The LWV and Law Day

What a day to wrap up my blog of the LWV, Law Day 2012. In honor of Law Day, the LWV focused on the lack of funding for the federal and state judiciary systems. The President of the national LWV sent out a press release in which she claimed, "It is understandable during tight economies to cut back wherever possible, but underfunding justice is a risk we simply should not be willing to take". She proposed giving the judiciary branch as much control as possible over their own budget. She also encouraged opening share of budget control tactics among states, which would increase transparency in spending. I do not know if I quite agree with her. Letting people in charge of their own budget usually does result in less waste and less spending in general. The down side to this is that the budget may not be going where it needs to. Sometimes an outsider perspective is needed to fully determine where to allocate resources.

Pushing a little to hard

This week was also about resistance. When trying to come up with an example of resistance the most blatant example I could find was after the LWV ran advertisements against 2 Republican Senators for voting against clean air initiatives. The LWV came under direct fire from both the Senators they ran the advertisement against and the Republican right. This is the most blatant piece of resistance I have been able to find. Perhaps this is a situation Bower might describe as the LWV a little to far on the agitation continuum. They pushed a little to hard (harder than normal) and received resistance from the government.
The local Austin LWV was busy this week hosting forums with the city over the upcoming election for Austin Mayor. The LWV moderated and sponsored the forums, giving citizens an opportunity to submit questions and hear candidates responses.

Resistance

This week's readings were about the resistance social organization face with the institutions they attempt to change. SSD and Bowers also addressed the reactions institutions have to the social movements. Bowers brought up the point that perhaps it is institutions jobs to allow dissent, dissent that doe not threaten social are governmental stability. That is social change and development in action. It shows you the perspective of the institution, which is one you don't get often. They can't let every social change group get there way so they have to move slow and be tough at first. Interesting... I do not think the LWV experiences as much resistance from government as many social change groups. They work with the government instead of against them. Much like my group project, Jubillee 2000, they spend most of their effort working and talking directly with the government. This could just be the phase their group is in right now. 100 years ago when the LWV started, perhaps the government used avoidance/evasion strategies?  Maybe their relationship with the government has final got the the "adjustment" stage?
Related to this idea, the LWV posted this in their Facebook Wall this week, "It is National Volunteer Week (April 15-21)! What better time to celebrate our grassroots volunteers who are the heart, soul and backbone of our very special organization. So let us all take heart and stand tall because our work does matter. We do make a difference every single day!"
Obvious attempt to connect with their grassroots level, even though I find they are mostly top down.
In local LWV news they are focusing on government privatization right now in the Austin branch. They haven't come out on one side of another but I bet they don't favor it.

Money Machine

I got my first "Luv-Your_League" update today. This is a newsletter the email to members every now and then to encourage donations. In the email they outline their fundraising goals and show graphs of how much they still need. They also give a brief summary of the they plan to use the money. The LWV is a donation powerhouse. As soon as you enter their website (national or city) there is always a large red button in the top of the screen reading "DONATE." No matter which page you go to the red button remains at the top of the screen. If that didn't send enough of a message there is a whole tab dedicated to "support." Under this tab you sign up for one time or reoccurring donations from your credit card. I must say there language of how the money is going to be used is vague. I do not think this is a successful way to get donations. I fear the only people who will donate with these tactics are people who are devout members and would seek out ways to donate anyways. I recommend a more detailed description of where the money is going; especially at the city or state level. If you can tie your money to a cause being done in your own community you are much more likely to donate.

Alinsky..a man of good words

This week's readings were about tactics for sustaining a social movement especially language. Language is such a permeating aspect it is there without even acknowledging that it is. Alinsky's article, Rules for Radicals, was very interesting. In the beginning without acknowledging it they showed how important language and work choice is when communicating with people. It shows quotations of Alinsky talking with someone. Without pointing it out, he adapts his language and word choice to the person he is communicating with. I can imagine the words coming out of his mouth in the same dialect, using the same slang references. When we want to get people to do things, such as organize, it is important to be seen as on their level. Communicating in the same fashion as someone if the first step in making them identify with you and your cause. Language is obviously a key concept in analyzing the LWV. The majority of their work comes in print. Their article need to be tailored to their audience. Press releases should be more formal. Daily news articles, more casual, word choices depending on the city in which it will run. You can see this is their work. A top down organization that attempts to hold tight to their grass root supporters walks a fine line. They most appeal both to the highly educated electorate and the masses who elect them. Titles such as "Think you have the right to vote? Not so much!" are aimed at the masses and used on their blog postings.
President Obama's signing of the Stock Act is all over their Facebook and website today. They are singing his praises for signing into action a bill that make insider trading illegal for Senators with proprietary information. Pictures on the Facebook show him signing the bill into law. This makes me further question their nonpartisanship. The rarely use images, but they chose to use one in support of the Democrat President. They seem to be an obviously left-leaning organization. Does it make you nonpartisan if you are liberal and you just don't come out and say it? What kind of ramifications does this have for your credibility? Lowered I would think. Can an organization that openly attacks public officials call itself nonpartisan?

A Picture Says a Thousand Words

Well this week was intense. Coming of the back of the Condit readings and the Operation Rescue presentation,  the impact of imagery in furthering a message cannot be denied. Pictures give life and realism to what words try to express. This is an area I feel the LWV is greatly lacking in. After attempting to find uses of imagery in their publications I could find only one. In April of 2011 the Massachusetts LWV ran a smear campaign against their Senator who voted against a clean air initiative bill. The ad uses the images of a very young girl sitting in her mother's lap connected to multiple breathing machines. The ad intentionally used a small child. It also had very slow nursery music playing in the back. A heart gripping image to support legislation for clean air. This type of message is effective. This type of message is what people remember and what people talk about. Ethical? Yes, people need to know how their elected officials are voting. Another key issue floating around the LWV blogs and news release is the hot button issue of women's healthcare and contraception. The LWV comes out on the side of women and their right to make personal healthcare decisions. This is one of the most controversial issues I have seen them take a stance on yet. Possibly a good time to spur pathos with imagery? They frame the issue as one of women's right to healthcare services. This is not surprising the organizations deep connection to women's rights.

Rhetorical Narrative

This week's theme was imagery and narrative. The idea of using a narrative as means for social construction was one I have covered before in other classes. It is a very interesting concept. If you can make your point by telling a story you are not only more memorable but less threatening. Narratives can also play in social constructs that are ingrained into citizens, such as The American Dream or Big Brother issues. Because the LWV does not use pictures and heavily relies on printed media and releases to spread its messages, narrative framing is a large rhetorical tactic of theirs. To highlight this point, I cite and article they posted last week about an 84 year old women not being able to vote. (http://floridaindependent.com/71154/blocking-the-vote) They tell her narrative of being a dedicated citizen who votes in every election, when suddenly new voter id laws keep from it. Her stories pulls at your heartstrings, hearing about her rude treatment at the DMV (something everyone can relate to). All of the stress leading her to cry. The LWV uses this narrative to get their point across. Several general US narratives are embedded in it; the elderly needing protection, the loyal voting citizen, and exhausting bureaucracy. I think it is a successful tactic. It is relateable. You feel sorry for her, and in the end you generally want to help her. How can you help her? Campaign against the new voter id bills, the LWV's mission. I think it is a good use of pathos, one they should probably use more often.
A huge success for LWV this week. A press release revealed they have been chose to support the US government this year in their job at the G8 president. A huge accomplishment that emphasizes their obvious top down approach to social change.