Introduction
The following material applies to all individuals who might aspire to be a political leader. This is regardless of what party the individual chooses to be a leader in, whether Democratic, Republican or the “red wig party”. However as discussed earlier in this course the United States functions essentially as a two party system that limits the ability of even the best organized minority or “third” party to get their candidates elected to major state and national offices. However, that is changing as the Internet opens up and eases the organizational aspect of creating and maintaining minority parties. Slowly the theme is being erased that minority parties often accomplish little other than being a “spoiler”.
Minority parties do, on occasion, force the Republicans or Democrats to alter their positions on subjects strongly advocate by the third party. Sometimes those changes end in the Republican or Democratic Party’s national platforms. This may be crass move by the dominant parties to weaken the minority party’s voter base or it can be that the minority party has presented a compelling case for a change in the position of the Republicans or Democrats on an important issue. Could this have been accomplished through working within the Republican or Democratic Party organizations? Maybe yes, maybe no.
Would we be better off with a Democracy that functions like many European countries where a party that gets 20% of the vote gets 20% of the representatives? Maybe, but that system has its problems too. It is not likely to happen here in the United States in any of our lifetimes so, it is best to work starting at the precinct/ward level and move up to become able to effect change by becoming a political leader within either the Democratic, Republican, or some minority party.
Political Leaders ProblemsAll political parties are in constant need of capable leaders on all levels.
Here are some of the qualities you need to be an effective political leader.
You’ve got to have patience and determination, because successful political action is the result of day to day work throughout the year.
You must have courage to fight for your convictions within your party.
You may have to accept occasional defeats, but you must have the foresight to look beyond the immediate election and measure candidates and policies by future problems.
And, needless to say, you’ve got to like people—a good politician is a good neighbor.
Last—you must get new members for your party from among your friends and neighbors.
And remember always, politics is the means of keeping our American way of self- government by bringing together the opinions and wishes of people into a unity that becomes a program of the people, for the people, and most important—by the people.
A political leader has two basic problems.
The first is to build an effective organization that can win elections.
The second problem is to keep the organization unified. A successful political leader must solve both problems.
An organization may be unified but so small and weak it cannot win elections.
Neither can a large organization of highly capable people expect to beat the opposition if it dissipates its energies in factional strife.
These two major problems are composed of many smaller problems, such as finding and training party workers, handling patronage, selecting candidates and financing the organization.
The political leader who successfully handles the many day-to-day problems that confront them will generally find that the larger problems have been solved in the process.
The Political Leader
A Political LEADER is the person to whom the members of a political party have delegated responsibility for managing its affairs.
Political leaders exist at every level of the party organization. In this chapter, however, the term is applied to a county central committee chairman, a city leader, a town leader, a ward chairman, or the like. In some areas, these political leaders are referred to as chairmen. In other areas, they are called presidents. They were once referred to as “political bosses.”
Individuals may assume political leadership, be elected, or appointed. The power of the leader may be derived from a constitution, by-laws, rules, unwritten agreements or tradition.
Basically, however, the leader keeps their leadership and derives their authority from the loyalty of those who support them. They retain this loyalty and withstand challenges to their leadership principally by their ability to outthink and outperform followers and potential rivals.
The real political leader may or may not hold a public office. They may not even have a title in the political party, being rather a private citizen with no official position. Where the real leader has no official position, it is necessary for them to work through the officially-designated party leader. For purposes of simplification, therefore, this chapter describes the problems of the political leader in terms of the officiallydesignated party leader.
The Position of the Political Leader
The political leader is generally responsible for the overall year-round maintenance of the political organization. Their position is similar to that of the chief executive of a company or the owner of a business in that they have a major responsibility in making decisions and determining policy. If their decisions are right, they retain the leadership and the party is as successful as its potential allows. If many of their decisions are wrong—or they are indecisive—the party deteriorates and they are likely to be replaced.
Their position is different from that of a chief executive of a company in that their subordinates and the board of directors are the same people. Management problems become more difficult when the chief executive must woo the support of the employees in addition to organizing them and directing their efforts. Obviously, the political leader is more restricted in seeking solutions to the problems than a company president. Further, unlike a business where the subordinates are beholden to the leader for their paychecks.
Most of the political leader’s subordinates work for No compensation.
To use another business analogy, they are like a president of a subsidiary company; the leader on the next higher level looks to them for a good record in production of votes. The next higher political leader, however, is more dependent on the subsidiary leaders’ support than is the top executive in a multi-plant operation.
Leadership strength varies with individuals as well as with position. In some areas, for example, a successful, established city leader may dominate a county leader; in others, a county leader may be able to replace a less well-established city leader, if they deem it necessary.
Political leadership status, in short, can be tenuous or unassailable, depending on personalities and on the ability of a leader to keep the loyalty of his organization and to maintain a continuing record of achievement.
A word of caution is needed in examining the importance of the political leader at the precinct or ward level, or maybe even at the county level. Many experienced in the political process have noted a distinct shift in everything, other than purely local, noncontroversial, elections, that the local leaders’ role in delivering votes for the party has been transferred to the state or national campaign committees. Since the big money flows into the national committees (and sometimes the state committees when there is a controversial candidate) the state and national committees are the ones attempting to get out the vote.
These state and national committees are often relying on sophisticated analysis of demographics and voting patterns as a replacement for the precinct or ward chairman’s ability to get party faithful to the voting booth. They are also relying on very expensive advertising campaigns that are often colored with untruths and misleading statements about the opposition. Is this a good or a bad thing? The author would probably lean toward this being a bad thing.
Functions of the Political Leader
Within the limitations described above, the political leader must, like a chief executive in business, manage the affairs of their party organization unit.
They are responsible for all planning and decision-making in their jurisdictional area.
They must maintain a good name for their company—in this case, their party—in the community.
They are expected to have a good vote-producing record—and the next higher leader hopefully rates them on their ability to perform.
They must handle patronage (assuming that there is any to dispense) and they must advise the party’s officeholders on political matters.
They must build an organization of salesmen and saleswomen—the precinct/ward leaders—and train them to sell the party and its candidates. They rate the subordinates, reward good performance in whatever way they can and, if necessary, get rid of “dead wood.”
Their judgment is most important in selecting candidates for public office—the representatives of the party in the eyes of the voters. A party is judged largely on the quality of its candidates.
They must obtain financial support for campaigns and for maintaining the organization.
In short, they have large responsibilities, the limitations on their freedom of action are considerable, and—like most of their workers—they are an unpaid volunteer.
Characteristics of the Political Leader
The success of a political leader hinges on their ability and their personal characteristics.
All the characteristics reviewed below obviously will not be found in all political leaders. However, any leader who maintains their position for any considerable time will possess a majority of them.
At first glance it may seem that some of the following characteristics overlap, but each has particular meaning and importance.
COURAGE. The political leader must show determination in carrying out the program and will of their organization.
This does not mean heavy-handed tactics or a “bull-in-the- china-shop” approach. It does mean a willingness to stand up and be counted when it may not be popular to do so.
DECISION-MAKING ABILITY. The ability to make the right decisions is the
acid test of a political leader. This ability is closely related to courage, intelligence, and experience.
TRUSTWORTHY. In business, people rely on written contracts. In politics, a man’s word is his bond. A politician is slow to give their word; often they must be pinned down as to their exact meanings—but their verbal agreement is honored. A politician who does not keep their word becomes known as “unreliable” and they lose support.
DEDICATION. The party leader must be firm in purpose and intent on getting the job done. They may have to push through a project after other people have lost interest or have forgotten the particular goal that has been set.
PATIENCE. Patience does not indicate weakness or lack of decisiveness, but rather an understanding of the multiplicity of forces that exist in any one group. The ability to listen patiently to the “stories” of the various people who make up the organization is important.
Patience and the ability to listen, of course, frequently pay concrete rewards because the leader learns many things that otherwise might not come to his attention.
ADAPTABILITY. A political leader must be able to adapt to changing situations, and must encourage his followers to do the same. Although planning is essential in politics, each hand is played as it is dealt, and plans may have to be changed on short notice.
DIRECTION-PERSUASION. Political leadership differs somewhat from leadership in other organizations. Lines of authority are more fluid. Normal management practices are not followed nor necessarily expected. Authority can pass from one person to another without formal notice.
Accordingly, a broad sense of direction, maximum persuasive ability, willingness to cooperate and the ability to cope with frustration are qualities political leaders need in more generous measure than leaders in other types of organizations. They are important to success in any position of political power.
SENSITIVITY TO TRENDS. A political leader develops a “political sixth sense” by keeping their ear to the ground and studying the attitudes of the electorate and the people within the party organization. This requires an intelligence network and an ability to sense coming trends and political needs.
“THICK SKIN.” A political leader must be “big enough” to overlook barbs and criticisms. Some people are envious and distrustful of any leader. Others would like to replace them and assume power themselves. Consequently, a leader is the focal point of much criticism–especially when things are not going well. A person oversensitive to criticism usually does not last long in a position of political leadership.
SENSE OF HUMOR. A sense of humor can help the leader—and the
organization through difficult times. A humorous anecdote has been used to relieve tensions and hot tempers in many political meetings.
LEVEL-HEADED. The ability to remain calm in a crisis is an important characteristic of a political leader. Often the opposition will attempt to create “panic”— use it as a political weapon. The ability to think clearly and calmly in times of political crisis will help the leader adopt a satisfactory course of action and at the same time maintain the morale of his party workers.
This, however, does not mean apathy—which is dangerous.
INITIATIVE. Political leadership requires initiative and creativity. An effective leader must be a “self-starter.” They must not only know what to do and how to do it, but must act on this knowledge.
EXPERIENCE. A leader should have some experience in politics before they are put into a position of authority. An inexperienced leader may think they are doing a good job, when, in reality, they are following a course that will destroy them politically and do serious damage to the party.
Experience enables a leader to distinguish between sincere friends and ingratiating enemies—who mask themselves as friends. Experience helps in discerning trends, political signs-of the-times and the value of new techniques.
Experience tells the leader when immediate action is necessary—and when action should be delayed.
Experience at the precinct level is especially important. Many leaders retain their precinct leadership even though they hold much higher party posts.
Without the basic background acquired by precinct experience, a ward, town, city, county, state or national chairman has little understanding of how votes are gotten, or the problems precinct leaders face in getting them. As a precinct leader a politician learns to be sensitive to what people are thinking—and to discriminate between inconsequential “brush- fire” issues that will go out harmlessly and “forest-fire” issues that require major attention.
Experiences “in the trenches” of politics is like the company president who
periodically spends time in the plant to learn the real problems of production and days on the road with salesmen to find out how the product is selling,
The reader may ask if the role of the political leader, specifically starting with experience at the precinct level is relevant in today’s world of big money advertising budgets and attack ads sponsored by Super PAC’s. One fundamental has not changed; elections are won by the party that gets the most votes for their candidates. So, what is the most effective way to get those votes, good organization and staffing at the precinct level or lots and lots of expensive negative advertising coming from both sides of the political spectrum? If you are working through the material of the “Action Course” the author suspects that you believe that the answer lies with the former and not the latter. Unfortunately it appears that the Democratic and Republican party leadership do not see it this way at the present time.
Recruiting and Training
Volunteers
A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION carefully selects its personnel—both paid professional staff and volunteer workers.
While a political organization should never be in the position of turning down volunteers, one of the basic fallacies in recruiting volunteers for political organizations is the idea that care and judgment are not required in the selection of volunteers for positions of responsibility.
Experienced political leaders know they must review, judge and finally “hire” personnel with the same care required in running any business, educational or religious organization. On a man-hour basis, more may be required of political personnel—for less pay, or no pay at all.
Sources of Political Volunteers
The political leader knows many sources of political talent—for example, social and service clubs, women’s groups, young people’s groups.
As a rule, people who stand out as organizers in any community activity such as charity drives, church work, service clubs, minority organizations and veterans groups are good potential material for political assignments.
Before approaching anyone who is already active in politics to join their “team”, the
leader will check with the top person in the organization from which they are recruiting for several reasons:
- It is common courtesy.
- They would be considered politically inept if they did not.
- They might be accused of “pirating.”
- They might receive valuable information about the person they are considering.
Political volunteers—like other types of workers—should be selected on the basis of the job to be filled. General classifications of duties include precinct/ward work, headquarters operation, and campaign management.
Checking References
Public officials and other political leaders may furnish helpful information about an individual who is being considered for political work. Co-workers can indicate if the person is well-liked. People who can’t get along with others are poor risks in politics, no matter how talented they are. For good or bad there now exist many sites on the internet that allows a very thorough background check to be made on almost anyone for a nominal fee. If there are any questions about the volunteers past it would be wise to use one of these services.
Testing
In politics, people are generally assigned to less demanding jobs before being moved on to greater responsibilities.
This procedure is not prompted by doubts about an individual’s ability but springs from the need for learning political behavior step-by-step.
Moreover, because voluntary workers receive no monetary compensation, their rewards for good work may take the form of impressive titles and increased responsibilities. Workers with long and faithful service may resent the promotion of a new comer to a higher position prior to the demonstration of superior abilities.
Rating the Volunteers
Both during the testing period, and later, a successful leader finds it necessary to rate their volunteers—particularly precinct leaders.
The leader uses different methods for evaluating performance in different jobs.
Headquarters workers are not difficult to rate. The leader can observe who carries out their assignments. Shirkers become the subject of conversation, and the leader hears it. Those who do an outstanding job in publicity, research, finance, or any of the other campaign operations are almost automatically brought to the leader’s attention by their performance. Many of the volunteers may be coming directly from the state or national party organizations and the local leader may not have direct authority over them. It is still important that the leader carefully oversee the performance of the “second party removed” volunteers and contact the state or national party if a volunteer is causing more harm than good.
Precinct leaders are rated very carefully. In the past many political leaders keep detailed records of the vote in every election, precinct by precinct, over a period of years to help them evaluate the precinct leaders. These records were used like sales records in a company to analyze each precinct leader’s vote production. Much of this activity is currently managed by highly sophisticated computer programs.
In spite of the emphasis of a top-down approach by the parties, good leaders will review each worker’s performance in a personal interview whenever possible. Reasons for poor performance may be uncovered in such conversations and steps taken to correct them.
It is difficult for the political leader to deal with poor performance because much of their help comes from volunteers
and they must rely on the good will of their people to retain their leadership.
They must, however, carefully, but firmly, reassign the incompetents to positions that can do little damage to the party.
The leader’s ability to reward good performance is also very limited. Very rarely, they may be able to offer some form of patronage; more generally they will reward productive volunteers through recognition—praise in meetings, letters of commendation, etc.
Manning the Precincts
Selecting the right people to staff the precincts is critical because elections are won in the precincts. Unless the party has every precinct adequately manned it cannot turn out its core of party voters. Again, at the present time much of the turn out the vote activity is coming from volunteers (and sometimes paid personnel) provided by the state and national party campaign committees.
Like a business, political organizations may have more personnel problems in one area than in another. Business may find it harder to get salesmen in some cities than in others. Similarly, experienced leaders have found that two types of precincts cause the most difficulty—the high income precinct and the low income precinct.
HIGH INCOME PRECINCT. In the high income precincts, the residents are usually successful business and professional people and/or already have very active personal lives including being part of their children’s car pool.
They are busy, have responsible jobs, and are accustomed to working with a staff that handles details.
Such people generally prefer to serve the party with their checkbook, if at all. They will not become active in precinct/ward work unless they thoroughly understand its importance. When they do become active, however, they generally make excellent precinct leaders. The intelligence, skill, education and ability responsible for their high income also make them effective in precinct work.
Frequently, much of the precinct work in high income areas is done by women and the occasional stay-at-home dad.
LOW INCOME PRECINCTS. The problem of obtaining good precinct leaders in low income precincts is entirely different—but just as difficult to solve.
A major problem of people with low incomes is to find a way to increase their incomes. Therefore, they often feel they can’t afford to devote time to non-paying jobs. Sometimes party leaders try to find a non-civil-service government job for a good precinct leader although these jobs are very few. Sometimes they can persuade a local businessman to hire a precinct leader in a suitable capacity.
Years ago, the big city machines had little trouble finding precinct leaders in low income areas. The leader had at his disposal a wealth of city jobs and jobs with contractors who had city contracts. For those who could not be given jobs, political clubs served as welfare centers, distributing Christmas baskets and help of all kinds in return for votes and workers. In addition, politics was considered a ladder to higher income and better things. Today, very few political jobs are available, and capable persons can forge ahead more readily in all fields than was formerly true.
But in all areas—high-income, low-income or medium-income—the major problem
In finding good precinct leaders is apathy.
People who work arduously on many other types of community projects are difficult to convince that politics is just as important.
Perhaps that is why a party leader is a leader in the true sense of the term. Real leadership ability is required to find and inspire people who will do the precinct work necessary to win elections.
Whether low income or high income it is the author’s belief that many people are worried about the overwhelming power of money to impact election results and often disgusted with the conduct of our elected representatives. If people understand that they can have an impact in the selection process and in the voting process many will be willing to find the time to get involved. Sometime those efforts bring highly successful results.
In the Town of Delton (the Wisconsin Dells area) in the fall 2012 Presidential election there were four (4) wards voting. The total registered voters up to the day of election (Wisconsin allows same day registration) were 1402 individuals. The total votes cast were 1162 or a very respectable percentage of the registered votes of 82.9%. The vote was split:
Obama 666/1162 57.4% of total voting
Romney 491/1162 42.3% of total voting
all others 8/1162 0.3% of total voting
Training the Workers: Effective political workers have:
The attitudes and orientation necessary to successful political participation. The skills and knowledge necessary to do political jobs. www.campaignschool.org for details.
In the past leaders also urged precinct leaders to hold training meetings such as those described in the pamphlet on “Political meetings.”
Another system for training workers is the “advisor system,” in which a veteran is assigned responsibility for explaining to a new worker what they do, how they do it, and why. The new comer works with the advisor and learns by doing.
Patronage
HANDLING PATRONAGE used to be one of the political leader’s biggest problems. Significantly less patronage is available today. At the local level it is often true that there are no patronage positions available. Patronage is generally misunderstood by the average citizen as rewarding incompetent party hacks with political sinecures. There is, of course, some of this in politics, just as there is occasionally an incompetent son-in-law or an irresponsible uncle on the payroll of a family-owned business.
Patronage was, and still to a lesser extent is, a political fact-of-life. What few jobs the elected official has to offer that are not civil service controlled are generally positions of policy making or implementation. Rather than rewarding someone for political activity the elected official is going to want to put people in those positions who they trust and who they believe are highly competent in their ability to oversee and implement the elected officials programs.
It would be a foolish elected official who appointed an incompetent to a position of authority. It would be hard to forget George Bush’s comment of “Great Job Brownie” to the FEMA appointee who totally botched the government response to the havoc to life and property caused by hurricane Katrina. Mr. Brown’s qualifications for his appointment to an important government agency in what turned out to be a position thrust in the national spotlight was that he was the former head of a horse owners association. A really bad patronage appointment since he turned out to be mostly incompetent.
But patronage is not just finding jobs in government for party faithful. Patronage has been classified into three basic types: job patronage, contract patronage, and psychological patronage.
Job Patronage
The first function of job patronage is to put persons into government positions that are in harmony with administration policies. As note earlier there are very limited job patronage positions available to the elected official and they will want to appoint competent and faithful people to those limited positions.
Patronage usually begins at the City level and moves up through major state elected offices and on to National elected offices. Most elected offices, such as a mayor, governor or U. S. Senator are allowed to have a certain number of employee choices that are free of the civil service system. These positions are almost always at an executive level for some branch of government of the elected officer’s administration. The politician who has these “patronage” jobs to fill probably wants people in those positions that are not only loyal to him or her but who have the intelligence and knowledge to assist in the implementation of their policies. It would be a foolish politician who appointed an incompetent to a position of authority in a job that was critical to the politician’s agenda.
Voters select an administration. But, if that administration cannot fill policy positions in the government with people who are sympathetic to its views, the will of the electorate is thwarted.
Contract Patronage
Most government business is conducted on a bid basis with the contract going to the lowest bidder. There are however some areas of discretion. Many politicians believe that it makes sense to give business to people who do not overcharge for goods and services and give good value – and who support the party.
Although almost all government contracts are awarded to the lowest bidder resourceful politicians have found ways to attempt to undermine this system by disputing the lowest bidder’s ability to perform the contract and in some select instances by drafting the specifications of the job to be contracted in such a way that only the supplier of their choosing- who just happens to support the party/elected official – is a qualified bidder.
Psychological Patronage
Because a political leader can do little to reward effective service for most of his volunteers, they often rely on psychological patronage – which could also be called prestige patronage or simply recognition. There are many ways to provide recognition to worthy workers and the political leader is always looking for those opportunities.
Patronage Poses Problems
Patronage is a two-edged sword for the political leader.
It can be used as an incentive or reward for faithful help. On the other hand, since patronage is extremely limited, it can create dissension and ill will among those who do not share in it, or who think they are entitled to more recognition than they are receiving.
Some political leaders claim it is possible to build and maintain an excellent organization without dispensing any patronage. Where this is possible, it relieves the leader of the onerous job of continually seeking patronage for his followers and mollifying those who must be refused it.
Most political leaders believe, however, that patronage is a useful tool in building their organizations.
Where patronage jobs are very limited there will always be politicians who manage to “game” the system and find ways to use government jobs or government contracts to repay favors.
Financing
The OPERATIONS of political parties must be financed. This involves raising money and spending it to maximum advantage.
The money coming into even state level campaigns particularly when there is a
“national” issue involved is staggering. The campaign for Scott Walker, governor of Wisconsin, including his defense in his recall election through 6/30/2013, raised a staggering $41,775,037 according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. And this does not count the money spent by Political Action Committees on their own advertising.
For those interested in finding out what organizations and what individuals have given the most, the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign list donations by type of source and by name of the donor. Many states have “watch dog” or “good governance” organizations that serve a similar function.
Even part time jobs in the Wisconsin Assembly bring in huge sums of money. The Republican Assembly Campaign Committee reported raising $967,419 in a prior general election. The similar organization for the Democrats, the Assembly Democratic Campaign Committee raised $2,063,420 in the same period according to Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and, again, this does not count the money raised and spent by the individual assembly candidates and Political Action Committees. It is not unreasonable to assume that the total money raised and spent in the election cycle for the Wisconsin State assembly exceeds the gross total salary income for all 99 state assemblypersons.”
Occasionally local politicians and candidates find themselves in the cross hairs of big money politics. Northern Wisconsin has had a past history of hard rock mining for iron ore, copper and related metals. The industry pretty much died out but recent advances in exploration techniques has brought international mining companies back to the area. In the intervening years many past administrations in Wisconsin had supported tough restrictions on future mining activity but the Republican administration of Governor Scott Walker coupled with Republican control of both of the state legislature branches pushed through major changes to environmental and other laws and rules making it more attractive for mining interests in the State.
A major mining organization, Gogebic Taconite, was completing exploratory drilling for a large open pit iron mine in Iron and Ashland County. The 15 member Iron County Board could attempt to impose monetary demands and environmental demands on Gogebic and an election was scheduled that could change the composition of Iron County Board that might make it harder, or easier, for Gogebic to do business in the County.
The election drew an interest from a group — Americans for Prosperity — funded by the Koch Brothers. County Board members who in the past probably ran unchallenged for office found themselves, particularly if they were considered to be even lukewarm to mining, involved in high stakes politics backed up by wealthy individuals who have no qualms about using their wealth. The entire population of Iron County, Wisconsin is 5931 and is the third less populated county in the state with less than 1/10th of 1% of the states total population. See the entire story in the Wisconsin State Journal article of March 21, 2014.
On the national level, according a CNN Politics article updated on November 6, 2012 the 2012 presidential election was the priciest to date with over $4,200,000,000 (yes that is $4.2 billions) being raised and spent.
Although there is an avalanche of money coming into National elections (and in some state elections where there is an issue of national importance) there is usually very little money available (other than out of the candidates pocket) in local elections. Information from Sauk County, Wisconsin Democratic Party indicates that many campaigns for County Supervisor (the smallest political division in Wisconsin) are run from start to finish on $1,000 or less. Under State law individual contributions are limited to $100 per donor and significant reporting requirements are avoided if the total raised is less than $1,000.
These candidates are usually forced to be very careful with how the limited funds are spent. According to a County Democratic Chairperson, much of the money is spent on so- called “door cards” (Door Cards are just what they imply- something to be left on the residents door when they are not home or handed to them in person if they are) covering a brief outline of the candidates qualifications and their position on issues important to the area covering the supervisor position. Depending on the quality of the printing (Democrats are limited in their ability to get bargain printing since they are required to use Union print shops when they are available) these cards can cost from $0.10 to $0.25 each.
If there are 1500 households in the district the candidate can spend up to $375 just on “door cards”. Yard signs are the next choice but cost $10.00, or more, per unit so 20 yard signs will eat up $200 of the limited campaign funds. The candidate is going to want to mail something to the people known to be supporters of their party (the “saints”) and possible include mailing to known independents (saveables) but with postage costing $0.49 per unit mailing to 750 homes is going to cost, not counting the cost of the envelope and the information in the envelope, $367.50. If the candidate wants information on the potential voters in the district (not just those on the voter registration list) they can spend maybe an additional $150 and get a list from the “vote builder” service offered by his state party.
So if the candidate did all of the minimum suggested” get out the vote” activity he has now spent $1092.50. Does he cut the yard signs down to 10 or forego the vote builder service?
Most people think of political contributions in terms of campaigns. Political leaders know the campaign requires the greatest concentrated effort, but it is the work done on a year- round basis that lays the foundation for successful campaigns.
“A dollar in the spring is worth two in fall,” is an old political saying.
Sources of Money
Methods of political financing have changed drastically since the turn of the century and in the last decade has made even more radical changes. For many years the two principal sources of funds were regular contributions by political jobholders and large contributions from wealthy individuals. Civil-service-type programs and the progressive income tax, however, had materially curtailed the amount of money that could be raised from these two sources. But apparently not anymore.
As the amount of money coming into campaigns started to become a serious issue there were efforts to control, or limit, large contributions such as the McCainFeingold law. Apparently McCain-Feingold just triggered the creative juices of campaign managers and professional fund raisers. All kind of artful devices were undertaken to allow wealthy individuals and business interests to contribute almost unlimited funds to achieve the results they were looking for. The Citizens United decision of the U.S. Supreme Court changed the term “almost unlimited funds” to “totally unlimited funds.
The impact of the current law on campaign financing and how party leaders now tap into those funds and otherwise ride the coattails of the PAC and 527 organizations expenditures is covered in more detail in chapter 8.
Generally, elective and appointive office holders are still expected to contribute to the party. Some of the techniques being used by political leaders to meet the continuing and difficult challenge of raising money in the past are still valid today in spite of the impact of the money coming into the campaigns by PACs, Super PACs, and 527 organizations.
The methods that still apply today include:
MAIL SOLICITATION. A letter appealing for money and enclosing a return envelope may be sent either to a selected list or to all declared party members. Mail solicitations are seldom very effective—partly because local party officials may not be skilled in writing effective sales letters. There is still some value in a politician stating that all of his contributions come from those contributing $500 or less.
HOUSE-TO-HOUSE CANVASS. This method—excellent in theory—requires
the organization of a house-to-house canvass by precinct leaders and their helpers during a stated period. It is probably safe to say that this technique is almost never used today.
MONEY-RAISING DINNERS. This technique—described in the pamphlet on “Political meetings”—is one of the methods currently in use for raising political funds.
Even with the blizzard of PAC, Super PAC and 527 organization funds, political dinners are still held with two purposes in mind, one to raise money for the candidate, or the party, and two to give the party faithful the chance to actually meet the candidate and possibly shake the hand of a “bigger fish” sent in by the state or national party organization to further motivate and energize the attendees.
MAJOR DONOR CIRCLES: Attempts may be made to provide some form of special recognition to those individuals or entities that make significant contributions to a candidate or to a party. The ways to recognize major donors are many but the emphasis should be on attempted to make the donor feel special and important to the candidate or the party.
A few political leaders have experimented with this idea by setting it up on a graduated basis, with various classifications such as Contributing member, Sustaining member, Patron member, etc. more ornate cards and buttons are given to those who make larger contributions.
SOCIAL EVENTS. Similar to money-raising dinners are other types of social events such as covered-dish suppers, dances, clam bakes, and outings for which the price of tickets is set high enough to provide a margin of profit. Often, a “raffle” may be conducted in connection with the affair—in areas where they are legal.
Telephone APPEALS BY THE CANDIDATE: At the local level many politicians have found that the most effective method of raising funds is a phone call by the candidate to the prospective donor. Obviously this is not possible in a large city election or statewide elections. But for the local election this is an extremely effective way to raise funds – assuming that the candidate is willing to make the calls and that the candidate has a pleasant voice and a friendly phone demeanor. It is hard for a party member to turn down a direct request from the candidate.
Obviously the effectiveness of this telephone solicitation method of fundraising is seriously diluted when third parties are calling for the candidate or when it is a “robot call” coming during the evening meal time.
INTERNET AND SOCIAL MEDIA: The finance committee of the Barack Obama 2008 Presidential campaign dramatically demonstrated the impact the internet and social media can have on fund raising. The totals raised by the use of the internet and social media may not be as much as come from typical Democratic funding sources such as labor unions and wealthy individuals but the psychological impact was, and is, significant.
These funding sources both demonstrated a ground swell of support of individual interest in the Obama candidacy and solidified a large number of committed voters for Election Day.
Finance Committee
Generally, the party leader gives the money-raising assignment to a finance committee.
Usually, he selects successful citizens who are well-known as community leaders to serve on this committee, because they inspire confidence among potential givers.
Publicity
THE PUBLICITY OR PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM may be defined as any activities designed to inform the public and the party workers about the party’s officeholders, candidates, and achievements. Publicity about the organization or the party leader is not generally considered desirable or helpful.
Although the publicity program reaches its peak during campaigns, the off-season, day- by-day publicity is regarded by many experts as most important.
They reason that voters tend to discount news made by a candidate during a campaign is on the grounds that they are seeking office and maybe saying what they think the voters want to hear.. At other times, however, they may be regarded by the voters as a responsible public official doing or saying something significant.
The more the officeholder or potential candidate is put before the public in non- controversial, non-self-seeking terms, the more they build a reputation with the voters as an active, conscientious public figure.
A candidate (or a party administration) that keeps publicity fences mended prior to a campaign is much harder to beat than one who has neglected them.
Purpose of Publicity
Publicity is a means to an end. First consideration, therefore, must be given to the goal to be attained. Publicity can be used to:
1. Attract people to a meeting or political event.
2.Give recognition to people who have worked effectively for the party.
3.Aid in electing a candidate.
4.Build party membership.
5.Help establish a favorable reputation for the organization and party.
6.Arouse public opinion on an issue.
How to Get Publicity
The best publicity is obtained by making news. There are many ways to make news. For example, names make news; events make news. Publicity can result from statements that attack the weakness of the political opposition or capitalize and tie in with news stories of the day.
Good photographs with human interest qualities are helpful. Among the many activities that can be publicized are:
—Fund raising banquets
—Special awards to deserving workers
—election or appointments of new officers
—Political rallies
—Arrival of office holders to area
—Departure of office holders from area
—Special workshops
—Contests
—Significant days (Lincoln or Jefferson days) —Dedication ceremonies
—Conferences with top leaders in important places
—Conventions
—Nominations
Items are often considered newsworthy depending on the location. What is considered news in a mostly rural area and in towns with under 5,000 residents will not be “news” in a larger city.
Publicity is Not Left to Chance
Leaders know that political publicity has become a specialized form of communication. It can no longer be haphazardly done or left to chance. In developing their publicity program, they look first for someone within their organization who is genuinely talented and experienced in this field. People with newspaper, public relations, and writing experience may be persuaded to help.
A political leader develops personal contacts with the local newspaper editors, radio and television commentators, and others in the communications field. Usually, this isn’t difficult. Editors and commentators know that political leaders are useful sources of information.
The Leader and the Candidates
THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE of the political organization is to win elections. The political leader is vitally concerned in the selection of their party’s candidates and recognizes the importance of a friendly, close relationship with them after their nomination and election.
Selecting Candidates A political leader develops, through experience, a “feel” for determining the qualities that characterize good candidates. These qualities are not easy to identify or classify. However, some basic points are generally considered in candidate selection. They include the personal background of the candidate, their achievements, their personal traits and characteristics, and the way they will fit into the overall ticket.
PERSONAL BACKGROUND. The candidate’s personal background is customarily checked for such things as police records, credit rating, business or professional reputation, moral character, family relationships (sometimes a divorce is considered a liability), alcoholism, etc. For a nominal fee there are several sites on the internet that offer comprehensive background checks. The experienced political leader will not leave this to chance.
This does not mean that candidates with some blemishes on their past record should not be given the support to run for office. If the political leader knows about past issues that could be uncovered (using the same process) by the opposition during a campaign they can usually be diffused given advance notice.
Ferreting out such intimate details prior to selection is an unpleasant task, but it is even less pleasant to have the political opposition discover—and publicize—information that will hurt the candidate during the campaign. In politics, it is necessary to assume that anything detrimental will be found out and exploited by the opposition.
A classic example of the consequence of not doing a thorough background check is the selection by George McGovern of Missouri Senator Thomas Eagleton as his vice presidential running mate in 1972. Shortly after the selection was announced the press got information (probably from Republican operatives) that Eagleton had previously received electric shock therapy. Eagleton was dropped from the ticket but the damage was done. The McGovern campaign was put on the defensive and never recovered. McGovern went on to lose the popular vote in 49 of the 50 states — a record that has never been broken. If Eagleton had been properly investigated he would probably not have been considered as a running mate or, at a minimum, his successful battle with mental illness could have been treated as a positive message for the McGovern campaign.
PERSONAL ACHIEVEMENT. It is not always enough for a candidate to have led a clean, honest life. There must also be a record of accomplishment in some field— civic affairs, military service, business, etc.
The achievement necessary varies with the stature of the office the candidate is seeking. For example, the electorate may demand a more impressive record of achievement by a candidate for a state office than by a candidate for a county office.
OTHER PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS . It is important that the candidate has an attractive “personality.” A person who has a warm, friendly, outgoing personality will invariably make a better candidate than one who is colorless or blunt, or short tempered.
It helps, too, if the candidate makes a good appearance. Courage and stamina are also essential.
An interesting approach to the picking of political leaders is offered by a Political Performance Indicator sourced through Humanmetrics (www.humanmetrics.com/politics/ politicaltest.
This organization studied certain qualities of political leaders including Bill Clinton and Joseph Stalin. Their primary criterion was the increase in the quality of life during their time in office of those they governed. This organization determined that there were four properties of the politician that contributed to either their success or failure in improving the quality of life of their citizens. These properties were;
.. Rationality
.. Authoritativeness
.. Adventurousness
.. Inspiration
Using their test (you can judge yourself online on with their test) Joseph Stalin came in dead last and Franklin Roosevelt and Margaret Thatcher had the highest performance indicators.
BALANCING THE TICKET. In some areas it is necessary to take geographic, religious, ethnic and social considerations into account in selecting candidates. Often, it isn’t good politics, for example, to nominate a ticket on which all the candidates have the same religion, ethnic background, or come from the same geographical area. Such a ticket might make some voters in other groups or areas feel they are not being represented.
COMPETENCE. Today’s society is so complex, specialized and interdependent that the qualifications of a candidate for handling the position they seek should be of paramount consideration.
Political leaders are not likely to find candidates who measure up in all respects to their rigid requirements. In addition, personal likes and dislikes may color the selection. However, the more objective and impersonal political leaders can be in selecting their candidates the better chance they have of electing top flight people to office.
Political leaders must maintain a close relationship with candidates both during the campaign and after they are elected.
Because they are responsible for managing their party’s affairs, the political leader has a sincere interest in guiding candidates and providing the help that their experience enables them to supply. If candidates who do not have the “know-how” of the political leader have confidence in them and trust their advice it is advantageous both for the candidates and for the party.
When candidates begin to “believe their press clippings” and develop exaggerated ideas of their own importance, it makes the leader’s task particularly difficult.
The Leader and the Officeholder After the candidate has assumed office, the leader has a continuing responsibility to advise them. Because the party leader is responsible for getting the party ticket elected at the next election, and because the party’s success at the polls depends in large measure on the performance of the incumbents, the leader must make their views known and understood.
At the same time, the voters have elected the officeholder, not the leader. The leader cannot tell the officeholder how to do their job. They must offer appropriate advice, remembering always that the final decision lies with the officeholder.
An old adage in the retail trade says “goods well bought are half sold.” In offering advice to officeholders, the political leader knows that a good record by their party’s administration is a major step toward re-election. Nothing is quite as popular with the voters as an honest administration that clearly demonstrates it has the voter’s welfare at heart.
Issues arise in the course of an administration where the right long-range decision may appear to be a short-run political liability. Sometimes the decision is reached on the basis of political expediency. However, political leaders may frequently advise their administration to take a longer view and accept the political liabilities as merely an additional hurdle to be cleared at the next election.
The political leader may offer advice on the administration’s program. Some elected officials regard their job as primarily one of “house-keeping.” The political leader, being close to the voters, is in an excellent position to offer advice on the formulation of a forward-looking program that offers new constructive solutions to people’s problems and captures their imaginations.
Civic Responsibility Tremendous pressures for adopting unrealistic programs that may appeal to some voters and for setting up a “political trough” for the party faithful and major campaign donors continually beset political leaders. It requires good judgment to know where to draw the line and courage to hold it.
Political power carries with it responsibility. A wise leader recognizes responsibilities to their community and the nation as well as to their party and its candidates.
Political leaders may also be tempted, or encouraged, to ‘settle the score’ against the opposition when given the chance. The pressure to do this will be especially strong if the winning party has been out of power for a while and/or the opposition has tended to ignore them when it was in power. The good political leader is ever mindful of the old saying ‘what goes around comes around’ and will attempt to limit any punitive actions directed toward the opposition.
Holding the Organization Together
A BASIC PROBLEM of a political leader is holding their organization together. Experienced leaders learn to recognize the forces contributing to disunity. They know how to strengthen the forces contributing to unity. As pointed out in earlier material holding the group together is one of the major obstacles facing splinter groups, citizens for “Whoosit” organizations and, dare I say it, groups that are formed around a single objective using the internet and social media.
Forces Contributing to Disunity Sometimes there appear to be as many problems in holding an organization together as there are people in the group. Here are five basic problems which can create disunity.
FACTIONALISM. Factionalism develops because cliques inevitably form in any political organization. When cliques begin to struggle for power, unity is lost. Factionalism occurs when political leaders allow the cliques to develop uncontrolled. A good political leader may encourage friendly competition, but they will prevent it from becoming so strong that it destroys the organization.
PERSONALITY Clashes. Strong personal dislikes frequently develop in a political organization. Unless these personality clashes are carefully handled, they can undermine the work of the organization.
INACTION. A political organization must produce something. When people are inactive, they become discontented. Petty jealousies and intrigue replace constructive activity.
LACK OF CONFIDENCE. The morale of the organization may sag at times, but as long as there is confidence in the leadership it can be built up. If confidence in the leadership is lost, however, the organization usually disintegrates.
PROFESSIONAL DISSIDENTS. The political leader must contend with the problem of the “professional dissident”—the person who is never happy in any organization. They are a constant griper, spreading seeds of discontent.
Forces Contributing to Unity Although some forces contribute to disunity, the political leader is aided by the fact that strong elements toward unity also exist. Here are some of them:
LOYAITY. Many persons have a deep and abiding loyalty to a party, a political faith or a political leader. It motivates their interest in politics and is often strong enough to give everything they do a political orientation.
Philosophy. Political groups and parties are welded together by similar basic philosophies. These underlying philosophies help create unity in any political group.
SATISFACTION. The satisfactions derived from building a better organization, working for better government, or achieving political power are some of the motivations that have been called the “psychological payoffs” or rewards of politics. The attainment of these rewards by individuals helps hold the organization together.
Promoting Unity Two-thirds of the battle in maintaining unity lies in the ability to recognize the problem. Experience enables the leader to deal with specific problems of disunity on a day-to-day basis, preventing them from growing to uncontrollable proportions.
For example, a leader can sometimes appeal to the dissident’s sense of loyalty. They can reduce factionalism by calling attention to the divisive efforts of the opposition and emphasizing the importance of presenting a united front.
Various types of rewards such as promotion and increased responsibilities can be used to reward the faithful. Conversely, demotion, lack of recognition, and more subtle forms of pressure may be exerted on the unfaithful. A
“professional dissident” for example, can be placed in a job where they will have few opportunities to disrupt important projects.
Although the basic philosophy of the group promotes unity, sometimes individuals within the organization are so intent on emphasizing principles and philosophy that they will alienate people with slightly different convictions. In such cases, the leader is faced with the problem of providing a “big tent” under which people with varying convictions (yet the same basic philosophy) can gather and still feel their beliefs and principles are being carried out.
The leader’s reputation for fairness and honesty also helps hold the organization together.
A Formula for Success Experts have developed a three-fold formula for running any kind of organization successfully.
The formula is:
Participation. Get the people working. Activity builds identification with the organization. Projects well-done give members a feeling of accomplishment.
Recognition. Reward the workers for their efforts. Recognize achievements or contributions.
Program of work. Map out a constructive program of work to be accomplished each year and assign individual responsibilities.
The political leader who applies these principles successfully will generally be effective.
By getting people to participate, they build a sense of identification with the party organization.
By recognizing achievement, they strengthen the desire to work for the organization.
By developing a sound program of work with attainable goals, they give their workers a sense of direction and keep them constructively active.
Political organizations that operate on this formula can achieve success at the polls. Success at the polls, in turn, promotes unity, lessens dissension, and inspires the workers to become even more effective.
Political leaders have many problems—and many opportunities.
How they meet those problems and how they rise to those opportunities, in large measure, determines the shape of politics in this country.