Another Lobby Days event has come and gone, and my feelings are mixed
indeed. That's not because I lack any belief in the need to tell our
elected officials what we think. Not because I didn't enjoy doing it, and
certainly not because I know that passage of anything we lobbied for is
unlikely this year. You see, I don't like attacking people that I respect,
because I'm just a soul whose intentions are good, and, oh Lord, please
don't let me be misunderstood. Prior to leaving, I was somewhat dismayed
to read JoAnn Roberts' negative comments about the '98 Lobby Days in
Renaissance News and Views' March and April issues, but her comments that
GenderPAC is unfocused and that attendance would be less than before were
dead-on correct, and so I must give credit where credit's due. So, just as
JoAnn always does, I'm going to call things the way I see them. I will
add this disclaimer: the views I'm expressing here are mine alone, and I am
not speaking for the group.
There is a fundamental need to change the way we plan and execute Lobby
Days, and I wonder if Riki Anne Wilchins is kidding herself about what we
accomplished there. In fact, I question whether anyone associated with
GenderPAC can quantify any legislative progress from this year's lobbying
with any sort of solid data. That is the problem. In business, you
quantify everything with numbers and statistics, and I don't think Dana
Priesing or Riki Anne Wilchins can quantify much statistically about this
lobbying effort. In fact, I'm convinced that nobody knows for certain how
many people even lobbied, from what states, and who visited what members of
Congress. Following this article, I've published a press release from Dana
Priesing which states that over 100 lobbyists were on the Hill this time
out. Sorry, but last year there were 60, and the group gathered for the
Monday morning group shot looked more like 30-40 to me. At the Sunday night
meeting, there were a number of people from Brown University that were
ostensibly supposed to lobby with us. In fact, a Brown student who lived in
Louisville was introduced to Amy McCorkle, Angela Bridgman, Marjorie
Demaille, and I; we asked him to join us at Rep. Baesler's office at 10AM.
Not only did we never see him, we didn't see any of the Brown people on the
Hill at all. That's right, we never ran into them in the halls, cafeterias,
or anywhere else on Capitol Hill. Anyone who has lobbied before in a group
can tell you that you are always running into your fellow lobbyists in the
House and Senate office buildings. To be fair, I've contacted some of my
fellow lobbyists in the weeks since, and nobody else seems to have
remembered them being there, either. So, where'd they go?
Professionalism?
I checked in with Dana twice to let her know who I'd talked to, and she
commented that "it's impossible to organize transpeople", and that
"practically nobody's been checking in". On Tuesday morning, I checked in
with her to see if there were any particular members of Congress that
needed to be visited, since I'd exhausted the Kentucky and Tennessee
delegations, and found out that Dana not only didn't even have a list of
who had been seen, but didn't even know who was there lobbying from what
states! Her mood seemed to be one of dejection and frustration, rather
than one of optimism, and I could well understand why. I kept my thoughts
to myself at that point, but found the whole situation to be ludicrous. It
indicated to me that there was no strategy, no organization, no direction,
just a "now go do something" attitude.
This is a problem that originates with the Sunday meeting, when we were
treated to inspirational speeches from Riki Anne and Nancy Buermeyer of
HRC, but not much organization. Regardless of Ms. Buermeyer's apparent
hospitality, the presence of HRC in our meetings, which actively opposes
transgender inclusion in hate crimes and employment rights legislation,
still seems roughly equivalent to allowing KGB officers into a CIA meeting.
In my humble opinion, the priority of the Sunday meeting should be the
following: Find out who is here, from what state, what appointments do we
already have, and who is left over that must be visited; then, explain the
pending bills, their status, who the key people are, establish talking
points, and practice and polish our presentations. What does kowtowing to
a lobbyist from HRC, an organization that is as much our enemy as the
Christian Coalition, do to help us organize a TG lobbying effort?
I'm quite aware that Riki Anne Wilchins and Phyllis Frye, former head of
ICTLEP, are not apt to be spotted sipping martinis together at the College
Park Applebee's. Because of that, I hate to make comparisons between the
ICTLEP and GenderPAC lobbying efforts in 1997. I highly respect each of
these individuals, but the differences in level of organization are so
vivid that they can't be avoided. Phyllis' priority was to organize the
lobbyists, find out where they had appointments, and then made sure that we
covered as many important Senators as possible. Decisions were made at the
Sunday session as to who was going to see what Senator. Monday and Tuesday
night, we were asked to complete a short questionnaire on each appointment
for future reference. I feel that there is no question that Phyllis can
tell you what was accomplished in each visited office. The effort went
like clockwork, and 20 lobbyists did a massive amount of fact-finding. At
the GenderPAC days in May 1997, in contrast, there was little effort to
assign offices, determine who was there and seeing whom. Worse, many of us
made appointments with our local legislators on the basis of a lobbying
effort for passage of a trans-inclusive ENDA, then found that the thrust of
the lobbying effort was for hate crimes. Hate crimes legislation is
important to our community, and is probably the most likely issue we can
get legislation passed to address, but to many of us employment rights is
THE most important issue. Most importantly, I fear that it made us look
like bait-and-switch artists, not to mention that in many offices a
different legislative assistant handles the two issues. This could have
made us look like fools.
Professionalism?
What is needed to make next year's effort a viable one? In a word,
organization. The Sunday session is the key to the effort. On Sunday
night, we need to explain what is being lobbied for, determine who has come
and from where, take note of what appointments have already been made, and
prioritize the remainder. If you are in Washington lobbying, you should
see your state's legislators, but if you come from a small state like
Kentucky, you can see many other states' officials, too. There were many
states that did not have lobbyists in attendance, and some of their
Senators and Representatives are very important. In a related effort,
copies of the bill being lobbied need to be disseminated a couple weeks
before the Lobby Days to allow study time, along with a statement of what
the status of the bill is. I was told by Congressman Scotty Baesler's
(D-KY) LA about the status of HCPA in the House (stuck in Rep. Hyde's House
Judiciary Committee). Had I been organizing this, I'd have made certain
that every Representative on the House Judiciary Committee was lobbied.
This goes into the organizing of this event: prioritizing who we use our
limited number of lobbyist-hours to visit. First priority should be the
lobbyists local representatives and Senators; second, their previous
years' contacts; third, the members of the House and Senate committees that
hold the keys to a floor vote; and fourth, possible and probable supporters
and swing votes. This recognizes that there are a limited number of
lobbyists with limited time, and uses them the most effective way possible.
Professionalism.
As I said earlier, I am uncomfortable in the role of attack dog. I don't
like to be a whistle-blower, to be the one to tell the empress that she
forgot to wear her clothes. One reason is this: if I suggest that change is
necessary, then I believe that I have the duty to volunteer to make the
changes reality. On the other hand, I don't have all the time in the
world, and have obligations to my family and career, and cannot say what
will be going on in Spring of 1999 in my life at this writing. Despite
this, I've made the decision to offer my managerial and organizational
skills to whomever may plan a lobbying effort in 1999, because I believe
that since I wrote this, I must put up or shut up. To make these statements
and not be prepared to back them up with action would be cowardly and
unfair to all involved. To that end, anyone who wishes can find me at
agc@MCI2000.com., if you want to call my bluff.
We are transpeople, and our appearance in offices is a curiosity already,
to be honest. The image we need to be putting forth is one of absolute
professionalism, informed expertise, and crisp businesslike presentation.
I'm not sure we appeared that way this time out, nor last year. Lobby Days
are vitally important events that need to happen every year without fail,
and with as many lobbyists as can attend. Lobbying is an effective tool,
but like any tool, needs to be executed in an organized, competent, and
professional manner. Despite the fact that this year's effort was
disorganized to a fare-thee-well this year, I wouldn't have skipped it. Our
elected officials, locally as well as nationally, need to see us, meet us,
talk to us, learn about us. That, my friends, is why I go to Washington
every year. For all the good works that we may do locally (and, as a board
member of It's Time, Kentucky, I recognize the need to pursue local
political action), the Federal Government represents our best hope for
protecting the rights of most transgendered people. Our elected officials
need to see that we aren't fresh from the green room of the Jerry Springer
Show. We have real lives, careers, legitimate concerns, and people who
care about us that are endangered by their very association with us. The
fact is, rights for transgendered people are not just for transgendered
people, they're for our friends, our families, for the entire GLBT
community, for our very survival, and for the sake of our nation as we
approach the millenium. Our job must be to make the annual Lobby Days
more effective and always learn from our mistakes. To do that, to be truly
effective, to finally get the rights and protections that we deserve as
American Citizens enacted into law, guess what we have to exhibit?
Professionalism.