Part of the Possible

3 Advocacy Basics You Can Do, Right Now

There seems to be a whole lot of activity happening in the normally quiet, restful period known as August “recess”. I use quiet and restful loosely here, because it’s just a matter of perspective. From the view point of district staff for members of congress it’s a time to dread the frenetic activity that ensues when all of Congress returns home between August and early September.

But this year, we seemed to be suffering the recess that never was. In the middle of August, it became clear that congressional leadership was going to call for ramped up committee work to dive into the topics you’re probably hearing about in the news right now: infrastructure spending and a $3.5 trillion spending package being pushed by the administration. That committee work has drawn members of Congress back to DC, sucked in by the black hole of faux urgency.

For would-be advocates stuck in the middle of all of this busy-ness, it can seem daunting to participate in the discussion (especially when you’re talking unfathomable levels of spending). The complexity of the proposals working their way through the Capitol could deter the stoutest activists within your organizations. When you add in the rushed nature of the negotiations, those outside the room are likely feeling their heads spin until they willingly throw up their hands and just walk away.

So, how can we position volunteer advocates, both the grassroots and grass tops to succeed right now? Well, per the usual, it’s back to the basics.

Put First Things First – Help Your Volunteers Tell a Story

Understanding that infrastructure, budget reconciliation, and the Afghanistan inquiry are sucking all the air out of DC, position your advocates to speak to singular issues within those topics as necessary. Reinforce to them that they aren’t expected to be experts on every section of the legislation – but that they can provide an impactful story on the issues that hit closest to home.

The most important priority for any advocate isn’t to be an expert on all things, rather an expert in their own field. Most of those willing to participate in advocacy understand they won’t always win – but they can always be a part of the action. The easiest way for them to do so is to share what they expect these proposals would cause to happen in their own lives. Help them back it up with stats and then get out of the way of their storytelling.

Show Up in Person – Help Get Them in the Door

Despite the committee activity through the week, members of Congress are still hosting and participating in events back home. With travel and meeting restrictions still encumbering citizen lobbying in DC, now is the prime time for engaging in events happening in your own community. Why? Well, frankly, the elected officials have been on a starvation diet of public exposure for just as long as the rest of us. Help your volunteer advocates fulfill that need for their representatives.

Right now, members of congress are likely working to fill their calendars when they’re back home in October so they can drum up support for the actions they’ll take on these big proposals in the next few months. They’ll be meeting with community organizations, not-for-profit enterprises, and economic development entities. For instance, if you’re in the business community and want to be an engaged advocate, now is the time to be leaning into your trade association and the local chamber of commerce. Both of those types of entities can help place you advantageously in front of your elected officials.

As Always, Be Kind – Find a Way to Say Thank You

When I talk about becoming brilliant in the basics, I almost always land on the importance of gratitude. Yes, gratitude. Even in politics.

I’ve been on the opposite side from advocates on a whole host of issues before. As a congressional staffer, I came to see a lot of familiar faces that would participate in advocacy across diverse causes. The most successful of those advocates cultivated a culture within their circles that brought positivity to the discussion. The most impactful found ways to celebrate the times where the elected official’s actions overlapped with their interests.

Repeat this to yourself: Even the staunchest of my opponents is still a human, deserving of dignity and respect.

Unfortunately we ignore that a great deal in the middle of heated debates. If you take the time, in the middle of our current “urgent” debate, you’ll probably find a way to express that respect to the folks you’ll need down the line.

In my own conversations with staffers of late, I can see and hear the strain. They’ve been stretched and frayed. For more than 18 months they’ve navigated a constantly shifting political landscape under restrictions that are hampering citizen participation. And the worst kept secret about our body politic is that citizen participation is coveted.

So we have to fight that urge to retract from the conversation. Now, more than ever, is a time to show up. That’s what you can do, right now – and these three basics will help you do it well.

Burning Capital

My prediction from a week and a half ago is progressing nicely. If you recall the post from last Tuesday (So, What’s Next?), I laid out four expectations I had for the next several months in American politics. One is being ramped up as I write this piece.

Right now, the Biden administration is running wild to move past the crises of August and regain solid footing ahead of a tense year that promises to be consumed by the mid-term elections. What does that look like in reality? Well, the messaging has changed. There’s a new urgency to the proposed infrastructure bill as well as a $3.5 Trillion budget reconciliation package. But in addition to the renewed urgency, the very language they are using has shifted as well.

Enter the populists

The development isn’t surprising in the least. As I wrote last Tuesday, the infrastructures of both major parties are already on an election footing. That means simplifying messages and boiling down nuanced policy to bumper sticker positions. This kind of politics is what riles and reinforces the base. So what’s the administration doing to work into that posture?

Well, first and foremost, the sales pitch to moderates is done. Congressional leadership and the administration are working feverishly to advance committee work on these bills and push their consideration ahead of some key calendar deadlines. In addition to that work, you see the discussion around that work being driven to a state of a “simple” yes/no prospect for the Democrat majority. Here’s a great take on this from CNN that I think you should read: White House moves to sharper, populist message to keep Democrats together in make-or-break agenda moment.

That CNN piece explains the why and the how of the messaging shift. But what does that mean for advocacy organizations?

Three Expectations

First – opportunities to influence and change the reconciliation package are shrinking. A shift away from nuance signals a need to solidify the agreement.

Second, the administration will undoubtedly have less capacity after the agreement to push major legislative packages. Quite literally, they’re burning their (political) capital.

Which sets up the third expectation: with limited legislative influence in the coming year, watch for a marked shift toward utilizing regulatory processes to advance the agenda.

Thanks to the Administrative Procedures Act of 1974, we’ve been on a long slow glide path toward greater regulatory power within the fourth branch of government: the agency driven bureaucracy. When any administration has expended its legislative influence, you can reasonably expect a shift toward executive orders and regulatory decisions to advance agendas without the nuisance of building popular support.

Like I said last Tuesday, I expect that effort to ramp up and that we will see significant regulatory decisions begin rolling out in the beginning quarter of 2022. Advocacy organizations that aren’t watching regulatory proposals RIGHT NOW are already behind the power curve.

That makes my advice to advocacy organizations is pretty straightforward: it’s time to get in the weeds on regulations.gov.

NASA, Corn Farmers, and Saving the World

In my day job, I have the incredible pleasure of working with agricultural producers. American farmers and ranchers are personal heroes of mine. You see, my family sold the farm before I came along – but my dad made sure I was never too far removed from those agrarian roots.

Growing up, every month we’d visit my grandmother who still lived on a property adjacent to the old family grain farm. He’d have me walk the fields and listen to his stories of what it was like as a young man on that farm in the middle of the 20th century. He told me about hard days, short nights, and the stresses and blessings of the business. Little did I know how much those lessons would inform my work in politics down the line.

But at the same time as my dad was trying to keep me grounded, I always seemed to have my head in the stars. Any regular reader of this blog has undoubtedly come across at least one post on NASA and what’s happening in the world of human space flight. Well, I think it’s high time I bring the worlds of astronauts and agronomists together to bring perspective on an issue grabbing a great deal of attention in our national political debates: climate change and greenhouse gas emissions.

Photo Credit: NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center

Over the past two years, an interesting conversation has been crisscrossing the countryside, and being presented as a new opportunity for agricultural producers. Across the US, farmers are being approached to participate in emerging markets that would allow them to sell credits for the carbon their crops sequester over the course of a year. Those credits, in large measure, would be sold as offsets – allowing other industries to pay, in part, for the costs of implementing new practices that allow for additional carbon sequestration in America’s rural communities.

I’ve spent a lot of time on this topic in the past year in particular. Though it started before the Biden administration, the President’s posture on climate policy is certainly pushing the debate further ahead. But, I think for the average person not engaged in these policy discussions, it’s important to know how we got here. And that’s where NASA comes in. <Insert Nerdy Glee Here>.

In the image above, you see a satellite view of North America reflecting data from 2007 to 2011. The fluorescence you see is NOT carbon emissions, but rather a reflection of photosynthetic activity. And for those of us struggling to remember our high school biology classes, that photosynthetic activity is how growing plants absorb the carbon they need to grow and thrive. Better yet, as the plant absorbs the carbon in our atmosphere, it transmits that carbon into the soil, offering an opportunity to sequester it in the long term.

How effective is it? Based on the data backing up the image above, it was found that photosynthesis from the U.S. Corn Belt peaks in July at levels 40 percent greater than those observed in the Amazon. The potential for sequestration in the agronomic cycle is MASSIVE. And we’ve come to realize this, in part, because of the important work performed in terrestrial research at NASA.

When it comes to NASA, most of us think of rocket launches and control rooms. But an incredible amount of NASA’s work is not about reaching further into the cosmos – instead it’s directed back toward understanding, and solving, problems right here on Earth. Since the initial findings about the Corn Belt’s productivity, the team at NASA (and some outside organizations) have invested significant resources into figuring out just where we go from here.

Right now, the political debate has room for these carbon markets – and we can thank Farmers and NASA equally for that development. In the next decade, research at the farm level and on our orbital observatories will push new developments and new advancements. The reason why I don’t live in a state of nihilistic dread about climate change is that I don’t discount the power of American innovation. In just a matter of 15 years we’ve gone from interesting data points to feasible programs. That’s the blink of an eye. I’m excited to see where we land in the next 15 years.

And if I was a betting man, I’d continue to put my money on NASA and Farmers to save the world.

Go back

Your message has been sent

It’s probably time to expand your definition of community

Do you feel like your organization is on its own in the advocacy realm? If so, take some solace in the knowledge that you’re probably not as alone as you think. Well, at least not in feeling that way.

A few weeks ago I posted a piece focused on some of the barriers that non-profits face in advocacy. At the time, I zeroed in on the internal factors at play in many non-profits: lack of resources and cultural indifference toward political engagement. But as I’m thinking about the challenges for these organizations today, I’m wondering about the external challenges too.

What if you have both the will, and the resources to advocate effectively? What barriers could still be in your way? As I’m pondering the topic, I keep landing on the reality of insularity.

Those who work in the non-profit space share a common attribute: an abundance of passion. Let’s face it, the work is difficult. Without a deep well of fortitude, those in the field wouldn’t last long. But there’s an overlooked shortcoming when it comes to all that passion. Too often it’s laser-focused on the limited scope of that non-profit’s mission and blind to the surrounding political environment.

And that’s no knock against these organizations – it’s an understandable outcropping of their passionate, intensely focused service.

But if I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times: there is room for everyone to participate, and succeed, in advocacy. But you have to be willing to embrace the role of partner by expanding how you define your community.

Within your political action plan you should already be identifying targets to influence. But be honest, are you also thinking through the targets to bring into your fold through coalitions? Building those relationships requires an immense amount of relationship and trust building – both of which require taking responsibility to be in community with others. And yes, that includes those you may disagree with politically.

Are you encouraging your team to serve with other organizations when they ask? Are you joining community groups like the Chamber of Commerce or the Rotary? What about making the immense commitment to serve on another entity’s board of directors? By making these commitments to the broader community, successful advocates can open doors to a network that will exponentially expand their political impact.

Take responsibility to be in community. You’ll find you’re not as isolated as you think, and that network will carry you far.

Go back

Your message has been sent

So, What’s Next?

For two dreadfully long weeks, Americans have wrestled with the events unfolding in Afghanistan – punctuated by the tragic loss of service members at the Kabul airport. But with the final American planes taking to the skies, many of us are left wondering: what’s next?

There’s still a great deal of story left to be written in this particular volume of Afghan history. Reprisals are ramping up. Musicians and YouTubers have already fallen prey. Some Americans remain in country – with limited options to leave.

But what happens back here at home? If I’m tapping into my realism, sadly I have to say “not much” and maybe “more of the same.”

Sure, Republicans and Democrats alike have called for investigations into the withdraw planning. I even think they mean it when they say they want answers. But with the final C-17s departing Afghan airspace, we’re about to see our national attention span shift to the next challenge. The clock is ticking as the sense of urgency fades.

Reeling from inflation, the withdraw, and now hurricane Ida, the Biden administration is in (what we Marines would call) the horns of a dilemma.

Elections come quickly. Two years is the blink of an eye in politics. And the historical averages are already stacked against congressional Democrats. Check out this Forbes piece from 2018 for reference.

So what can we expect from the administration? The strategy could be pretty straightforward:

1) a show of compliance toward congressional oversight hearings on the Afghan crisis; 2) a political-capital intensive push on the infrastructure deal and the $3.5 Trillion budget reconciliation package this fall; 3) a non-legislative nod to shore up base support through regulatory moves that meet campaign priorities (e.g. climate regulation) in early Q1 2022; and 4) a shift to economic messaging as early as February 2022.

Regardless of the public clamor we will see over the next month, both major parties are focusing in on the midterms. The administration will start the process of shifting the narrative as quickly as they can. Simultaneously we will see congressional Republicans on the attack to keep a national security drum beat alive.

(But I’d caution Republicans not to repeat the mistakes they made by over politicizing the Benghazi tragedy. They also have an economic message to prepare for the midterms).

There’s at least some reason informing my speculation on the political strategy above. Regardless of the rhetoric, elections boil down to whether the average voter feels safe and able to make a buck. Right now, those decks are stacked against the administration and congressional Democrats.

Despite those challenges though, there’s a lot of poker left to play. I’ll be interested to see if my prediction holds up – I certainly don’t claim any special clairvoyance. And if I’m being honest, I really want to hear what you think. So, from your view, what’s next?

Go back

Your message has been sent

If Not Us, Who?

I know I tend to take a more positive tone in most of my posts, but we are now two weeks into the devastating failure of the Afghanistan evacuation and I’m struggling to find the light. Despite the administration’s efforts to reassure the international community by way of the tens of thousands evacuated so far, the full picture of it all isn’t pretty.

Take this excerpt plucked from Politico:

Source: POLITICO Global Translations, August 25, 2021

You can neither build back better, nor make America great again by refusing the role of leadership in the free world. Those words mean even more to me today than when I wrote them just last week. In the absence of American leadership on the Afghanistan withdraw, the world is struggling to keep pace with the chaos as it unfolds.

The digital data trail laid out in the excerpt above is just the latest shocking reality coming to light. The pitiful strategic planning exhibited over the last several years has failed to account for the technical savvy gained by the Taliban during the preceding two decades. Now, because of that failure, those left behind are at an even greater risk than previously thought.

The worst part is that it didn’t have to be this way, and the French are proving it. If I was in more of a joking mood, I’d make the expected underhanded comment about the proud history of French retreats – but I’m just not there yet. I have to hold back because they executed the most sound withdrawal strategy of them all.

The French began withdrawing Afghan staff as early as May of this year, with only French nationals remaining in their embassy into July. Their thoughtful planning allowed them to protect their most vulnerable Afghan staff and their national security interests.

I find it…difficult…to believe that two consecutive American administrations couldn’t, or wouldn’t, have found a way to do this better.

The Afghan people are facing a grim future. Regardless of the platitudes coming from the Taliban PR department, reports of abuses are already coming out of Afghanistan. Afghans who worked with the international coalition partners are being targeted. United Nations personnel are being told to limit visibility of female staff. The writing is on the wall. We know the next chapter.

As I write this, I’m lying in my toddler’s bed helping her to get to sleep. I find myself torn between gratitude for my own reality and despair for what the future holds for the good people of Afghanistan.

We can feel powerless in moments like this, and maybe we are because the events are already in motion. But there will be more moments ahead – both within this conflict and whatever next generational crisis arises. It’s up to us to set the example for our elected officials. So, if you’re as frustrated as I am, it’s time to practice some introspection.

I think we need to be asking ourselves some meaningful questions. Is it really time for a retreat from the world stage? Or, is it more important than ever for us to be a force for good in a troubled world? And one final question to ponder (maybe the most important): if not us, who?

A Worthy Read for the Moment

A fair amount of time has passed since I added a new recommendation to the Bookshelf. Today, I right that wrong.

I was first introduced to the writing style of Thomas E. Ricks in his study of US Military leadership titled The Generals. Less a history and more of an organizational biography, The Generals tracks the evolution of senior leadership practices in the US Army and Marine Corps from the world wars to present day.

Even years removed from my first read, I find myself returning to his work periodically when I’m thinking through organizational leadership challenges. That’s why, since I first published the Bookshelf page of this site, Ricks has been featured in my little corner of the web. But earlier this month I finally picked up his latest work First Principles, and I think he’s earned another spot on the shelf.

Let me open with a caveat: I disagree with some of the concluding recommendations he shares. That being said, he’s done something rare in studies of our founding generation: he revealed something different to discuss.

I’ve read more books on the founding fathers, and their times, than I should admit. It’s a favored period for this particular idealist. I admire the founding generation – flaws and all – for the optimistic spirit they found a way to codify. Or, as Ricks states: “I have learned in researching this book that America is a moving target, a goal that must always be pursued but never quite reached.”

But for the countless volumes written about that generation, it’s not often that I find something new to ponder.

In First Principles we step away from the common historical storytelling, and instead focus on the educational experiences that guided public men of the era: the classics as understood and professed by academics of the Scottish enlightenment.

Ricks dives into the shared influence of Roman and Greek virtue (and some vice) on Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Madison. Without dedicating too much real estate to the events, or realpolitik, of the founding, Ricks avoids the humdrum of biographical histories. What’s more, he moves beyond the founding era to show the decline of the very classicism that shaped our earliest days. Directly, yet evenhandedly, he shows the founders falling out of sync as America expanded and came to terms with the flaws in their plan (i.e. their failure to abolish slavery).

Our founders achieved something remarkable. Durable and amendable, their experiment has set the stage for Americans to do what they do best: pursue their own happiness. Ricks reminds us though, that the founding generation can still teach us something about public virtue and the duties that should share equal prominence with the freedoms we enjoy.

There has never been a time in American politics free of division. From the outset, we’ve disagreed over the role and scope of government. There’s truly nothing new about today’s arguments. But maybe it’s time we pause to reflect on the virtues that informed our founding and our friction along the way. Who knows, we may just learn a thing or two from the likes of Cato, Cicero, and Cincinnatus.

If you think you may agree, pick up a copy of First Principles by Thomas Ricks. It’ll be worth it.

Choose Principles Over Polls

We’re about a week in to the coverage of the fall of Afghanistan to Taliban forces. If you missed my post on Tuesday, please check it out. I think you’ll understand a little more clearly the raw nature of my feelings on the topic. But let’s dig into the bigger political picture here.

Just how did we get here, and what can we expect moving forward?

From my perspective, it boils down to polling and allowing statistics to tell us the story we want to hear. A common human trait. And before anyone thinks this is going to be a hit piece on President Biden, I credit President Trump with making the same mistake and I say a pox on both their houses.

Take this observation from a recent, and decent, piece out of POLITICO:

“For months, Biden’s advisers had been downplaying the likely political impact of the U.S. exit, pointing to polls showing that voters were tired of war and just wanted to bring the troops home. And they noted that it was Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, who approved the peace agreement with the Taliban in his final year in office.”
Politico, “Clearly botched,” August 15, 20201

This is the danger of polling and leading by statistical analysis. No matter how good your model, there’s a shortcoming in this approach: it ignores the enormous complexity of human, and American, preference.

For instance, take a moment and imagine being asked this question: “do you believe we should end our occupation in Afghanistan and bring American troops home?” Would your answer be a bit more complicated than a simple “yes” or “no”? I’m hopeful that if you’re reading this blog regularly, you’re of the kind who would say: absolutely, it’s much more complex.

The Trump and Biden administrations, from my view, have both neglected the effect of American exceptionalism. Simply put, I believe Americans don’t want to retreat from the world stage. Yet under consecutive administrations, we’ve seen jarring examples of just that approach. From the extremes of both major party bases we see calls for isolationism (proving once again our politics are less of a spectrum and more of a circle).

Under the Trump administration, the stunning successes of trade deals like USMCA and the China Phase 1 deal were preceded by a lengthy trade war punctuated by damaging retaliatory tariffs. And while the Trump administration began its tenure with significant shows of military strength, the long term goals of the administration called for equally significant drawdowns in military missions and a cold shoulder to our NATO allies.

By contrast, Biden’s first two quarters in office will be defined first by the debacle on the ground in Afghanistan, and (a bit more quietly) his complete withdraw from international trade negotiations. That second one, though less visible, holds the potential to be even more damaging to US interests in the long term. For instance, the administration opted to allow Trade Promotion Authority to expire, crippling our ability to even approach the trade table, let alone come out ahead.

For both administrations, this lean into isolationism is dangerous – and I believe a major misreading of the American spirit.

In the modern news cycle our attention span may be short – but our cultural memory is long. We know what happens in a world where modern America takes a step back – and more than a few of us are pretty wary of those prospects. You can neither build back better, nor make America great again by refusing the role of leadership in the free world. And Americans know that.

Unfortunately, I cannot paint a rosy picture for you that we will see a shift in the approach of the administration. Even Vice President Harris, a presumed front runner for a future Democrat nomination, has remained stunningly silent over Afghanistan. We can make assumptions about the strategy here: that allowing time and distance to develop will protect the administration and down-ticket candidates in the long term. After all, most Americans don’t vote primarily based on foreign policy – we are an economy driven electorate.

I’m sure we will, in fact, be talking about something else come the election cycle of 2022, let alone 2024. I expect the trend toward isolationism to continue, despite the clamor and political fallout right now. But sadly, without an existential threat like the Soviet Union serving as a national focal point, it’s difficult for any of us to hold true to the old adage that “politics ends at the water’s edge.”

For advocates, the trend toward isolationism will continue to impact countless NGOs seeking to serve global missions, with the singular exception of those in the global climate policy space. Those seeking to advance environmental causes can reasonably expect to continue capitalizing on the moment in front of them.

I’m, as you’ve surmised by now, frustrated with the state of things. I do hope for a change in the trend line. I believe in a world where America leads actively, and by example. I believe in free trade because it mitigates conflict. I believe in a strong military because it allows us to protect the innocent regardless of national strategic benefit. And I believe in the importance of leading from principle, not the polls, because statesmanship is what our people deserve.

Go back

Your message has been sent

At a loss…

Let me start by acknowledging that my time in uniform never took me to Afghanistan. It simply wasn’t where the Marine Corps sent me. Nevertheless, I lost a few friends to that far away land.

I’m writing tonight after a stunning few days when the world witnessed the implosion of twenty years worth of national sacrifice. I don’t know if I’ll be able to add much substance to what’s already been said on the topic – there is certainly no shortage of those commenting.

But if I’m honest with myself today, it’s almost that I have too much to say. I’ve got too much to say about the men and women who went willingly. The first who went to seek out and eliminate an evil of the highest order, and then the countless others who followed on their heels, showing glimpses of our very finest to a people very unlike us.

I’ve found myself in quite a few conversations about the events of the last few days…and I seem to be living out the duality of our country in my discussions. In one moment, I find myself questioning the execution of the withdrawal, in the next I question the entire war. At one and the same time, I find the cause of intervention both illogical and absolutely necessary. Have you felt yourself spinning in a similar circle?

Today, the pundits spun. And while I spent the day thinking about those best of us who served the Afghan people honorably, I find myself appalled by the worst of us seeking to capitalize on the moment for political gain. It’s no longer about the moral right or wrong of the endeavor, it’s about who can claim moral superiority by racing to the bottom. Even the libertarians are spinning, showcasing their isolationist tendencies.

Well, from my perspective we’re all a little right, and a lot wrong about this conflict. But we’re all wrong when we call the endeavor a failure.

It’s a false equivalency to claim that, like Japan and Germany, Afghanistan should have adopted our values in a generation. Without a deeper understanding of their insular, locally driven culture, you simply cannot fathom the gulf between those cultures.

Few Americans comprehend the disparate, tribal nature of Afghanistan – a country where Islam took the better part of 1200 years to attain its prominence (and then as a decree from a nascent central government seeking to consolidate power). Contrasted with the highly centralized and homogenous nation states of Japan and Germany, it becomes slightly easier to realize the challenge of nation building in a country more definable as a loose affiliation of tribes.

American presence on the ground in Afghanistan had to look different than post-war Japan and Germany because they are fundamentally different. If we had chosen sobriety at the innumerable decision points along the way, we’d have admitted to ourselves that nation building in Afghanistan would take generations – and it’s likely none of us would have had an appetite for that.

But was the cause worth it?

Yes. Unequivocally.

In a tweet yesterday I revealed my most honest view of what to expect next:

“What happens next is what happens whenever the powerless are left to the care of evil men.”

Maybe I’m biased because I knew firsthand the caliber of men and women we sent to the mountains of Afghanistan. Maybe I’m slanted because of unfettered idealism. But you will be hard pressed to convince me that America’s role is to withdraw from the dark spots in the world. What kind of shining city on the hill is that?

I do believe in American exceptionalism – as well as the exceptional responsibility that it requires of us. The events of the last few days sting so much because we are spurning that responsibility and leaving evil men better equipped to pursue their tyranny.

We can question the strategic value of Afghanistan. We can debate the wisdom of past administrations as much as the current. Hell, we can even discuss the parallels to Vietnam. But you will not convince me that protecting innocents, and promoting the rule of law was a failure, much less wrong.

The world is still quite big, and it’s inhabitants make it infinitely complex. We will never make it less so. But before you score your political hits in the coming days (as all sides will find a way to do), pause to recognize that complexity and try to find a way to reserve your comments. The end of this story isn’t written, and won’t be for a long time – that’s the nature of things, especially in Afghanistan.

And while you’re pulling your punches there is something positive you can do to help some people today. We can reasonably expect the veteran community to struggle with these events. If you feel inclined to help meet their coming needs, I’d ask you to consider donating to Save A Warrior. You can learn more about their mission here: SaveAWarrior.org.

The Non-Profit Barriers to Advocacy

Non-profits have a corner on the passion market, but often miss their opportunities to harness those passions.

Let’s start by acknowledging the simple fact that non-profits have it tough. Constantly scrapping, chasing grant dollars and donors to just scrape by. Despite the overwhelming generosity available in the world, there’s never enough to go around for every organization.

Now add to that pressure the actual delivery of services, communications, personnel management, et cetera, et cetera and you land in a precarious position: how do you advocate for the bigger issues when you’re stuck in the minutiae?

I believe there are some key points of failure where non-profits are falling short in the advocacy game. Unless an organization is prepared to address these, I fear they’ll struggle to break through to their memberships and move them toward political engagement.

Other Duties as Assigned

This is a biggie. It’s consistent across small and medium sized non-profits alike. Regardless of mission and resources available, predominantly local charities struggle to treat advocacy as a primary area of responsibility – let alone have a staffer singularly focused on making it possible. Instead, they’re forced into a scenario where someone on the team has a secondary role, an other duty as assigned, to work on advocacy. Separate from their primary role, its often an afterthought.

Frankly I get it. On the inside of a small team, you’re constantly chasing your core mission and reacting to the ephemera occurring around your operation. With few on hand, who’s going to take on that long term role of relationship building so key to successful advocacy?

What do you do if you can’t afford the cost of a dedicated advocacy staffer? First I’d recommend creating a core team of advocates within your board leadership who can take the charge on relationship building. Even without a thoroughly developed action plan, those community movers and shakers are well positioned to bump the right elbows. As they get exposed to the decision makers over time, they’ll help identify areas where the organization can improve by contracting the services of a public policy firm.

By enlisting such a firm, you can bring targeted resources to your weaker areas. Need help planning an education day at your statehouse? Public policy firm. Need assistance identifying the key legislators you need to engage to move a bill? Public policy firm. Need new ideas on how to communicate your priorities? You guessed it – a good public policy firm can build out custom resources to meet your needs.

But There’s a Bigger Issue

It’s one thing to not have a focused effort on public policy. It’s an entirely different hurdle when your organization believes it doesn’t need to engage in issue advocacy at all.

Sadly I see this as a growing trend.

Groups that have a great story to tell about their mission are doing so – to their donors and volunteers. But to many, it seems there’s a reticence toward sharing those same messages to policy-makers. For whatever reason, they’re staying out of the political fray.

Sure, the big organizations get it right. The organizations with national support structures drive agendas because the show up. But a shockingly low number of local organizations are taking the time to reach out to their elected representatives to simply tell them about the good work happening in their back yards.

I’ve said it here before: decision-makers and their staffs reach out to the folks they know. It’s simple human nature. There’s only so much time in a day, and it’s unreasonable to expect public servants to stumble across your website. If you want those decision-makers available to you, you have to make yourself available to them.

It’s not easy. If you’re struggling to keep your head above water already, you’re going to be hard pressed to put the energy into effective advocacy. But if you’re wanting some ideas on how you could get over that hurdle, there are pros who want to help. Message me on luke@partofthepossible.com and I’ll help point you in the right direction.