Archives for Drew McKissick

How to Write Great Letters to the Editor or Op-Ed Columns

Write great letters or columns and get your message out!

Ever get an itch to let people know what you think on an issue you care about? Ever thought about writing it down and sending it to a newspaper to be published? You can do this with “letters to the editor” (LTEs) and guest op-eds (or columns). It’s not difficult, and can be more influential that you think.

Letters to the editor are just short letters submitted to the editor of a publication and (sometimes) printed for everyone to see. Op-Eds are longer opinion pieces (or columns) that in most newspapers appear on the page opposite the editorial page; hence the term “op-eds”.

When most people think about letters to the editor or op-eds, they think about newspapers, but don’t forget that a many news organizations exist online as well, not to mention sites that are just dedicated to political and/or religious news and information from a certain point of view. Also don’t overlook smaller publications, such as local weekly papers and magazines.

The point is that it is a great (and cheap) way to get your message out to your target audience in a medium where you control exactly what is written, (just not whether it gets published). In addition, elected officials usually keep track of what’s being written as another way to keep up with what issues people in their community care about.

Good Op-Eds or Letters to the Editor can:
• Raise your (or your group’s) profile or credibility
• Increase public awareness of the issues you care about
• Mobilize public support for your cause

Submission Tips:

Generally, limit yourself to one subject and be brief. List your concerns and articulate the facts. Work to keep it simple so that it can be easily understood. Don’t base it on emotion. Keep it civil and don’t go on a rampage and vent your spleen. You won’t win any converts that way.

Check the Guidelines

Find the publication’s policies for letters or guest columns. Most newspapers prefer letters under 150 words, and op-ed pieces in the range of 600 to 800 words. Get a sense of what their editors will be looking for by becoming familiar with similar items that they print every day. Try to have an angle that the editor would appreciate, (make sure that it fits with the general focus of the publication).

Be Timely

Keep up with current events and look for opportunities to work a local news angle into what you’re writing. Timing is the key. The more relevant your topic is to current events, the better your chances of being published.

Stay Focused

Space is limited, so the fewer points you’re trying to make the better. If you can’t work your main point into one or two sentences, then you need to refine it. Identify a few points that support your argument and build around them. Be clear about your position. Don’t equivocate. Make an effort to anticipate and refute the arguments of your opposition.

Make Your Main Points First

Get to the point quickly and convince the reader that it’s worth their time to keep reading. Draw them in by making sure that the first paragraph catches their attention. When writing an op-ed, you state the conclusion first. Make your strongest point early, then use the rest of your space to support that point. You can provide some initial background information, but don’t let it overwhelm your article.

Explain Why the Reader Should Care

Put yourself in the place of the reader looking at your article. As you are writing, at the end of every few paragraphs, ask yourself: “so what?” Then answer the question. What will your suggestions accomplish? What should they mean to the reader? Offer specific recommendations. Look for great examples that illustrate your argument, or use personal anecdotes and humor to draw the reader in. Help educate them without being preachy.

Don’t Be Verbose

Use short sentences and paragraphs. Your writing should be crisp, clear, concise and to the point. You want to write in order to be read by the largest audience possible, not drown people in verbiage. Use active, rather than passive language.

Make the Ending Memorable

As mentioned, it’s important to have a strong opening paragraph, but it’s also important to close well. You want a short, strong closing paragraph that neatly, (and memorably) summarizes your argument, (maybe even cleverly restating that point you made in the opening paragraph). Restate your position and call people to action.

Provide Some “About” Information

Provide your standard contact information, as well as one or two sentences describing who you are, what you do, and any other information that you think the editor should be aware of. For example: “Joe Smith is an Anytown, USA based political activist with Concerned Citizens. He can be reached at xxxxxxx”. Make it easy for them to let everyone know who you are and what you’re about.

***

Letters and op-eds are a great and inexpensive way of getting a message out and helping shape public opinion.

Any group that works to have an impact on one or more issues should make it a point to have a regular schedule of someone from the group (or a respected person with the same point of view) submitting letters and guest op-eds to the media outlets that reach your target audience.

So go ahead, let people know what you think!

How the Legislative Process Works

Legislative ProcessLegislating is a messy business. As Otto Von Bismarck once said, “Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made”. But it’s a messy business because it involves people who represent lots of other people with different points of view. And this process has to accommodate them all.

There are a lot of moving parts (and people), and many steps along the way that an idea must take before it can become a law. The result is that it is more difficult to change things than it is to defend the status quo. But knowing how the process works will make you be better equipped to have an influence on the things you care about when the time comes.

Here’s a basic breakdown. Generally speaking, the legislative process begins with an idea or a concern, which might have been passed on to a lawmaker by someone in the general public, or initiated by the lawmaker themselves.

The Federal and State Level:

Committees: The vast majority of legislative work is done on committees. As soon as any measure is introduced by any lawmaker it is usually assigned to the appropriate committee that deals with that subject matter. Public hearings begin here, changes are made, and delays or even defeats are possible.

In most cases committees are where legislation dies, as most bills never make it out. If you have lawmakers friendly to your cause on the committee, they may be able to either help “kill” a bill you don’t like by keeping it bottled up in committee, or help get it passed out to the “full body”.

At this point in the process, members of the committee considering the bill you’re concerned about are your targets for grassroots lobbying pressure. Committee Chairman are even more valuable, as they can usually control which sub-committee (if any) the bill may be referred to and whether or not the issue is even heard by the whole committee, (such as deciding whether or when to schedule hearings on the issue, or an actual committee vote). They can also be critical in influencing how other committee members will vote.

As a grassroots activist, you can have an impact at this stage by personally contacting committee members and attending hearings on the proposal and speaking out to help shape public opinion.

The Legislative Calendar: Once favorably recommended by a committee, a bill is scheduled by legislative leaders (usually by a “Rules Committee”) for floor debate by the body. Your involvement at this point could include contacting the key decisions makers, such as the Speaker of the House, Senate President Pro Tempore, Rules Committee members or legislative aides involved in these decisions. Focus on the people controlling the legislation.

Debate and Floor Action: Once a bill passes out of committee it is usually put on a schedule for debate by the full chamber (such as a House or Senate). At this point, all members of the legislative chamber can have an influence on the final outcome by participating in debate, offering and voting on amendments, and then ultimately voting on the bill itself. (At the local level, passage by an entire council or board is usually the end of the process.)

Referral: In cases at the state and national level, where the legislature is divided into two bodies, (House and Senate), when one chamber passes a bill, it is then referred to the other chamber for consideration, where the process starts all over again. This presents you with either another challenge or an opportunity, depending on which side of the issue you’re on, (offense or defense).

Conference: Conference committees are usually comprised of two or three members from each legislative chamber, and are created when there are differences between the versions of a bill passed by both bodies. The purpose is to iron out these differences and submit back to both chambers a version that they think can pass. Because there are so few of them, conference committee members can have a tremendous impact on the final shape of a bill, meaning you can concentrate your lobbying activity on a very small group of lawmakers at this point.

Final Vote: Once the conference committee report is submitted, each chamber will then usually hold a final vote on a bill. If it passes both chambers with a simple majority it is then forwarded to the chief executive, (the President or a governor).

Executive Action: Usually the chief executive is required to take action by a certain time (either with a signature or a veto) or the bill automatically becomes law. Some states allow a “line-item veto,” which enables some provisions to be vetoed without killing the entire bill. If the bill is vetoed, the legislature has an opportunity to attempt to override the veto, (usually by a 2/3’s super-majority). This could make a huge difference to your strategy, depending on whether you’re on “defense” or “offence”. A strong expression of support or opposition at this point could help a chief executive decide whether to sign or veto a bill.

The State Level:

Although the state legislative process is very similar to the federal level, there are some differences. Generally, state legislatures have shorter legislative sessions than Congress, and state legislative officials have either very little or no staff. And the fact that these bodies are smaller and closer to home gives organized conservatives enhanced opportunities for activism and influence.

The Local Level:

While many of the same elements apply at the local level, there can be wide variances in the process in various cities, counties or school districts. The biggest difference from the federal and state level is that there is usually just one chamber to deal with, (a council or a board), rather than two. Of course that means few people to lobby…and officials who are elected from smaller districts and are more susceptible to organized local pressure.

To research how the process works in your area (or for your county or school board), contact your local council or board member and ask for information.

Conclusion

One of the most important things to understand about the legislative process is that it is designed to move slowly…and that’s a good thing! A slow, multi-step process helps prevent the passage of bad legislation. And considering how many bad laws we have on the books despite that fact, imagine how much worse it would be if things moved fast.

From a strategic standpoint, the key thing to remember is that a long process makes it far easier to play defense rather than offense. That means that it is easier to defend the status quo than it is to get something passed. In order for a bill to become law, it must “win” at virtually every step in the process, whereas those trying to “kill” the legislation often only have to win just once.

Knowing how the process works, understanding when, where and how (and on whom) to bring the heat is vital to having an influence on public policy at any level in our system. At each step there are different people who can advance or hinder your cause.

Invest the time in getting to know the players at each step along the way. It will pay dividends later.

Lessons from the Obama Backlash

nopeNow that Election Day is behind us (unless you live in Louisiana), a few lessons and observations from the Obama backlash…

Obama Was the Issue

At the risk of demonstrating a keen grasp of the obvious, Obama was THE issue in this campaign. Republican campaigns were like the gun store with the “Salesman of the Year” poster of Obama over the counter. And he was making the cash register ring.

Liberals tried to suggest that 2014 was an “election about nothing”, but that’s because it was all about their guy, his agenda and the big government that comes along with it. Obama was such an issue that many Democrat candidates wouldn’t admit to voting for him, or even that they supported him and his policies – to which Obama quickly reminded everyone that, yes they did.

Leave it to a narcissist to confirm that it was all about him.

The results speak for themselves. Democrats even lost in deep blue states like Maryland and Illinois…a few of the places where Obama actually dared to campaign. In a happy bit or irony, half of the Senate Democrats who voted for Obamacare are now gone.

If you accept (as Democrats suggested) that Obama had a mandate for “Hope and Change” after the 2008 election, you have to admit that it’s as gone as a goose in winter now.

Republicans Still Need to Define an Agenda

In 1994 Republicans successfully nationalized the off-year elections around an issues based agenda. It worked spectacularly. Then in 2010 and now they succeeded simply by “not being Obama”, which tells you something about how popular Obama is with voters.

But that won’t be enough in the next election. Democrats will continue to run away from Obama like scalded dogs because his ineptness has given the big government their agenda needs such a bad name that they will eventually need to throw him under the bus. That goes double for the next Democrat presidential nominee.

Remember, for liberals, government is never the problem. It is always that someone is just “not doing it right”, or it just needs a little more of your money. The success of their agenda always takes priority, even if that means violating politically correct “ethics” and blaming a guy who happens to be the first black president.

The best way to put forward a national governing vision is to start legislating now, not simply sit back and leave defining an agenda up to the next Republican presidential nominee.

2015 offers the GOP the perfect opportunity to use Obama as a foil to define what they are, and what Democrats are by way of their opposition. They need to demonstrate just who the problem is by piling bill after bill on Obama’s desk – including a repeal of Obamacare – and make him have to keep switching veto pens because they run out of ink.

Gridlockamageddon is Coming!

You think you’ve seen gridlock? You ain’t seen nothing yet baby. You can almost hear it now, the copious wailing and gnashing of teeth in the media and the DC political class about more gridlock and obstruction now that Republicans run both the US House and the Senate.

Even in defeat, Harry Reid set the table with his “congratulatory” statement, saying, “The message from voters is clear: they want us to work together”. Really? If voters wanted a Congress that would “work with Obama”, they must need glasses or they would have voted to put Democrats in control. Instead they voted for Republicans who made it quite clear that they opposed Obama, Obamacare and Obamanomics, and would work to rein him in.

In other words, they voted for what the media will call obstruction and gridlock.

Have you ever noticed that “gridlock” or “obstruction” is usually defined as Republicans not giving Democrats what they want? But if it was gridlock for House Republicans not to work with Senate Democrats and a Democrat President, will it be gridlock for a Democrat President not to work with a Republican House and a Republican Senate? Don’t hold your breath.

The gridlock apocalypse is upon us!

Good Candidates Matter

Much has been made by political establishment types over suggesting that Republicans did well because they kept too many kooky conservatives from being nominated this year. They say the lesson is that when they pick the candidates, Republicans will prevail.

But the fact is that good candidates usually do well (or at least better) regardless of the political environment or what they believe. Being a good candidate who can effectively communicate is divorced from “what” is being communicated, (see: Barack Obama, Bill Clinton).

Republicans fielded high-quality candidates in most races this year, and it clearly made a difference. But don’t let anyone suggest that conservatives don’t make good candidates. Just look at Joanie Ernst in Iowa, and Ben Sasse in Nebraska, both supported by Tea Party conservatives. (See also: Scott Walker, Tim Scott, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, etc.)

It’s just a fact of life that there is large group of people in politics who just want to win, and they and their money gravitate towards quality candidates who look like they can. If conservatives start spending real time focusing on identifying the best candidates to run up and down the ballot in 2016 and start coalescing around them, odds are more of those fence sitters will come along for the ride.

***

Enjoy the win…but start getting ready for the next fight.