“Lobbying Decisions and the Health Reform
Battle”
Kenneth Goldstein
Failure of the Clinton Plan? (73)
Public Opinion and Clinton Plan:
There was a considerable amount of public support for the Clinton Health
Care Plan.
Gallup (09/24/93):
ABC/Wash Post:
Support:
Oppose:
59%
33%
67%
20%
Passage of Bill: “Seemed Inevitable”
Year Later: Plan Was Dead: What Happened?
…
Explaining Defeat of Clinton Plan (73)
One Theory: Lobbyists?
The defeat of the Clinton Plan is often seen as example of power of interest
groups.
Lobbying Effort: Grassroots Strategy:
Opposition to the Clinton Plan was a highly organized “grassroots”
campaign.
How Influential Were Interest Groups? (73)
Explaining Defeat of Clinton Plan (77)
Mobilization Theory:
The goal of any “grassroots” lobbying effort is to properly frame an issue, and
then identity which constituencies are most likely to influence legislative
behavior.
Nature of Business Opposition: Grassroots
Business Lobbyists: Grassroots Strategy
Targeted Mail, E-mail and Phone Bank aimed at sympathetic and undecided
members of Congress.
Goal: Legislative, not Public (75, 77)
Influence Legislative, rather than Public Opinion/Behavior
Strategy: “Politically Useful Information” (76)
Provide “politically useful information” to targeted legislatures. That is
information designed to convey what the political consequences would be
of passing of defeating the Clinton Plan.
Plan: Identify constituencies within targeted members’ districts.
Business Strategy:
Business Strategy:
1) Messaging
2) Targeting
a. Legislative: Committees
b. Constituency: Districts
3) Mobilization
Messaging (77)
Getting the Right Message:
Messaging was key. Opponents had to change the message from:
Health Care for Middle-Class to Cutting Jobs and Reduced Choice
Elements of the Message:
Employer Mandates
Price Controls
Mandatory Alliances
Physician Choice
…
Targeting (78)
Legislative: Committees
Four Committees have jurisdiction over Health Care legislation:
House:
Ways and Means
Energy and Commerce
Resources
Education and Labor
…
Senate:
Finance
Labor and Human
Mobilization Theory: District Targeting
Targets: Important and Persuadable Committees
Mobilization theory predicts that any grassroots lobbying would start by
identifying which committees or legislators are both most important and
persuadable, and therefore need to be targeted by mobilized, and
influential constituents.
…
Mobilization Theory: District Targeting
Important and Persuadable Committees:
Determined by whether or not they sent political “cues,” and by the
likelihood they could be persuaded.
Important:
House Energy and Commerce
House Ways and Means
Senate Finance
…
Unimportant:
House Education and Labor
Senate Labor and Human Resources
Determining Constituency: Targeting Criteria
Constituency: Targeting
Districts were targeted based on the “importance” of the Committees.
Goal:
Goal is to mobilize constituents most likely to influence legislative
behavior in target districts.
Defining Influence:
Constituents that have:
1) Greater Resources
2) More Personal Contact with Member
Finding Influential People:
Business Groups: Leverage Strategy
Groups opposed to the Clinton Plan targeted those they leverage over:
1) Employees
2) Suppliers
Finding Influential People:
Examples: IBM, Mobil, DuPont, Xerox
Each used a variety of strategies to mobilize their employees, including
internal mail, email, voice mail.
Big PHARMA:
Targeted retired employees and stockholders: mobilized a network of 19
thousand people.
Finding Influential People:
GAC Teams: Guardian Advisory Council
Made up of five to ten influential people (business leaders, personal friends)
in targeted districts.
“When a member…goes home, they spend ninety percent of their time with
one percent of the pop. We wanted that one percent to be people who
were going to communicate our message.”