“Congress Doesn't Care”

Advocacy Myths That Need to Die

Day 6: “Congress Doesn't Care.”

Spend enough time in advocacy and eventually you will hear it.

Usually after a bill stalls.

After another meeting that goes nowhere.

After another form-letter response from a congressional office.

After legislation fails to get a hearing.

After Congress funds something you consider ridiculous while telling you there isn't enough money for the issue you've been fighting for.

Someone says:

“Congress doesn't care.”

I understand the frustration.

Sometimes it certainly feels that way.

And let's be clear:

Some members of Congress probably don't care about your issue.

There are 535 voting members of Congress.

They are not a hive mind.

Some care deeply about veterans.

Some care deeply about survivors.

Some care about military families.

Some have personal connections to the issues.

Some have spent years working on them.

Some know very little about them.

Some have completely different priorities.

Some may genuinely disagree with you.

And yes, some may care considerably more about politics, reelection, donors, committee assignments, media attention, or whatever else is consuming Washington that particular week.

But reducing all of that to:

“Congress doesn't care”

may feel satisfying.

Strategically, it tells you almost nothing.

Congress Is Not One Person

We talk about Congress as though it is a single creature.

Congress needs to do this.

Congress refuses to act.

Congress doesn't care about veterans.

But “Congress” is 535 elected officials spread across two chambers, plus committees, subcommittees, leadership structures, personal offices, professional committee staff, legislative counsels, and thousands of congressional employees.

They represent different states.

Different districts.

Different parties.

Different constituencies.

Different committees.

Different ideologies.

Different experiences.

Different priorities.

And different levels of knowledge about your issue.

Saying “Congress doesn't care” can obscure the much more useful question:

Who in Congress has the ability to do something about this, and what is preventing them from doing it?

Now we have something we can work with.

Caring and Agreeing Are Not the Same Thing

This distinction is incredibly important.

Someone can care about veterans and disagree with your legislation.

Someone can care about survivors and believe your proposed benefit is structured incorrectly.

Someone can care about military families and believe another policy should receive funding first.

Someone can believe your problem is real and still disagree with your proposed solution.

That does not automatically make them anti-veteran.

It makes them someone who disagrees with you.

Advocates sometimes make the mistake of turning policy disagreements into moral judgments.

If you cared, you would support this bill.

Would you?

What if the bill contains a harmful offset?

What if it excludes part of the affected population?

What if there is a less expensive way to accomplish the same goal?

What if another proposal addresses the problem more effectively?

What if the legislation creates an unintended consequence?

We expect lawmakers to listen to our arguments.

We should also be willing to listen when they explain their objections.

Then we can address those objections.

That is considerably more useful than declaring that they simply don't care.

Sometimes the Problem Is Jurisdiction

You can have an incredible meeting with a member of Congress.

They understand the issue.

They agree with you.

They want to help.

And they may still have very little ability to move the legislation.

Why?

Jurisdiction.

Congress operates through committees.

Different committees have authority over different policy areas.

A member who enthusiastically supports your proposal may not sit on the committee responsible for moving it.

That member can cosponsor.

They can send letters.

They can talk to colleagues.

They can advocate internally.

But they may not control whether the committee holds a hearing or schedules a markup.

That doesn't mean your meeting was worthless.

It means your next advocacy target may need to be someone else.

Good advocacy asks:

Who actually has jurisdiction?

Sometimes the Problem Is Money

We covered this yesterday.

Your proposal may be popular.

It may also cost billions of dollars.

That doesn't automatically mean Congress doesn't care.

It may mean lawmakers don't agree on how to pay for it.

Or the CBO estimate created concerns.

Or an offset is controversial.

Or PAYGO considerations complicate the legislation.

Or Congress is trying to fit multiple priorities into a limited budgetary environment.

You may believe Congress should spend the money anyway.

Fine.

Make that argument.

But now you are arguing about priorities and funding, not whether anyone cares.

That's a much more useful fight.

Sometimes the Problem Is Politics

Yes.

Congress is political.

Breaking news, I know.

Members consider elections.

Party leadership matters.

Majority control matters.

Committee leadership matters.

Presidential administrations matter.

Public opinion matters.

The political environment matters.

Sometimes a perfectly reasonable policy becomes trapped in a larger political fight that has very little to do with the people affected by it.

Sometimes one party doesn't want to give the other party a legislative victory.

Sometimes a bill becomes associated with a political fight that overwhelms its actual substance.

Sometimes leadership simply doesn't want the issue on the floor.

That can be maddening.

But again, understanding the obstacle helps advocates develop a strategy.

Maybe the legislation needs stronger bipartisan sponsorship.

Maybe it needs a different legislative vehicle.

Maybe the issue needs to be separated from a controversial package.

Maybe advocates need to wait for another opportunity.

“Congress doesn't care” gives you nowhere to go.

“This bill is stuck because leadership doesn't want it on the floor” gives you a target.

Sometimes There Are Competing Priorities

Your issue may be the most important issue in your world.

That doesn't mean it is the only issue Congress is dealing with.

Members and staff may simultaneously be handling defense authorization, appropriations, health care, natural disasters, national security, agriculture, taxes, immigration, infrastructure, Social Security, education, government shutdown deadlines, constituent casework, nominations, and hundreds of other issues.

That does not mean your issue is unimportant.

It means attention is finite.

Timing matters in advocacy.

Sometimes the problem isn't convincing Congress that your issue matters.

It is convincing Congress that your issue matters right now.

Sometimes Congress Has Bad Information

This is where advocates can be enormously valuable.

Members of Congress cannot personally become experts on every issue that crosses their desks.

Neither can their staff.

They depend on information from agencies, committees, researchers, constituents, advocacy organizations, lobbyists, experts, affected communities, and other sources.

Sometimes that information is incomplete.

Sometimes it is outdated. (reality check: often outdated or even not available like the number of suicides of veteran spouses or surviving spouses )

Sometimes statistics are repeated so many times that nobody remembers where they came from.

Sometimes an organization presents one interpretation while another presents something completely different.

Sometimes the government itself doesn't have good data.

If Congress is operating from bad information, yelling:

“You don't care!”

Won't fix it.

Bringing accurate data might.

Sometimes the Staffer Knows More Than the Member

Advocates sometimes become obsessed with meeting the elected official.

Everyone wants the senator.

The representative.

The committee chair.

The person whose name is on the door.

But congressional staff matter enormously.

The 26-year-old legislative assistant sitting across from you with a laptop may have spent the last three years handling the veteran portfolio.

They may have read every version of the legislation.

They may know the CBO concerns.

They may know which committee staffer objects to the language.

They may know what amendment could make the bill move.

They may know which organization is opposing it behind the scenes.

They may know far more about the specific issue than the member they work for.

Do not dismiss staff.

Do not talk down to them.

Do not treat them like obstacles between you and the “important person.”

They may be the person who turns your advocacy request into legislative language.

And Sometimes the Problem Is Us

Here comes the uncomfortable part.

Sometimes Congress isn't the problem.

Sometimes advocates are.

Maybe we haven't made a convincing argument.

Maybe our data is weak.

Maybe we're repeating talking points instead of explaining policy.

Maybe we cannot answer basic questions about cost.

Maybe we haven't identified who would be affected.

Maybe we don't understand the opposition.

Maybe our proposal solves only part of the problem.

Maybe we're talking to the wrong offices.

Maybe we're asking for something that isn't within that committee's jurisdiction.

Maybe we send thousands of identical emails and call it engagement.

Maybe we spend more time posting about Congress than talking to Congress.

Maybe our messaging assumes anyone who disagrees with us hates veterans.

And maybe, just maybe, our brilliant proposal isn't as brilliant as we think it is.

That possibility should always remain on the table.

Good advocates ask themselves:

What if I'm wrong?

Or at least:

What am I missing?

Ask Why Before You Assume They Don't Care

If an office won't support your legislation, ask why.

Seriously.

Not sarcastically.

Not as a trap.

Ask:

“What concerns does the office have with the bill?”

You might learn something useful.

Maybe they object to the cost.

Good. Now you know what you need to address.

Maybe it's the offset.

Good. Find another funding mechanism.

Maybe the office supports the policy but not the current language.

Excellent. What language would solve the concern?

Maybe they think another bill handles the issue better.

Read it.

Maybe they don't understand the issue.

Educate them.

Maybe they genuinely disagree with you.

At least now you know.

And yes, maybe they simply don't care.

Fine.

Move on to someone who does.

Stop Burning Bridges for Sport

Calling every member who disagrees with you anti-veteran may feel great on Facebook.

It may be less useful when you need that member six months later on another issue.

Advocacy requires relationships with people you disagree with.

Sometimes profoundly.

Today's opponent on one bill may be tomorrow's strongest ally on another.

You don't have to like them.

You don't have to vote for them.

You don't have to donate to them.

You don't even have to agree with them on anything outside the issue sitting in front of you.

You do need to understand that legislative advocacy requires working with the Congress voters actually elected.

Not the imaginary Congress we wish existed.

Congress Absolutely Deserves Criticism

None of this means Congress gets a participation trophy.

Members should be held accountable.

If an office ignores constituents, say so.

If lawmakers misrepresent legislation, correct them.

If Congress repeatedly promises action and fails to deliver, document it.

If members use veterans as campaign props while refusing to address legitimate veterans issues, call it out.

If legislation contains harmful provisions, identify them.

If lawmakers make terrible policy choices, criticize those choices.

But make the criticism specific.

Specific criticism can produce change.

“Congress sucks” produces a T-shirt.

Maybe a pretty good T-shirt.

But probably not legislation.

Kill the Myth

Some members of Congress care deeply.

Some don't.

Some care but disagree with you.

Some support the goal but oppose the legislation.

Some are constrained by jurisdiction.

Some are worried about cost.

Some are following leadership.

Some are dealing with competing priorities.

Some are operating from bad information.

And sometimes advocates simply haven't made the case.

Myth: Congress doesn't care.

Reality: Congress is 535 different elected officials operating inside a complicated political and legislative system. Figure out who can help, who can't, who won't, and most importantly, why.

Don't waste all your energy asking:

“Why doesn't Congress care?”

Ask:

“What is actually stopping this from moving?”

Then attack the obstacle.

Not the entire institution.

Because writing off all 535 members of Congress as uncaring may be emotionally satisfying.

It is strategically useless.

And whatever you do...

Read the damn bill.