Legislative Advocacy Quotes

Sir Edwin Chadwick (1800-1890) was an England reformer. His words are true and relevant in 2025. He said, “There is a moral as well as an intellectual objection to the custom, frequent in these times, of making education consist in a mere smattering of twenty different things, instead of in the mastery of five or six.

Generally speaking a view of the available economic systems that have been tested historically must acknowledge the immense power of capitalism to generate living standards food housing education the amenities to a degree unprecedented in human civilization. The benefits of such a system while occasionally random and unpredictable with periods of undeniable stress and misery depression starvation and degradation are inevitably distributed to a greater and greater percentage of the population. The periods of economic stability also ensure a greater degree of popular political freedom and among the industrial Western democracies today despite occasional suppression of free speech quashing of dissent corruption of public officials and despite the tendency of legislation to serve the interests of the ruling business oligarchy the poisoning of the air water the chemical adulteration of food the obscene development of hideous weaponry the increased costs of simple survival the waste of human resources the ruin of cities the servitude of backward foreign populations the standards of life under capitalism by any criterion are far greater than under state socialism in whatever forms it is found British Swedish Cuban Soviet or Chinese. Thus the good that fierce advocacy of personal wealth accomplishes in the historical run of things outweighs the bad. And while we may not admire always the personal motives of our business leaders we can appreciate the inevitable percolation of the good life as it comes down through our native American soil. You cannot observe the bounteous beauty of our county nor take pleasure in its most ordinary institutions in peace and safety without acknowledging the extraordinary achievement of American civilization. There are no Japanese bandits lying in wait on the Tokaidoways after all. Drive down the turnpike past the pretty painted pipes of the oil refineries and no one will hurt you.

THE LEWINSKY PROCEDURE: A STRATEGY GUIDE FOR MINIMIZING POLITICAL SCANDAL Deny -The necessary first stage, where you question the accuracy of the facts. It will take time for all the scandalous details to come out, and if you’re careful or lucky, they may never come out. Deny everything until the point that the facts against you can be substantiated. Delay -Take every action possible to stall, postpone, impede, procrastinate, and filibuster. The longer the time between the initial news of the scandal and the resolution of the scandal, the better. Diminish -Once the facts against you have been substantiated, either minimize the nature of the scandal or its impact against you. “At this point, what difference does it make?” Debunk -Have a helpful news organization or advocacy group develop a useful counter-narrative that explains away the scandal or contradicts the facts or generally does something to get progressives back on your side. “Explanatory journalism” is a great help here. Distract -Change the conversation by talking about something else. It doesn’t matter what that might be, because there’s always something else more important, even if it’s reminding people to drink more water. Suggest that the scandal itself is a distraction from the real issues. Deflect -When in doubt, blame the Republicans. All administrative failures can be blamed on the failures of the prior administration. All political failures can be blamed on Republican legislation or Republican intransigence in not passing progressive legislation which would have fixed the problem. All personal failures can be excused by either bringing up the example of a Republican who did something similar, or by pointing out that whatever was done wasn’t as bad as serving divorce papers on your wife when she’s in the hospital with cancer, or invading Iraq. Divide -Point out that the scandal is being driven by the most extreme Republicans, and that moderates aren’t to blame. This won’t help you with moderates that much, but it will give the moderates another reason not to like the extremists, and vice versa, and this can only be positive. Deploy -Get friends and allies to talk about your positive virtues in public, without reference to the scandal. If the scandal comes up, have them complain about the politics of personal destruction. Demonize -Attribute malign intentions to the conservatives trying to promote the scandal. This approach should also include special prosecutors, judges, and anyone else who is involved in the scandal to one degree or another. Defenestrate -When necessary, shove someone under the bus. Try not to make this a habit, or you won’t have anyone around to deploy. The target for defenestration can be small (rogue employees in the Cincinnati regional office) or large (Cabinet secretary) but it needs to be someone who won’t scream overly much as they sail out the window. ❄ ❄ ❄

Foster children are much more likely than other children with similar problems to be prescribed multiple medications that will have no impact on their symptoms. These medications, particularly the so-called atypical antipsychotics (medications like Risperdal, Abilify, and Seroquel) can shorten life and have severe side effects, like weight gain great enough to increase risk for diabetes. The over prescribing and inappropriate prescribing of such medications to children in foster care has been so dramatic that the Government Accountability Office has issued a special report condemning it. Both the federal government and several states have sued Big Pharma for targeting foster care children, resulting in multi-million-dollar settlements. In the last few years, attention to these issues by legal groups, such as the National Center for Youth Law in Oakland, the press (an excellent example can be seen in the online series from the Mercury News by Karen de Sa), and advocacy groups such as Foster Youth in Action, has increased awareness of this problem. These investigations and advocacy are leading to some positive changes. For example, California passed legislation to monitor prescribing to children in foster care. But sadly, rather than joining in or even leading efforts to improve the quality of care for foster and adopted youth, most medical and psychiatric groups have resisted or even openly opposed these efforts. Change is hard, and it is hardest for those with the most to lose. As Annette Jackson and I wrote in 2014, “the academic or interest group most threatened by the innovations which challenge their existing frame of reference or perspective, will be the most vocal and hostile to the new ideas.

Research studies have found that the vast majority of whites who hold implicit and explicit racial biases against African Americans strongly support voter ID laws, which are the purported legislative answer to massive, rampant voter fraud. However, researchers have also found that whites who hold implicit biases are convinced that their advocacy for voter ID is not based on racism but rather on ensuring election integrity. Thus, the language of election integrity created an acceptable post-civil rights race-neutral cover to allow the myth of massive rampant voter fraud to continue to do damage.

Although political representation by racial quota is the effect of government policy, it is not yet respectable to call for it explicitly. When President Bill Clinton tried to appoint Lani Guinier as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights her appointment failed, in part because of Miss Guinier’s advocacy of representation by race. In her view, if blacks were 13 percent of the US population, 13 percent of seats in Congress should be set aside for them. It does not cause much comment, however, when the Democratic Party applies this thinking to its selection of delegates to presidential conventions. Each state party files an affirmative action plan with the national party, and many states set quotas. For the 2008 Democratic Convention, California mandated an over-representation of non-white delegates. Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics were only 4.6, 5.2, and 21.1 percent, respectively, of the Democratic electorate, but had to be 16, 9, and 26 percent of the delegates. Other states had similar quotas. Procedures of this kind do lead to diversity of delegates but suggest that race is more important than policy. Perhaps it is. In Cincinnati, where blacks are 40 to 45 percent of the population, Mayor Charlie Luken complained that the interests of blacks and whites seemed so permanently in conflict that “race gets injected into every discussion as a result.” In other words, any issue can become racial. In 2004, the Georgia legislature passed a bill to stop fraud by requiring voters to show a state-issued ID at the polls. People without drivers’ licenses could apply for an ID for a nominal fee. Black legislators felt so strongly that this was an attempt to limit the black vote that they did not merely vote against the law; practically the entire black delegation stormed out of the Capitol when the measure passed over their objections. In 2009, when Congress voted a stimulus bill to get the economy out of recession, some governors considered refusing some federal funds because there were too many strings attached. Jim Clyburn, a black South Carolina congressman and House Majority Whip, complained that rejecting any funding would be a “slap in the face of African-Americans.” Race divides Cook County, Illinois, which contains Chicago. In 2007, when the black president of the county board, Todd Stroger, could not get his budget passed, his floor leader William Beavers-also black—complained that it was “because he’s black.” He said there was only one real question: 'Who’s gonna control the county—white or black—that’s all this is.

The Kyoto Protocol achieved, practically, nothing; in the twenty years since, despite all of our climate advocacy and legislation and progress on green energy, we have produced more emissions than in the twenty years before.

Guardians of the Vote: History, Heroes, and the Legacy of Voting Rights—1960s v. Today” by Jet Thomas, Ed.S., a retired educator, is an essential text covering all aspects of voting in the United States of America. It focuses on how Black Americans, along with other minority groups, have suffered from unequal and often biased circumstances that have suppressed their participation in this cornerstone of democracy. Thomas covers the history of voting with particular emphasis on the events that led to the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s; he features both well-known and more obscure figures who were leaders in creating change – whom he refers to as “Guardians of the Vote;” and the concerns we are facing today due to decisions by the Supreme Court that have weakened the Voting Rights Act. He exposes and explains the current tactics of political maneuvering to circumvent the rights of citizens who are exercising their right to cast votes. Journalist Tavis Smiley contributed the foreword, which describes how the individual reader can become a guardian of the vote by increasing their involvement in the process, with education and training from supportive organizations, making every effort to vote in every election, and then instructing children on the importance of voting and the history of civil rights empowerment. The foreword functions as an outline for what the reader will encounter in the body of the book, as discussed in its nine chapters. Many readers will realize that much of the material that Thomas presents was never covered in their own educational experience, at least not in-depth, and depending on the era of their school attendance, in discussions of current events – this reader/reviewer can attest to very little, even though the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed less than a decade before my own high school graduation. In retrospect, and with consideration of my memories of the coverage presented on the major network news broadcasts of the time, that seems quite shocking. The Introduction offers an excellent overview of the history of key events related to voting in the United States. Thomas then offers nine highly detailed yet very readable chapters covering topics that include discrimination methods found in communication, voter intimidation and restrictions, political manipulation, a study of pertinent legislation, a survey of key voter advocacy groups, and profiles of leading figures in the Civil Rights Movement. The text is amplified with graphic introductions to each chapter that provide a timeline of historical events. There are also numerous photos of pertinent materials, important historic and well-recognized figures such as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, and Congressman John Lewis, along with the individuals he profiles as “Guardians of the Vote.” These visuals provide additional interest and context to the narrative. The author has compiled and organized a vast trove of information to educate and inform readers on the importance of making their voices heard through voting. He also strives to acquaint them with the obstacles Black Americans and other minorities face when attempting to vote, and solutions for remedying this very large problem facing our democracy. His in-depth research and careful documentation are highly evident. In addition, he provides a helpful glossary and references to assist his audience. Readers from high school age onward will come away with new information that will aid them in becoming “Guardians of the Vote” in their own right. Knowledge truly is power when the goal is positive change. “Guardians of the Vote” by Jet Thomas, Ed.S. is a book that should be used to teach history and current events in every high school classroom, in college courses, in community study groups, and in political organizations. It is an important book, and I recommend it to every current and prospective citizen of this country.

Not long after that, Halle Berry went to the Hill and yelled, “I’m in menopause, OK?” at a press conference outside the Capitol to promote legislation supported by a bipartisan group of female senators that would earmark $125 million in federal funds for menopause research.7 This kind of advocacy work is vital because we’re going to need government muscle to ensure that women have the support and health care they need so they can live healthy lives longer.

Not long after that, Halle Berry went to the Hill and yelled, “I’m in menopause, OK?” at a press conference outside the Capitol to promote legislation supported by a bipartisan group of female senators that would earmark $125 million in federal funds for menopause research.7 This kind of advocacy work is vital because we’re going to need government muscle to ensure that women have the support and health care they need so they can live healthy lives longer. Thankfully, the White House is getting on board the train, too. In 2023, it announced a $100 million investment in women’s health research, to which President Joe Biden then added an additional $250 million in a 2024 executive order.8