by Michael A. Smith, Professor of Political Science, Emporia State University
Note: The author discusses certain political views in this blog post. In sharing these personal opinions, he does not speak for his employer, for the Midwest Political Science Association, or for any of their respective affiliates.
The times, they are a-changin’. With President Trump and Elon Musk’s shock and awe campaign attempting to remake large swaths of the federal government overnight, and one party or the other commanding supermajorities in many state legislatures, there is much to alarm political scientists, both in terms of our profession and individually as private citizens. Regarding the former, a case in point are the numerous bills in various state legislatures that would limit or abolish tenure, such as HB 2348 in Kansas.
While we pride ourselves on our theoretical, data-analytic, and teaching skills, it can be easy to forget that we often observe political phenomena from an analytic distance. We may have let our skills for practical, political engagement grow rusty. Whether you’re new to the game or just getting back in, here is a brief, practical politics refresher.
1. Learn the Process from People with Institutional Memory
Not only is the policymaking process in the U.S. federal and state government complicated, it also varies from state to state, time to time, and administration to administration. While many of us (myself included) may still use the classic “how a bill becomes a law” lectures in our introductory courses, there are all sorts of twists and turns that only seasoned insiders really understand. It can be enormously useful to talk to those who are or have been on the inside, such as former or current state legislators or members of Congress, lobbyists for organizations one supports, and journalists who cover the political beat. Our textbooks may be fine resources that demystify the process for students, but they cannot possibly capture all the surprise twists and turns one is likely to encounter on a policymaking journey.
Consider the actions of our university’s newly-formed chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), as we speak out on matters of concern to us in the Kansas Legislature. After several supporters testified to the House Committee on the Judiciary, we learned that the bill had been pulled and referred to the Committee on Federal and State Affairs. Only through the help of insiders (who asked not to be named) did we learn that this was a procedural maneuver. The Kansas Legislature has a “Turnaround Day” after which legislation that has not moved out of committee is generally considered dead. Yet the referral to Federal and State Affairs– an “exempt” committee– re-sets that clock. The bill is then sent back to the original committee and can continue to be heard after Turnaround Day. I have taught American Politics and State and Local Government for decades–and this was still a new one on me.
There is also tremendous variation among state legislatures. Some meet every other year, others meet for only a few months per year, and still others are in session nearly year-round. Some have idiosyncratic procedures. For example, Kansas has a work-around known as the “gut and go,” in which the contents of a committee-approved bill can be completely deleted and replaced with the text of another bill. Congress and most other states have no such procedure.
2. Target Your Appeals to Undecideds
Surely the greatest rookie mistake in politics is to waste time either commiserating with those who already support you, or arguing with those with whom you have no chance. Counting votes is so important in legislative politics, many party caucuses even have a special role for it– the party whip. The party whip’s job is to count all votes on pending legislation– yes, no, and undecided–and then “whip” those undecideds into shape by persuading them to vote for the party leadership’s position.
This is good advice for everyone. Again, access to insiders is very helpful here, otherwise you may have to spend a great deal of time in the capitol doing your own vote-counting. When you’re ready to get serious, you have to give up the comfort of speaking with those who already support you, as well as the chance to “vent” at those who strongly oppose. To paraphrase James Carville, “it’s the undecideds, stupid.”
3. Know Your Audience
In my recent newspaper column on tenure, I used University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Amy Wax as an example. My choice was deliberate. First of all, I do support Wax’s free speech rights and oppose attempts to dismiss her by her university, even though I also disagree with many of the controversial things she has said. However, I also thought it important to highlight an example of an outspoken, conservative professor whose job has been protected by tenure. Kansas is a Republican-supermajority state, and if there is to be any chance of preserving tenure here, it will require conservative, Republican votes. In today’s political climate, highlighting the protections that tenure offers for a professor who is not “woke” is an excellent way to shift the dialogue, which often focuses on the belief that today’s professors are uniformly liberal, or that only liberal professors need the protections of tenure, both of which are false.
4. Signed, Sealed, and Delivered
It doesn’t get much more old school than lobbying. Legislators are inundated with emails every day. For some reason, faxes– obsolete for more than a decade in most other professions–are still common in both politics and law. “Astroturf” (fake grassroots) pressure is also common, with interest groups pre-writing emails or faxes for their members, who are asked only to sign and send them. Elected officials and their staff can immediately spot large quantities of identical messages. Finally, phone calls are typically taken by staff or interns, who simply make tick marks as to the # of calls for, and against certain pieces of legislation.
This is why it is often advised that any correspondence one wishes to send by in the form of good, old-fashioned letters: personally composed, hand addressed, and stamped.
In this age of information overload, many lobbyists (both professional and volunteer) resort to face-to-face communication. There may come a time when to just get dressed up (most legislatures and Congress still prioritize traditional, business attire) and head to the capitol, hoping to catch certain undecided legislators between meetings.
5. It’s a Marathon, Not a Sprint
Finally, remember this: Trump and Musk’s shock and awe campaign notwithstanding, policymaking is a marathon, not a sprint. Recall that in most states, for a bill to pass, it must clear the committee process and floor votes in both houses, may go to a conference committee, then back to the floors, then be signed by the governor. If vetoed, it must be overridden by a supermajority in both houses. Next, it must be implemented. Finally, let’s not forget about those court challenges!
As an example of implementation, consider the “framework” passed by the Kansas Board of Regents to restructure state universities in 2022. This policy facilitated the removal of tenured professors as part of university restructuring, ostensibly due to the impact of COVID on higher education. Yet the Regents immediately hit a snag– the administrations of every university in the state except one announced that they would not be using it. My own employer did use it. Two and a half years later, several court cases are still pending regarding those dismissed, several of whom have told me they are still being paid. The aforementioned HB 2348 appears to be a direct response to this situation by one of the parties involved.
It’s a tumultuous time in America, and this affects policymaking regarding academics, as well as a wide variety of other topics. No matter your stance or affiliation, using a few basic organizing tips is likely to make your appeals more effective.
About the Author
Michael A. Smith is a Professor of Political Science at Emporia State University. He has authored or co-authored five books, the most recent of which is Reform and Reaction: The Arc of Modern Kansas Politics (co-edited with H. Edward Flentje, Kansas 2024). He has other academic publications as well, and also writes newspaper columns carried throughout Kansas as part of the Insight Kansas group and blogs for the MPSA. Michael appears occasionally on television and radio in Kansas and western Missouri to discuss state and national politics. He was an expert witness for the plantiff in the Bednasek v Kobach case, decided together with Fish v Kobach by the federal district court for Kansas in 2018. Michael teaches courses in American politics, state and local government, and political philosophy. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Missouri in 2000. Follow Michael on X (formerly known as Twitter).