectively fight against poverty, racism, and injustice.

→ 2 Comments

Posted in From the Trenches (Guest post)

Tagged , , ,

Solving my babysitting problems while promoting intergenerational policy convergence

Posted on February 3, 2011 by | 2 Comments

March 16, 2010 Rally for Public Schools, Topeka, KS--my parents, kids, and I are standing just out of view to your left

I won’t try to pretend that my main motivation for having my kids’ grandparents babysit them so much is to spur increased commitment on the part of each (kids and grandparents) to the kinds of intergenerationally equitable policy solutions that are so often elusive, or at least presented as such, particularly in the areas of entitlement reform, taxation, and budget cuts.

But I really think it’s a side benefit.

Okay, so my kids are too young to voice their support for productive aging strategies, universal design, and a robust income support policy for older adults. The younger two are still working on talking, and the older one is currently obsessed with Captain Underpants, so we’ll give them a little time.

But my parents get it, I think more than many retired people, and they pay more attention, which is perhaps just as important. And, granted, some of that could be because they’re my parents, and they’re wonderful, and they have to listen to me going on and on about this and that policy debate all the time.

But I think there’s good evidence, anecdotally at least, that their frequent, sustained, and meaningful contact with my kids changes their perspective on policies that affect children and young adults, in ways that have potentially powerful implications for building public support for the kind of policy infrastructure that all generations need and deserve.

  • When they pick my son up at preschool, they see what well-paid early childhood educators working in a clean and spacious environment can do with little kids, and they recognize the importance of every child having access to such a resource.
  • When they take my sick daughter to the doctor, they are reminded of the importance of each child having a medical ‘home’ and the insurance coverage to pay for it.
  • When they see the twins’ faces light up at the public park, they think about the erosion of quality public spaces and the need to preserve areas where children can play safely.
  • When they hear my older son’s friend talk about how he was supposed to go to all-day kindergarten but can’t because his parents can’t afford it, they realize that many programs within our “public” schools aren’t free, and that young families face real challenges in providing for their children’s educations.
  • When they hear my voice on the phone, trying to sound calm as I tell them that the other babysitter cancelled and I’m supposed to give a speech in an hour, but it will take me 40 minutes to get there, they remember (as they grab their keys) that childcare arrangements are precarious for so many families, and that parents can’t work unless someone is providing good, quality, affordable care for their children.

    I would never discount the very real struggles of grandparents raising grandchildren–I, too, am reminded of the importance of supports for older adults when I see my parents’ relief when I pull up to take over the childcare once again–nor do I naively assume that seeing need in the eyes of one’s own grandchildren automatically translates into commitment to meet the needs of children everywhere.

    But I see how my Dad learns so much about our community, and the realities of young families, while he’s watching the kids play at the sandbox and talking to (as he calls them) “the other moms”. I see how my Mom reads the whole newsletter that my son brings home from school, and often asks me questions about it. I see how their lives become integrated with those of other generations as they learn to inhabit the same spaces, and share the same resources, and I think…maybe I’m onto something after all.

    • → 2 Comments

    Posted in Background Reading

    Tagged , ,

    I’m a “values” voter

    Posted on October 28, 2010 by | Leave a comment

    Values: emotion-laden beliefs about how things should or should not be

    Um, yeah, I’ve got a lot of those.

    I believe very strongly in a vision of how the world should be: a more just distribution of resources, opportunities for all children to be safe and to learn, supports for families of all configurations, core human and civil rights for all persons, a healthy environment for this generation and those to come.

    I have definite emotions wrapped up in those values, and strong emotional responses–anger, sadness, elation, hope, fear, disappointment–associated with our movement towards or away from that vision.

    And I have policy preferences that stem from those values, as an expression of those values and the strategies I see as most promising for bringing them to fruition.

    And my desire to see those policies enacted drives my voting behavior, my political contributions, my willingness to volunteer for candidates, and, yes, my interpretation of “objective facts.”

    Even though I’m a sometimes social scientist, then, I make no effort to pretend to divorce my values from my perceptions of reality. I know that they are a lens through which I see the world. I know that there are words, and images, that are, for me, powerful activators of my political motivations, and that I’m instinctively biased against a candidate who talks about the “death tax” or “the gay lifestyle”.

    Objectivity is overrated.

    Really.

    And it’s really unattainable anyway.

    So, this election, I’m claiming my identity as a “values voter”, someone who makes every decision about for whom I’m going to vote (or for what) based on the values that I hold most dear, and only secondly on my logic-based assessment of how well a given policy or candidate will advance those values.

    What about you? What values will motivate your vote (and your decision to vote) next Tuesday? How do your values influence how you see the “facts”? And how will you communicate these values to candidates and organizations seeking your support?

    → Leave a comment

    Posted in Background Reading

    Tagged , , ,

    Of silver linings–the policy ‘good’ that may come from all the recession ‘bad’

    Posted on September 16, 2010 by | 1 Comment

    Because I don’t in any way wish to give the impression that I’m celebrating the pain that the current recession is bringing to individuals, organizations, and entire communities in the United States and around the world, maybe the title for this post should instead be, “Things I’m Really Glad We’re Not Talking So Much About Anymore.”

    But I really do believe that there may be some long-term good, in terms of the shifting of policy priorities in the country, to come from this widespread, deeply-felt, and sustained period of economic downturn. That’s one of the lessons that we should take from the social reforms achieved in the last, still worst, economic depression this country has seen.

    The whole “personal responsibility crusade”, while certainly a seed of inspiration for the Tea Party folks and some other anti-Obama campaigners, has fallen quite dramatically from favor. We don’t have to read one news story after another about various proposals for Social Security privatization. No one’s credibly talking about replacing Medicare with health savings accounts. Being unemployed is no longer assumed to be code for being uneducated, unmotivated, or criminal.

    There is an understanding, not insignificantly, that bad economic things happen to really “good people”, and, even more importantly, that government should play a role in cushioning the blow when people fall victim to these economic forces and, even, (!) seek to prevent some of the falls in the first place.

    Sound familiar?

    So, in addition to health care reform that addresses many (but not all) of the concerns Hacker outlines in the chapter on “Risky Health Care”, we have student loan reform that makes college more affordable (and loan repayment more feasible), and a push for financial reforms that would curb some of the banking practices that heightened the risks Americans face.

    Those are obviously big things, and we can and must work very hard over the next few years to achieve more legislated “bricks” in a secure economic foundation.

    But I’m perhaps even more hopeful about some of the changes in attitudes about the appropriate relationship between a government and its people–more questions asked about how 401(k)s are supposed to provide retirement security when so many have lost so much in their accounts, more student protests against tuition increases in higher education, more recognition that health care should be a basic right rather than a chance happening.

    And, while I certainly wish that we could undo the economic damage we’ve sustained in these past 3 years, I celebrate the beginning of the reversal in the inward-looking, self-blaming, isolating exaltation of personal responsibility, and believe that this is our best chance in quite awhile to dispel the idea that we deserve to shoulder all of the risks and yet receive few of the spoils associated with economic life in 21st century America.

    But those clouds are lifting, so we must find ways to harness this shared sense of vague insecurity and turn it into a strong movement for social change, if we are to weave a safety net that will actually catch us the next time we fall. Because this surely won’t be the last recession, but it can be the last one that Americans have to weather alone.

    → 1 Comment

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary

    Tagged ,

    When is a social problem not a “problem”?

    Posted on September 13, 2010 by | 2 Comments

    I spend more time than most people, probably, thinking about what makes us define certain conditions as social problems, or not, and about the impact of that problem definition on the development of a policy agenda that, ultimately, we hope will lead to significant change in those same social problems.

    So it was with considerable chagrin and great interest that I read The Great Risk Shift, which is basically a couple hundred pages of compelling personal stories, strong economic trend data, and fairly detailed legislative and ideological analysis that, collectively, puts a name to a social problem that is undeniably such, but which I’ve never really spent much time contemplating:

    Economic Insecurity

    Distinct, then, from economic inequality, which I actually use as an example of when problematic conditions are not broadly accepted as social problems, but which Jacob Hacker argues is actually far more debated than the more insidious nature of economic insecurity (and he has a good point–we do talk about rising executive pay, at least a little, but who really contests the replacement of pensions with defined-contribution plans anymore?). Distinct, too, from poverty, which, despite being a seemingly intractable part of our economic structure (and on the rise, as the 2010 Census data will no doubt show), is universally recognized as a bad thing that deserves our attention (although that’s about where the agreement ends).

    Economic insecurity, on the other hand, has become such a part of what we accept about economic life in the United States that, while we may recognize and even bemoan its effects–longer work weeks to compensate for stagnant wages; an increase in work activity among retirement-aged older adults; middle-class Americans saddled with their own student loan debt into middle age, and unable to save for their children’s education; workers who stay in dead-end jobs because they’re afraid to lose their health insurance; the rise in bankruptcies associated with health care costs; the tragic incidence of home foreclosures related to risky subprime loans–we still seldom pinpoint the cause at the foundation: a conscious decision on the part of policymakers and corporate leaders to shift the risks inherent with life and, especially, productive activity, onto ordinary families.

    Social workers talk about the broken social contract, about how Aid to Families with Dependent Children has become a block grant and the safety net is really more like a tattered scarf that, if you’re lucky, you might use to keep a little warm in a storm…and, I think, that this idea of economic insecurity, the idea that no matter of work effort or personal initiative or all-around ‘goodness’ can really protect us against devastating loss, is part of what we’re railing against. After all, the welfare reform bill was called the “Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reform Act”, and Hacker calls this whole dismantling of the social insurance system part of the “personal responsibility crusade”.

    But, when it comes to our own lives, this social problem has become so much a part of the fabric of “the way things work” that we lack some of the language, let alone the organizing strategy, with which to name and attack it. The personal responsibility movement has, at its heart, a message that “we’re all in this alone”, and that’s part of its danger–that same message pushes people to turn inward in the face of economic threats, and, when we’re looking to ourselves to find the fault, we’re less likely to get mad and join with our neighbor to make things right.

    The health care debate over the past two years has brought some of these issues into focus, and the recession certainly provides an opportunity to organize around almost-universal experiences of uncertainty and doubt, if not outright panic and deprivation, but we have to start from a common understanding of what the problem is, how we got here, and how fundamentally our own lives and the workings of our economy will need to change in order to make economic security a strong foundation for the economic opportunity about which our country claims to be concerned.

    Some of the pages that I marked as I read, that I think could be part of our journey to identify the problem of economic insecurity, mobilize the vast majority of Americans who know its consequences intimately, and bring about the change that we know only concerted action can:

  • I show a chart in my Advanced Policy class about wage stagnation over the past 3 decades, and we talk about the social and economic changes (increase in women’s labor participation, increased work effort, etc…) that has wrought in U.S. families. Hacker illustrates wage volatility, which spikes in economic downturns but is alarmingly high as a baseline, and discusses the economic and emotional effects of such dramatic dips and fluctuations in pay from year to year.
  • I also spend some time comparing the U.S. welfare state to that of other developed economies (and we’re always on the low end of investments and outcomes), but Hacker points out that, including private expenditures and tax incentives, the U.S. spends a lot on health care, retirement, and disability insurance. The problem is that, increasingly, these are not secure guarantees of any kinds but a hodgepodge of mostly employer-based benefits that lack portability, universality, adequacy, and stability.
  • Precisely because economic insecurity is a problem that cuts across economic classes, we have to address classism in our society in order to fight it. Hacker doesn’t talk about this; I’m not sure why, but it jumped out at me at several points. College-educated professionals have actually seen greater wage volatility over the past two decades than those workers with less education, and many of the foreclosures and bankruptcies associated with this recession have happened in households that were previously middle-class or even upper-income earners. But, of course, classism rages in the U.S., and so many of these well-educated, previously “successful” individuals are loathe to acknowledge that their performance in the “self-reliant” category has been less than stellar, and that, indeed, they are vulnerable and victimized by many of the same economic forces that afflict those less well-positioned. Everyone likes to look to those below and say, “at least I’m not….” and, as long as we’re dividing ourselves like that, we’ll blame ourselves or those lesser others, rather than the real culprits, for the strains we experience separately, yet together. This would, of course, affect anti-poverty policy, too, since the reality is that ALMOST 60% of Americans will spend at least a year in poverty between 20-75, even controlling for those cash-poor college years. Imagine if we had an anti-poverty policy based on that picture of who’s poor (most of us!).
  • It’s economic insecurity, even more than actual income level, that’s associated most strongly with psychological distress. We social workers know that we spend a lot of time dealing with the fallout from the way that policies harm our clients. These new insights help us to better understand precisely what’s inflicting these wounds–the stress of not knowing what tomorrow will bring to our finances is, quite literally, making us sick.
  • We’re NOT doing this to ourselves. Myself, I know that I’ve been guilty of that whole “policy analysis by anecdote”, shaking my head at a friend’s purchase of a house she really can’t afford or a relative’s purchase of television so huge it scares (really) my children. My husband and I don’t buy very much, not as much because of a grand plan to provide for our economic security as because we don’t want really want very much, and so it’s easy to look at others’ decisions and raise our eyebrows. But Hacker cites data from Elizabeth Warren that illustrates pretty definitively that the income gains of the past few decades have been eaten up by the rising cost of basic household expenses–housing, health care, transportation, taxes, education, and childcare–not by our expanded expectations.

    And perhaps it’s that last point that can serve as the starting point for implementing Hacker’s three-point plan of “get wise, get mad, get even”. We do need to know what we can do to protect ourselves in the current “fend for oneself” environment–the whole “secure your oxygen mask before helping others” idea. But we can’t stop there. If we’re not responsible for this mess (as I often tell my kids!), we shouldn’t have to clean it all up. We need to agitate and organize, and build the kinds of policy structures that will bring an equitable and adequate measure of economic security to all Americans.

    In other words, let’s call it a problem and then solve it.

    • → 2 Comments

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary

    Tagged , ,

    Economic Insecurity, as seen from the sandbox

    Posted on September 13, 2010 by | 1 Comment

    photo credit, manyeyes, via flickr

    So I’ve obviously been thinking a lot lately about economic insecurity.

    And I spend a lot of time at the park with my kids, so I’ve noticed many signs of the impact of this insecurity on young families, like mine.

    And that’s got me thinking about kids and working parents and economic policy and what it would take to build a structure of economic security, and what that would look like from my perch on the edge of the sandbox, listening to kids shout “Mommy, watch me!” in English, Mandarin Chinese, and Spanish.

    I see more fathers at the park these days, and they’re not there spending a day off with their kids–they’re unemployed, or working only part-time, or handing out business cards to other parents, trying to get customers for a remodeling business or website design or software consulting. And I wonder what’s happening to their savings accounts, and to their mental health.

    I hear moms talking about sales and coupons and how to save money, a lot more than I used to. And many “stay-at-home” moms really aren’t, totally. Many families, like my own, are balancing shifts of sorts, with both parents earning and both caring for children, in order to reduce costs and increase income. One mom brings the jewelry that she makes to the park to sell. I get at least 3 invitations a month to some ‘party’ where a mom is trying to earn extra income by selling stamps or housewares or clothing.

    And then there’s the strain. Certainly some of the parents that I see and hear snapping at their children or staring absently into space are comparatively economically secure, but I wonder, especially now, how much of the stress that manifests itself in difficult interactions between parents and kids stems from the underlying pressures of trying to raise those children–the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates raising a single child to age 18 will cost a middle-income family almost $237,000, or 37% of income per year, in addition to reducing income as one caregiver reduces hours or changes schedules to meet childcare demands.

    As Hacker concludes his chapter on “Risky Families”, “when Americans build strong families, it has profound benefits for society as a whole: stronger neighborhoods, more productive workers…(the costs) are paid for through the sacrifices that families must make, the risks that families must bear, usually without much compensation or assistance” (108).

    And that’s what I see most, from my spot under the tree, watching my daughter stuff sand in her pants and my sons race the dump trucks–families trying their best, to do the hard work of parenting so that their kids will grow up happy and healthy and a credit to their families and an asset to the world.

    And, as any parent knows, there’s a lot of insecurity in the business of raising kids even under the best circumstances: will my son make it through quiet rest at school? Will my daughter’s language development pick up? Will my kids survive high school with the embarrassment of their mom’s letters to the editor appearing in the paper every month? (all of these are, um, obviously just hypothetical)

    We can’t legislate all of those potentialities away–that’s part of what we sign on for when we become, through whatever path, “parents”. But we can, and should, and must, do something about the other. Because working parents should be able to plan for the future, with some guarantee against devastating income plunges. And every family should have health care. And disabilities shouldn’t bankrupt. And, after working hard at both “jobs”–paid work and unpaid parenting–for decades, everyone deserves to retire.

    With that kind of foundation, imagine the sand castles we could build to the sky.

    → 1 Comment

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Tagged , ,

    A Millennial Social Policy Agenda for the Millennium

    Posted on July 13, 2010 by | Leave a comment

    Last week I had a post about the Millennials, their tremendous potential for good in this country, and how advocates for social justice can build on their promise. I’ve been doing some more research, both about the characteristics and conditions of this generation, and about their public opinion preferences, and I’ve been thinking about what a social policy agenda for this “Millennial Era” (as it’s called in Millenial Makeover) would look like.

    What excites me the most? How much potential for overlap there is with My Top 10 Things we Should be Thinking about in 2010 list. Maybe there’s hope for me being an ‘honorary Millennial’ after all!

    But the greatest lesson for this whole exercise, I think, is how we can learn to talk and think like Millennials regardless of our particular policy priorities, in order to both gain new perspectives on our issues and also to increase the likelihood that they’ll gain support from this large and increasingly influential cohort. Below are some of the values and concerns that the authors identified in Millennial Makeover, with my take on how to frame social work policy priorities to align with them:

  • Concern about debt and fiscal sustainability: Millennials will deal with record personal and national debt as they age, and they’re right to be concerned with how it may weigh down their pursuit of their goals, and our collective pursuit of national well-being. Social work advocates can talk about tax reform as a step towards a stronger fiscal foundation, and should also have ideas for how stronger education investments (see below), prevention programs, immigration reform, and other social work priorities will also reduce costs and, ultimately, shrink the federal deficit. This doesn’t mean that we back away from priorities that have significant costs, but it should add another tool with which we can make our case. It also means that we need to address the rising economic insecurity even among highly-skilled workers, for whom the economic recession and increasingly ‘temporary’ attachments to employers have resulted in tenuous and very leveraged lives.

  • Commitment to equitable health care policies: Millennials are more likely than any other cohort to be without health insurance coverage, and their employment histories (and, likely, futures) make an exclusively employment-based health care system untenable. Advocates for social justice need to organize and mobilize this population in pursuit of continual health care reform, connecting it not just to their own vulnerability but also to their concerns about equity, security, and fiscal solvency. Again, similar arguments can be used to shift risk from individuals to the federal government and other collective entities, not just in the area of health care, but more broadly across people’s lives.

  • Belief in the importance of education: There are two key points here: first, that Millennials will be a very highly educated generation, and one that knows first-hand the value of an education and, second, that some of the values and tools of this generation are well-suited to reforming our educational institutions in ways that have significant promise to improve outcomes for all kids–transparency, relationship, accountability, networking, anti-orthodoxy.

  • Commitment to public service: If our nonprofit organizations aren’t structuring volunteer opportunities specifically to appeal to young adult volunteers, we are totally missing the boat here. Over 80% of Millennials volunteer, so get busy and figure out how to connect them to your work. In public policy, we can build on this belief in shared fate, responsibility to others, and the value of altruism to promote policies that, while not directly related to Millennials’ individual well-being, appeal to their sense of civic-mindedness; this is where support for older adults and those with disabilities could fall.

  • Environmental protection: Millennials care about my kids’ future, too, even though they’re too young to belong to the same generation, and, in addition to being the generation that will (hopefully) stop climate change and reduce our footprint, the Millennials’ focus on future generations is a good argument for supporting investments like universal preschool, stronger supports for working families, commitment to juvenile justice reform, and other policies for a better tomorrow.

    The Millennial Makeover ends like this (I couldn’t fall asleep for hours later!):
    “The tectonic plates undergirding America’s political landscape are beginning to shift. The resulting cataclysm will wash away the current politics of polarization and ideological deadlock, putting in place a new landscape of collective purpose and national consensus that involved individuals and communities in solving the nation’s problems” (p. 267).

    I don’t know about you, but this is one wave I really want to ride. I apologize in advance to my kids’ babysitters for the dozens of questions I will ask you about your political beliefs when you’re just trying to get out the door, to my neighbors’ kids for asking them which issue frame most appeals to them, and to the random young people on campus I stop to ask you how you think the Obama Administration is handling xyz issue. It’s just that, well, I think you’re kind of a big deal. And so should we all.

    I’d love to see examples of how these issues and perspectives of Millennials are (or are not) reflected in this 2010 election season. A special treat awaits those who comment with links to political advertisements or other analysis of how candidates, parties, and/or nonpartisan groups are framing their priorities along these lines, and/or actively reaching out to Millennials in pursuit of their common policy agendas!

    • → Leave a comment

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary

    Tagged , ,

    Voter Registration: It doesn’t have to be like this

    Posted on July 7, 2010 by | Leave a comment

    This week and next, Classroom to Capitol will focus on electoral trends, issues, and strategies that, together, can set the foundation for successful enactment and implementation of the progressive policies about which social workers so deeply care. We know that it does matter who is elected, that our clients’ voices will be heard differently by different elected officials, and that participation in electoral processes, in itself, holds potential to change clients’ lives. Primaries are less than a month away in many states, and it will be November before we know it. Ya es hora!

    Suffragettes gathering--Thank you, sisters.


    Today’s post is about one of my favorite topics: the onerous voter registration rules in the United States, and how we can and should change them. I could go on and on about this, so, to discipline myself, this is a post in three parts: first, what’s wrong with the status quo; second, what a truly just voter registration policy would look like (that’s the short part); and, third, interim steps that would make a big difference in voter registration and participation. If you’re so inclined, there’s a special treat for the first 5 readers who each register 5 unregistered voters; just leave a comment about how you accomplished it and any barriers you encountered (difficulty figuring out the rules, trouble navigating the forms, etc…).

    The Broken Status Quo:
    In November 2008, approximately three million people were turned away or forced to vote provisionally due to a registration problem. Only 70-75% of US eligible voters are registered. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld restrictive voter registration schemes that will make it harder for low-income individuals (who often do not have primary identification documents or the money to request them) to comply with new rules. Young people, those without private automobiles, and people of color are among the least likely to be registered to vote, although voter turnout among registered voters in those populations is comparable to other populations.

    The Ideal:
    Automatic registration of all eligible voters–every citizen automatically ‘opted-in’ on his/her 18th birthday (I’d like to see the repeal of bans on suffrage for convicted felons, too; voting is more of an obligation and duty, than a privilege, as it’s understood in our society, and we need a policy that acknowledges that). There are minor technical challenges to overcome in making this happen, but they are minor. In the age of the REAL ID Act and rising intelligence, I’m hard-pressed to think of any real obstacle besides the obvious political one: we want to make it hard for people to vote.

    What We Can Do To Get There:

  • Same-day voter registration: It’s not as good as universal registration, but allowing people to show up and register on Election Day would give organizations more time to mobilize potential voters, send a message to voters that they are welcome at any point in the process, and reduce the uncertainty and confusion that surrounds current registration rules and barriers. It may require additional training for poll workers, to be able to verify voters’ eligibility, but it’s totally doable. Iraq allows people to fix their registration status and vote the same day, for crying out loud.
  • Pre-registration for young people: State Representative Milack Talia (Democrat from Kansas) filed legislation last session to pre-register young people (ages 14 and up) to vote; their pre-registrations would automatically be added to the voter registration rolls when they turn 18. The goal is to increase registration and turnout by increasing the time that organizations and individuals have to reach out to this population and streamlining the process. I think it’s another good interim step.
  • Election Day holiday: Even with same-day registration (or universal registration, for that matter), if low-income folks don’t have a day off to get to the polls, they won’t get there. We need to make Election Day a holiday (the way that it is in most of the world), and we need expanded advance voting options nationwide to reduce the lines and make sure that even essential workers who won’t have the day off can vote at their convenience.
  • Halt and repeal of repressive rules: I know how hard it is to get people to register to vote. I’ve stood outside in very, very hot weather for hours, begging people to complete a NONPARTISAN voter registration form and been cursed at and spat on. Seriously. So don’t tell me that there are so many people clamoring to vote illegally that we have to go to the extremes of requiring multiple forms of identification, cracking down on nonprofit groups trying to register people, and enacting other voter suppression tactics. It’s just not true, and it’s just not fair.

    We can’t expect to succeed in winning the policy debate if we don’t have rules that allow our folks to influence it at the polls. We need easy access to our democracy, for all citizens in this country, and then we’ll see that the best ideas and the best candidates for our nation’s future can rise to the top. Let’s change the rules so that, at the latest, the 2012 elections are our most open and vibrant yet.

    You know that I have to end this one with, Sí se Puede.

    • → Leave a comment

    Posted in Analysis and Commentary

    Tagged , , ,

    I wish I was a Millennial: the generation that could turn it around

    Posted on July 6, 2010 by | Leave a comment

    So, now that you’ve watched fireworks explode, enjoyed time with family and friends, and celebrated the democratic traditions that make this country great, it’s time to turn our attention to the reality that it is time, again this year, to make it great again: It’s an election year!

    This week and next, Classroom to Capitol will focus on electoral trends, issues, and strategies that, together, can set the foundation for successful enactment and implementation of the progressive policies about which social workers so deeply care. We know that it does matter who is elected, that our clients’ voices will be heard differently by different elected officials, and that participation in electoral processes, in itself, holds potential to change clients’ lives. Primaries are less than a month away in many states, and it will be November before we know it. Ya es hora!

    Image credit, futuremajority.com

    When I read Millennial Makeover, I couldn’t stop thinking about my cousin Caleb. He’s a junior in high school and chair of “Coalition”, which is an organization started by some peers a couple of years ago to…combat child slavery and human trafficking around the world. Seriously. They mainly hold fundraisers: selling concessions at football games, organizing concerts, hosting a 5K…and now they’re getting into advocacy, too. They use social media prolifically (I know, because I’m friends with him on Facebook!) And they make sure that all of their members register to vote when they’re 18. I mean, I was pretty hard-core social justice as a teenager, and I wasn’t involved in anything like this. It’s awesome. And, according to generational experts, it’s a movement.

    Millennial Makeover has to be the most optimistic book I’ve read in a long time. It’s like being with Caleb and his friends for an afternoon–they use some acronyms that I don’t immediately understand, but their enthusiasm for justice and fervent belief that they can help to achieve it is infectious. Here, the authors assert that the Millennials are a ‘civic’ generation, characterized by an orientation to societal challenges, problem solving, and institution building. They point to the 2008 Presidential election as a highpoint in this generational cycle (actually begun a few years earlier)–rising voter participation, unprecedented involvement by young voters, and positivism about the role of government in improving people’s lives. And they claim that, historically, most generational shifts like this last about 40 years.

    Not yet convinced that’s there’s reason to be excited? The authors point to the New Deal and the presidency of FDR as the last civic realignment, and we know what that period did for social workers and the causes we care about.

    I won’t try to restate all of the considerable (and really fascinating) evidence the authors include to draw comparisons between the GI Generation (the last civic generation) and the Millennials (relative diversity, adoption of new technologies, group orientation). Perhaps the most important parallel, for electoral purposes, is the most obvious one: both generations are larger than the ones immediately preceding them. That means that, quite soon, the Millennials will be big enough to make their preferences dominant, which is why it’s important for social work advocates and organizers to understand what those preferences are and how to mobilize them. We know that demographics are not destiny, though, and that social movements are built and sustained, not magically derivative of vital statistic patterns.

    So, what we need to “get” about Millennials to build electoral and broad-based movements that will make their power felt:

  • The old divisions don’t work–we need new coalitions.
    Identity politics will have to evolve to resonate with Millennials, whose social lives don’t break down along the same lines. While, importantly, Millennials’ neighborhoods and schools are highly segregated, their own attitudes about race, sexual orientation, and gender roles are much more egalitarian than current generations in power, which opens up considerable opportunity for progressive policy, but only if we can find new ‘hooks’ to bring people into politics (around ideas, not identity).

  • They’re not just shiny new gadgets–they’re whole new ways of connecting.
    We know that nonprofits, campaigns, and social movements will fail to authentically engage Millennials (and, quite possibly, anyone) if we view social media and other emerging technologies as just new platforms on which to broadcast our same messages. Millennials just don’t relate to technology that way; Caleb hardly ever buys CDs and rarely even subscribes to e-newsletters, but he shares weblinks and photos and other content through social media all the time, and creates his own content, too, around the justice issues he’s passionate about.

  • They’re not kids, and their ways of doing things are just as valid.
    There has been some good debate in the nonprofit world about how organizations (including the Generation X and Baby Boomers who currently control them) need to adjust some of their practices and behaviors to be more open to Millennial participation and influence. Candidates and campaigns will have to learn this, too. Some might dismiss this as pandering, but I think it’s essential that we ask ourselves two questions: first, aren’t there some significant ways in which the “Millennial way” of doing things is actually superior to current practice (um, transparent, relational?) and, second, what do we possibly have to gain from alienating a large group of enthusiastic advocates/voters for many of our causes? Exactly. For me, the biggest challenge of this will be getting decentralization right–you know how I feel about devolution for its own sake, but Millennials will want to see nimble and responsive organizations (and government), and they’ll have good evidence on their side from all of their experiments with collaborative decision-making.

  • This is not a phase; it’s a shift.
    There’s considerable data that the political orientations of a generation are much less pliable than some would think; in other words, today’s 20-year-olds are likely to have many of the same core values when they’re 40. And 70. For many Millennials, for example, their belief in the importance of a strong government was cemented by the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the current economic recession, both of which occurred during their formative years. Our challenge, then, is to connect our policy issues to these core values in a way that will resonate–as usual, framing is key.

    So, Millennials, I know you’ll have something to say about all of this! How do you view your world? And these 2010 elections? How are the organizations where you’re working, volunteering (in record numbers!), and advocating including you and your peers (or not)? How can we ‘get it right’, to turn it around?

    • → Leave a comment

    Posted in My New Favorite Thing

    Tagged , , , ,

    Agenda-setting, Twitter-style

    Posted on June 23, 2010 by | Leave a comment

    TweetScoop graph the day President Clinton was hospitalized for chest pains in February 2010

    I have to be one of the world’s worst tweeters. I’ll admit it. I’m totally sporadic with it and, even though I really don’t follow many people, compared with the most active Twitter users (and I truly think that all of the people that I’m following are totally interesting and cool), the stream moves so quickly that, since there are long stretches each day when I’m away from my computer (and, we’ve established, I can’t follow Twitter on my phone!), I somewhat randomly pop back in when I can, send out a tweet (usually links from my RSS feed), check my @melindaklewis messages (including retweets of my blog posts from some kind and generous souls!), and scan back through the most recent tweets, a practice which means that I inevitably miss a lot. I know that I’m far from Twitter best practices, but, with three kids 3 and under running around, it’s about the best I can manage.

    That’s why I was glad to see some of Tamar Weinberg’s suggestions for Twitter in The New Community Rules, and to think through how Twitter can be used, in shorter bursts like the ones I can handle, for framing and issue strategy. Let me explain what I’m thinking here, and then share some of the tools that I learned from Tamar’s book and have since played around with, that I think could help with this.

    We know that a big part of the framing battle requires figuring out how to talk about the issues that we want to advance in order to make them resonate with our targets and the general public. We know that winning this battle of ideas and words can make our proposed public policy solutions seem quite commonsense, and go a long way towards having those same policy ideas accepted. There are more than 75 million Twitter users worldwide, and more than 50 million tweets are sent each day. While an estimated 25% of these accounts are inactive, a lot of Twitter users are ‘influencers’, those whose ideas on issues are likely to change the way that others see those same issues. Figuring out what they’re talking about, and how, lets Twitter help you insert your issues into the broader public agenda. You could also use these tools to do an impact evaluation, of sorts, to see whether your work to elevate the profile and/or change the conversation around a certain issue has been successful, although, unless you’re doing a really nationwide campaign, you’d have a hard time being able to isolate your work and audience enough for that to be very accurate (those of you in bigger cities can set your location to find local trends and all of us can at least specify the U.S. as our location).

    My favorite of these trending sites, and the one I use the most, is hashtags.org. You can search for any keyword (or combination–it helps if you use Twitter at least enough to know which hashtags are most commonly used for the issues you care about). For example, here’s what it shows for “public option”. You can search at particular points in time, and I found a really interesting spike right after President Obama announced his version of health care reform (on February 23, 2010). This application also gives you representative tweets sent that use this hashtag. The front screen also includes the top 10 or so hashtags, although, I’ll be honest, these are mostly celebrities or other references that I completely do not understand, leading me to believe that they relate to popular culture!

    Another cool program, although you have to pay to get its most optimum features, is Tweetscan. It works similarly to the above, except they’ll actually email you alerts when the hashtags you’re watching crop up.

    Twitter does its own analytics, of course, although, in my opinion, they’re not as helpful as some of the external applications. You can do real-time searches on Twitter, though, to see what’s trending–this is probably useful if your organization is in the news right now and you want to know what people are saying about it, but it doesn’t give you the time perspective that hashtags do (although they do search the body of the tweet, not just the hashtag, so this could be a good way of navigating the hashtags initially, if you’re not sure what they are).

    At the opposite end of the spectrum is Twitscoop, which you can use as your Twitter landing page, to send tweets, track trends, and monitor urls, too.

    Twitt(url)y–This tracks the top websites being tweeted, which, while not as helpful, in my opinion, as a keyword search, can give you a sense, on a given really hot topic, the particular sources or “takes” on an issue to which people are referring most, which gives you a sense of the most trusted sources/allies or, sometimes, your most potent adversaries. (Note: the link above takes you to the English filter; the first time I was on the site, it was off, and I couldn’t figure out why all of the top posts were in Chinese!)

    For me, finding these tools has kind of restored my faith in Twitter, helping me to see that there are ways for it to be meaningful and relevant even if I’m not checking it from my smart phone all the time. It helps me to get a sense of the pulse of the conversation (and a surprisingly high percentage of that conversation does deal with public policy!), and, you know, sometimes I even learn who this Justin Bieber is that my cousin Molly kept talking about.

    → Leave a comment

    Posted in Tips and How-Tos

    Tagged ,