Through citizen lobbying, anyone can acquire political clout and influence the democratic process. But unlike professional lobbying, citizen lobbying belongs to the broader, though ill-defined, phenomenon generally referred to as ‘activism’. Indeed, like other forms of activism, it is unpaid and demands your time and commitment. And you give it out of belief.
Yet lobbying by the citizens differs from general activism in one important regard. Citizen lobbyists tap into the repertoire of techniques generally used by professional lobbyists to induce systemic change. Thus, while a sit-in protest expressing solidarity with the rejection of twelve new refugees in your city is activism, an online petition calling for a reform of the legal status of refugees is citizen lobbying.
In particular, what characterises citizen lobbying – as distinct from other forms of activism – are:
the target (public authorities);
the method (the lobbying toolkit); and
the goal (systemic change).
Citizen lobbying chiefly targets public authorities, as they hold the key to systemic change. And to do this, it mobilises the toolbox of tactics and avenues of participation generally used by professional lobbyists. To clarify this second feature of citizen lobbying, if you join a group that helps build houses for the poor, it’s great work. But it’s not lobbying – it’s a service. You’re not targeting the policymakers, you’re not using the lobbying toolbox and you’re not changing the system – just fixing the problem for a few people. But if you instead start campaigning for a new housing policy for the poor by targeting the relevant policymakers, you are lobbying. While helping individual citizens to get a house is great and needed, it might be significantly more impactful if you fix a housing policy that will address the needs of virtually all homeless citizens.
Citizen lobbyists typically engage in the policy process by monitoring the policy process, identifying the issues of importance to them, developing a strategy and engaging in a variety of activities to attain their goal, often by mustering external support. Indeed, any effort aimed at monitoring and identifying a policy problem, shaping a solution and making it happen qualifies as citizen lobbying. The same is true when the efforts are directed at blocking, altering or boycotting a policy initiative. A citizen lobbyist does the same things as conventional lobbyists: monitoring, meeting with officials, strategic advocacy, coalition building, campaigning and more. The same thing happens when someone supports an existing group or NGO to pursue a cause by sharing their skills, expertise, time and energy. You become their lobbyist, while remaining a citizen.
Last but not least, what distinguishes a citizen lobbyist is her agnostic and pragmatic motivation. What drives her is not the desire to push an ideological agenda (e.g. being against free trade), but the desire to address an issue of public concern which has typically been neglected (e.g. how to ensure free trade benefits everyone).
A citizen lobbyist strives to advance the interests and causes of the disadvantaged and as such it empowers everyone. This does not mean that citizen lobbing can realistically give all citizens an equal voice, but rather that all electors-elected relationships are going to be structured from that idea. Citizen lobbying nurtures commitment to a process in which a multiplicity of voices can be heard and all can help to set the ‘rules of the game’.26
The genius of it is that it does this by channelling democratic distrust into a positive force. Unlike other traditional forms of activism, the concept of citizen lobbying reconciles protests and proposals. Participation begins not from a place of conflict but from one of shared interest. The elected representative listens to what others say and then decides what is best.
As a citizen lobbyist, you aim to set the agenda by prompting policymakers to act, but you can also react to the agenda set by government officials (or other forces). You put forward a solution to the problem identified. You may be confrontational (by resorting to pressure tactics and creative ways to get attention, when needed), cooperative and even deliberative.
To sum up, lobbying complements – rather than competes with – the conventional forms of political participation. If we want to live in a society where policymakers are informed, it is crucial that they have access to accurate, timely and comprehensive information from all sources. Only then can they increase their problem solving capacity and take informed decisions that reflect the public interest. Which means it’s up to us to give them that information. Through lobbying, anyone can acquire a political voice, play the political game and influence the democratic process. As the saying goes: if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em!
Finally, citizen lobbying enables you to leverage your untapped talents and experiences. Don’t be afraid to be creative. The ability to imagine the future is the distinguishing feature of our minds.27
Let’s take a look at why and how you can do that.
Why Citizen Lobbying?
‘I asked “Why doesn’t somebody do something?” Then I realized I was somebody.’
Anonymous
But you might still be asking why you should embrace citizen lobbying. You may think you have better things to do with your time than meet politicians and civil servants, monitor the policy process and talk to policymakers. But think about how much time you spend talking to your friends about social injustices, sharing news that shocks you on social media or discussing the problems of your lives without even realising that they are shaped – for good or for bad – by policies. By failing to invest time and resources into their root causes, it’s no surprise that the democratic system is failing to represent you. How can we tolerate evidence-free, ignorant and sloppy public policy when in our day-to-day jobs we demand skill and rigour? Our whole lives, from the quality of the air we breath, the safety of the food we eat, to the education we provide to our children, are shaped by policies. And as defining these policies has become an ever more demanding, resource-intensive activity – due to the need to take into account more voices and collect more data – your contribution is even more vital than before.
Although it might appear a highly technical exercise, it is time to invest in the policy process. In doing so, you may acquire skills you can use to get a new job or change career, or that will simply make you think differently about your role in society. Indeed, citizen lobbying is not just about informing the policy process and making it more accountable. It also offers you a unique opportunity to use your talents and expertise and to share them for the benefit of society. In a well functioning democracy, the qualities of the citizens matter as much as those of politicians. Last, as previously discussed (see page 4), participating in public life will also contribute to your individual happiness.
By now I hope I have succeeded in demystifying lobbying. And we have already seen its potential to breathe life back into our democracies. Think of how Calvillo and the community of people he successfully mobilised forced the Mexican government to take action against the obesity epidemic affecting the poorest. When Calvillo embarked on his campaign against misleading advertising by soft-drink manufacturers, he invited MPs to meetings led by scientists. They explained that diet was as important as physical activity in preventing obesity. That meeting was a game-changer in the MPs’ perception of the problem – and more broadly in their relationship with the citizens. When you lobby as a citizen, you are informing decision-makers and helping them take the public’s views into account when they make policy. You can no longer be ignored, especially if your contribution becomes a signal among the noise.
Calvillo’s story, and the other stories we looked at in the Introduction, show how citizen lobbyists can – in their spare time – address and break the cycle of powerlessness that entraps us. Power is no longer about assertiveness, dominance and force: it is about making a difference in the world by influencing others.28
Let’s now examine how citizen lobbying may successfully address the major causes of our growing feeling of powerlessness that we previously identified.
If Nobody Speaks for You, Repr
esent Yourself!
When you lobby as a citizen (you pick a cause and push for it), you fill the ‘representation gap’ by reaching out to your elected representative and other decision-makers. In particular, by voicing your concerns, you push decision-makers to consider your issue and, eventually, take a stance on it. You can then hold your representative accountable for her actions – or lack thereof.
Lobbying acts as a counterweight to institutionalised power. We could call it counterpower. According to sociologist Manuel Castells’ theory of power, counterpower is our capacity to challenge the power embedded in society’s institutions so that our values and interests can be represented.29 In particular, by creating a new space for political reflection and action, citizen lobbying can counter the undue influence of special interests. That’s how citizen lobbying contributes to closing the representation gap and making the policy process more equal. Decision-makers start paying attention to opinions and interests they’ve never listened to before. You have pierced the echo-chamber of politics.
If You’re Not in the Club, Tap into Your Own Talent and Expertise!
When acting as a citizen lobbyist you have the opportunity to deploy your own imagination, talent and expertise in the service of an issue you care about. Isn’t it about time that you broke out of your job description and offered some of your skills to the rest of society?
It won’t be just you who regains control of the policy process and humanises it, but the decision-makers too. Suddenly, you matter to them and they matter to you. Your expertise, leadership, conviction or credibility might even mean they need you. Often citizen lobbyists become the trusted advisors of policymakers, or even companies, that they originally denounced because both parties are able to see the other as a partner rather than an adversary. In a political and civic landscape characterised by passivity, this humanising aspect of citizen lobbying is especially heartening.
If Nobody Teaches You, Learn by Doing!
Acting as a citizen lobbyist entails being exposed to how the system works and learning from it. Fighting for a cause means you develop exactly the skills and attitudes that the policy process needs to survive. Yet not all forms of engagement with the democratic system, whether in a representative or in a more hands-on participatory democracy, necessarily foster a learning experience.30 For example, a citizen who attended a public hearing or submitted her observations in a public consultation might not learn anything about policymaking.
But citizen lobbyists do more than activating one of the many avenues of participation available to us. They typically enhance civic skills, such as speaking at public meetings, networking and working with others to develop advocacy strategies to accomplish their goals. As a result, acting as a citizen lobbyist sharpens both their individual and our collective democratic understanding. Indeed, a growing body of evidence suggests that citizens who engage with the policy process tend to be more active via conventional political channels.31 Max Schrems, who was just a student when he took on Facebook, had to educate himself not only about data protection and litigation, but also to learn how the policy process works. Because of that self-education and his struggle to find pro bono lawyers, he also lodged the follow-up suit against Facebook in the Irish courts, alongside citizens willing to help. Max’s litigation has inspired many other citizens, both in Europe and in other jurisdictions, to follow suit. As Michael Edwards put it, ‘we learn to be citizens not through books or training but through experience and action’.32
At a time when so few people understand the political process and inequalities continue to grow steadily, citizen lobbying emerges as a credible approach to reinvigorate citizen engagement, augment social capital and overcome the knowledge gap. Moreover, as Robert Putnam convincingly argued, when people work in social networks and interact with others, their trust of others also increases.33
If Somebody Decides for You, Take Back Control!
Lastly, when you become part of and gain a voice in the policy process, you take back control. It is no longer the state or market that decides on your behalf. You are more likely to accept a collective decision that you have had a part in shaping, which means you’re more likely to feel a sense of accomplishment, and to have nurtured a feeling of community and joint endeavour.
Time for Citizen Lobbying
‘Critics of the magistrates are also responsible. Their argument is, “The people ought to decide”: the people accept that invitation readily; and thus the authority of the magistrates is undermined.’
Aristotle, The Politics
Contemporary democracy requires minimal public participation – it presents an efficient method of selecting political leaders and putting them to work on policies. However, it fails to encourage and cultivate the social and political skills of each individual, and thus often leaves us feeling disconnected and powerless.34 Unfortunately, this is also true of many of the petition sites and online calls-to-action that we may turn to in an attempt to engage in civic action. Have you ever asked yourself what happens after you’ve signed an online petition? Who does the heavy lifting to explore and execute the petition’s demands?
We’ve already discussed how citizens are spectators, not participants, in the political system and consumers of public policy. This is what civic technology advocate and author Micah Sifry calls ‘passive democratic engagement’.35 However, the marketplace may offer us another model of engagement; in the marketplace, your feedback is often solicited – through customer surveys or requests to leave a product review or rating – and acted upon. But in politics there is no such system for soliciting or offering feedback. Indeed, our offline political systems generally do not even expect any feedback.
The Perils of Direct Democracy
This neglect of public opinion has prompted countless calls for more direct democracy in our systems of government. It is often argued that direct democratic processes, such as referendums and initiatives, give people a better opportunity to speak out than the usual representative processes do. Political leaders, civic advocates and a growing number of citizens portray direct democratic outcomes as the authentic ‘voice of the people’. By enabling people to speak directly, without any of the potential distortion inherent in representation, direct democracy seems an irresistible way to respond to the popular will. As a result, the ideal of direct democracy as the expression of popular sovereignty has become a ‘quasi-religious commitment’ that plays the same role in contemporary democratic ideology as the divine right of kings played in the era of monarchical rule.36 Why, ask advocates of direct democracy, should we choose a politician to decide for us every few years, if instead we can directly choose the final outcome of a decision and bypass all sorts of personal interests? Can’t an individual agree with some measures proposed by a right-wing party and at the same time support some of the ideas of its left-wing opposition? Shouldn’t we rely on a referendum to decide every single aspect of our government?
This all sounds exciting and promising, but it entails some major dangers we should bear in mind. First, the voice of the people is not a sufficient condition for democracy, as is frequently implied by the proponents of direct democracy. Government decisions also require the input of experts and, as such, benefit from a plurality of voices. Connected to this point, it seems rather hard to argue that anything should be susceptible to a popular vote. Some issues require value judgement and expertise that is difficult to guarantee in a referendum. Third, a major limit of a ‘referendum culture’ is the perverse incentive to overvote, that is, to regulate what doesn’t need to be regulated or decided. Finally, direct democracy carries the potential to hurt minority groups insofar as it doesn’t accommodate compromise by looking at solutions that are beneficial to all.
As many people have found with recent movements-turned-political parties – Podemos in Spain, the Five Star Movement in Italy and the Pirate parties among them – direct democracy is not in itself a viable response to many of society’s challenges. These movements
typically determine their official positions by discussing the most relevant issues and elaborating their positions online. Yet not only does the overall quality of engagement within these self-proclaimed ‘direct democracy’ experiences remain extremely disappointing, but their political outcomes don’t live up to their rather idealistic expectations.37 The base systematically follows the indications of the vote put forward by its leaders. Uneven voter turnout, poorly-drafted referendums and the influence of special interests tend to get in the way of popular input. Indeed, direct democratic processes distort popular input by preventing people from expressing their priorities.
More importantly, by presenting voters with one issue at a time, referendums and other forms of direct democracy offer – as witnessed in the Brexit vote – no opportunity for voters to channel their political power towards the issues that most concern them. Giving people the chance to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to this or that particular policy makes people feel as though they have more input, but these kinds of direct democracy actually limit their ability to influence the overall range of outcomes. Thus, for instance, after having voted to leave the EU, British citizens have no voice in determining the new relationship between their country and the rest of the EU. Yet this is what will determine the fate of the British economy, the lifestyle of its people and of future generations.
The most recent experiences of direct democracy suggest that a political system based on the unmediated, constant and universal participation of all citizens in political matters is not a realistic option.38 They remind us that while representative democracy is not the best way to deliver successful and inclusive political decisions, it is the best way to avoid the ‘tyranny of the majority’, a situation in which a temporary majority changes the rules of the game.39 Representation typically feels restrictive, but in practice it enables voters to express both single-issue preferences (to recognise same-sex couples or regulate stem cell research, for example) and cross-cutting priorities (e.g. more or less public spending on social welfare).40
Lobbying for Change Page 8