Lawmaker-citizen facilitation: Training leaders for effective government in the United States
Facilitation Principals and Practice
Professor Wansley
January 20, 2011
Introduction
The lawmaking process in the United States is sometimes a very challenging experience for both lawmaker and citizen. Instances in the news have pointed to a need for effective leadership and facilitation when issues become heated. For instance, a recent impasse with Congress resolving the budget threatened to put the government out of service1. In Colorado, lawmakers have continued to marginalize the medical marijuana community through dismissive behavior and neglectfulness of certain analysis2. Further issues manifested in Missouri as a lawmaker curses at a fellow lawmaker during debate3. In two other cases one lawmaker yells out, “baby killer” during session4 and another yells out, “you lie,” to the President as he addressed the House in a speech about immigration5.
Currently, no minimum education requirement exists to be a legislator, nor is there any training required once elected to office6. This lack of education and training has led to abuses of power, and ineffective problem solving for the groups affected by various pieces of legislation.
This paper will discuss the need to address this shortfall in the lawmaking system with a facilitation training program for lawmakers and citizens, and propose to ultimately require specific facilitation training for all members of the legislative branch of the united States government. The program presented in this proposal will address the need for training citizens along with lawmakers and can be used to address lawmaker-citizen conflict.
As an organization, the Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program (CLFP) will operate as a non-profit and will be overseen by an elected board of directors. Facilitation trainers will be paid professionals with extensive education, research, and experience with alternative dispute resolution, government policy and/or law. These individuals will have proven experience with effective leadership and facilitative skills.
The CLFP will also operate with volunteers in a supportive capacity, working with community outreach and fund-raising. Volunteers will be allowed to use their experience with CLFP toward internship credits. The volunteer program will also entail a youth program, specifically geared to training youth leadership and problem-solving skills in a legislative capacity.
The Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program anticipates some resistance from lawmakers regarding mandated training; however, this resistance will be addressed by showing the efficacy of the program through a results-based monitoring system. This system will show that education and training in facilitative leadership and developmental facilitation is a vital part of effective government work. Until a program is mandated, the CLFP will offer CLE (continuing legal education) units, in hopes of encouraging legal professionals to learn the facilitative approach offered by CLFP.
The following research will shed light on the need for the Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Training Program, and show how the program will provide for an improved citizen-lawmaker exchange during high conflict legislation. As will be shown, there is a immediate need for a facilitative education program to not only help improve the lawmaking process with specific regard to citizen involvement, but to teach the leaders of tomorrow proven methods to facilitate effective groups.
Literature Review
To set the tone for the proposed organization this paper will first address the ground rules as are offered by Roger Schwarz in his book The skilled facilitator (2002). The following rules will be the foundation of the Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program, and will always be the fundamental standard of operation for every aspect of the program (97):
Test assumptions and inferences
Share all relevant information
Use specific examples and agree on what important words mean
Explain your reasoning and intent
Focus on interests not positions
Combine advocacy and inquiry
Jointly design next steps and ways to test disagreements
Discuss undiscussable issues
Use a decision-making rule that generates the level of commitment needed
These ground rules rules will be allied with the CLFP in the following areas of development as Schwarz suggests throughout his book (2002). In developing the program all ground rules will be used to form the organizing members; to govern the members and address any issues within the organization; to develop an approach to the specific problems the organization hopes to address within the legislative branch; and to follow-up on issues that have been managed through the CLFP.
This proposal will also use these rules as a basis for examining and diagnosing the behavior tied to ineffective groups. As Schwarz explains regarding diagnosing behaviors that hinder or enhance group effectiveness, three steps will occur in diagnosis: observe behavior; infer meaning; and causally relate behaviors to models of effective group behavior (136).
This proposal will examine an effective government model for operation that will include citizen participation and training for both groups to show the need for a citizen-lawmaker facilitation group like CLFP. The three steps above will be used to examine the problems that currently exist and are to be addressed by the CLFP.
The final part to address in analyzing the need for facilitation is theory-in-use. These are patterns of behavior explained in three models: Unilateral Control Model; Give-Up-Control Model; and Mutual Learning Model (69-92). The following are basic characteristics of each model:
Unilateral Control- This model is ineffective in most situations of facilitation and involves use of secret-keeping, face saving, self-preserving, and self-centered-ness to achieve the goals of the person acting in alignment with the unilateral control model. Deception, misunderstanding, conflict, mistrust, and quality of life are impacted by this type of approach (71).
Give-Up-Control- Schwarz states the results of this model are the same as the Unilateral Control Model, but the approach is slightly different. In this model, the answer is already known, and the process of group interaction is merely task to complete regardless of quality. This model contributes to miscommunication, conflict, and defensiveness. Essentially, this model involves the act of letting the group “implode on itself” by use of non-intervention (79-80).
Mutual Learning- This is the optimal model at the current time to operate under as a facilitator, and possibly in many other areas in life. This model involves all nine ground rules state above. The core values of this model involves valid information sharing, free and informed choice, compassion, and commitment (86).
Observing and diagnosing behavior
To observe behavior associated with ineffective government, a study by Neal Woods looks at government corruption and its relation to weakening specific state programs, in this case environmental programs (2008). The research looked at the various aspects of political corruption, including political culture, size of government, type of government, and mentions previous research that has concluded the impact of corruption on public policy efficacy.
Woods identified corruption as ‘‘deviation from norms of legal and public duty for purposes of private gain’’ (260), and measures this by arrests related to violations of political officials over a period of six years. The results Woods discovered during his own analysis as well as the previous research conducted at the time of his work were that political corruption is directly related to the efficacy of public policy (258).
To further observe behavior, I look to an article by Joseph Nye, on the importance of effective leadership in government (2008). The idea of leadership is examined as a political process consisting of three parts (55).
Leaders
Followers
Context
The balance of power is a common factor that comes up frequently throughout the article, and is relative to the previously mentioned research regarding corruption (Woods 2008). This balance in power is also an important factor when holding this information to the standards of the ground rules by Schwarz and appears as an attempt at unilateral control (2002). In fact, when there is an imbalance in power as Nye suggests, there is ineffective government, the ability to test assumptions and inferences, share relevant information, explain reasoning and intent, focus on interests not positions, advocate and inquire, joint participation in designing the group’s processes and testing disagreements, discuss undiscussables, and create a level of commitment necessary to sustain the group are all impossible (2008).
In a corrupt government, where the political leaders are found guilty of abusing their positions of power, these rules are not possible to be adhered to by all members of the group. This is why the corrupt politicians end up in jail. It’s also important to keep in mind Wood’s study only represents politicians who were caught doing something corrupt.
This research emphasizes the importance of teaching citizens a basic set of rules that will allow them to hold their leaders to a commonly-known standard consisting of the nine rules and a mutual learning model presented by Schwarz. When a citizen has an issue with something they feel is not quite right, they can express this to the governing body by using rule number three to give a specific example to test assumptions and inferences (rule number one), and possibly discuss the undiscussables (rule eight). Training citizens to communicate clearly in this manner will help in situations where the citizen becomes so emotional that their credibility is destroyed, and sometimes even escorted out of the hearing; as was the case when a protester spoke out against what he felt was dishonest testimony regarding home foreclosures, and was removed by police7.
Recently, some meetings between citizens and lawmakers have become increasingly violent, with one such incident leading to the deaths of six people when a disgruntled citizen went on a shooting rampage at a grocery store constituency meeting for Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona8. Offering facilitative leadership training to the nation’s leaders and citizens will help reduce the level of disdain created by a perceived abuse of power by setting the tone of operation through the use of commonly understood ground rules and a mutual learning approach.
Is it possible that an article written for Rolling Stone Magazine in 2006 sheds light on what the future held? According to Matt Taibbi, the United States government during the Bush administration was, “more than just the most shameful, corrupt and incompetent period in the history of the American legislative branch. These were the years when the US parliament became a historical punch line, a political obscenity on par with the court of Nero or Caligula – a stable of thieves and perverts who committed crimes rolling out of bed in the morning and did their very best to turn the mighty American empire into a debt-laden, despotic backwater, a Burkina Faso with cable” (2006).
Taibbi continues through his article to describe various reasons for the behavior he calls “favor-trading” and compares the U.S. Congress to a quote by Mark Twain which likens the group to criminals (2006). Throughout the article there is mention of Congress’ tendency to marginalize the minority, and acknowledges a power inequity at play. Both these qualities are also present in the previous studies which show ineffective/corrupt government are consumed by power inequities, information withholding/lying, and marginalization.
In diagnosing the ineffective behavior of the lawmaking process, there must be some meaning derived from the behaviors observed in other research and in the media. The meaning the writer of this paper takes from these situations is there is a dire need for a citizen-lawmaker facilitation group like the one proposed in this paper. Regardless of the reasons behind the behavior observed in this paper thus far, the impact remains. This impact is why it is so important to follow the guidelines of facilitation to identify, address, and repair the damage and those involved with creating the damage.
Where do we go from here?
For this section, we examine the behavior of effective government. How does this behavior differ from the examples of government gone wrong? An article by Henry Waxman looks at the qualities of “good government” (2006). The first think Waxman points out is the need for more transparency and accountability in the U.S. Government by preventing secret-keeping, or as the ground rule two (share all relevant information) comes into play. This is not the only ground rule that could apply here. Numbers five (focus on interests not positions) and eight (discuss undiscussable issues) also apply here.
In his article, Waxman offers specific examples of times when Congress has diverted accountability for issues surrounding the war in Iraq, not questioning various fiscal policies, and appointments of questionably qualified officers to positions of great responsibility. He claims these times where our leaders have lacked accountability have led to corruption, and points to many instances where leaders have ended up in prison over their behavior and abuse of power (24-25).
This article is particularly important in understanding what behavior leads to what result, and supports previous research regarding corruption leading to ineffective government. Hiding information, covering up one’s indiscretions and/or mistakes, and avoiding inquiry all violate Schwarz’s ground rules, which further supports the use of facilitation to address these matters.
Waxman suggests open information to the public. This seems like a simple solution, and doing this would address the violations of the ground rules as they are. Open information sharing is so vital in maintaining checks and balances, as it prevents deceptive practices and allows group members to make fully informed decisions.
Gundersen, et. al (2006) offer reasoning for the need for facilitation training in their article that begs political science to teach facilitative leadership. The authors say effective group leadership is beneficial in social, civic, and economic, and education associations through effective facilitation (2006, 1).
The article suggests effective facilitation is necessary to conduct a proper democratic interaction, alluding to the absolute necessity of facilitation training to guarantee democratic discussion (1). The authors state facilitation is something that can be learned, which is all the more reason to utilize a tool for effective democratic process when possible (2).
Organizational design
While the organizational flow of the legislative can seem somewhat overwhelming and complicated, the CLFP will be relatively simple. The organization will consist primarily of volunteer members who work with various staff. The staff will be qualified experts in dispute resolution and/or facilitation. The level of education of the staff members will be a minimum of a master’s degree. Appendix I shows the application form for all volunteers along with the description, Appendix II is the application form for staff and the position description.
The volunteer program will be overseen by the staff, and each staff member will be responsible for his/her own group of volunteers. The organization will have a staff member dedicated to organizing the volunteers for all staff members, but the education and training will be the responsibility of the volunteer’s assigned staff member since the education and training for each volunteer will vary based on the group they are working with. The group will be a non-profit organization, and operate under a board of directors.
Figure 1.1. Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program Organizational Flow Chart
As is shown in Figure 1.1, the primary source of man-power for the CLFP will be volunteers. These volunteers will report to the staff and the staff reports to the board of directors. The ground rules for the organization itself will be the same as the ground rules mentioned. The board of directors will meet once a month and the staff will hold weekly meetings to keep communication fluid and free-flowing. Every other board of director’s meetings will be open to volunteers to address any organizational issues.
Summary
Research shows corruption is a primary factor in ineffective government, and corrupt behavior is inconsistent with the ground rules of an effective group. This information in combination with the recent incidents of violence, numerous examples of lawmaker misconduct and power inequities in corruption provide the necessary grounds upon which to cultivate a new way of interaction and citizen involvement with government. This is the foundation for the Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program.
Appendix I
Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program Volunteer Application
Name_______________________ Date________________
Mailing Address_______________________________________
City___________________ State_________ Zip Code_______
Phone_________________ Alternative Phone______________
Highest level of education:
K-6 __
7-12__
College__
Graduate School__
Position applying for:
Community outreach__
Office support__
Technology__
Youth Program__ (must be 17 or younger)
Youth mentor__ (bachelor’s degree required, or director approval)
Previous work experience and/or volunteer experience (use back of sheet for more room, or attach resume/CV):
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I affirm to the best of my knowledge the information provided on this form is accurate, and understand providing false information is grounds for: 1.) immediate removal from any volunteer program, 2.) lifetime ban from participating with CLFP or any events held by CLFP, and 3.) revocation of any honors and/or awards bestowed by CLFP.
Signature________________________________ Date______________
Volunteer Description
The Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program is operated primarily by the efforts of citizen volunteers. The following are roles a volunteer with the CLFP can partake in:
Office support- This role is for any level volunteer. Minimum age requirement is 14, with special exceptions available on a per case basis. Duties performed will be primarily in-office and include roles such as clerical, janitorial, and support for administrative staff.
Community outreach- Volunteer outreach members will work with staff to educate the community via classes, organize and participate in events for fund-raising and awareness, and work with the youth program. These volunteers must be at least 16 years old, with special exceptions on a per case basis. Some assignments may have certain education requirements.
Technology- These volunteers will work with our web development and office technology. This includes all office computers, networks, and equipment. These volunteers must be at least 18 years old, but special cases will be considered.
Youth program- All youth program volunteers and mentors will work specifically within the youth program. Minimum age requirement for youth is negotiable, and those over 18 can transition to mentoring.
Appendix II
Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program Staff Application
Name_______________________ Date________________
Mailing Address_______________________________________
City___________________ State_________ Zip Code_______
Phone_________________ Alternative Phone______________
Highest level of education:
College__
Graduate School__
Position applying for:
Legislation expert__
Community Educator__
Government Educator__
Other:______________
Previous work experience and education (use back of sheet for more room, or attach resume/CV):
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I affirm to the best of my knowledge the information provided on this form is accurate, and understand providing false information is grounds for: 1.) immediate removal from employment, 2.) lifetime ban from participating with CLFP or any events held by CLFP, and 3.) revocation of any honors and/or awards bestowed by CLFP.
Signature________________________________ Date______________
Staff Role Description
Staff with the Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program are the heart of what we do and how we do it. Our staff create our operating protocol, manage volunteer programs, and create curriculum for our citizen and lawmaker education programs.
All staff is required to submit a proposal for the position they are applying for, two letters of recommendation, academic transcripts, official CLFP application, and resume. CLFP will offer full benefits to staff, which include health, dental, and optical insurance, retirement savings, and an education fund that can be used for anyone in the staff member’s immediate family.
Volunteer coordinator- Persons in this person will coordinate volunteers and assign them to the appropriate staff member based on interests and goals. The volunteer coordinator will also manage the office.
Educators- Persons in this person will research and coordinate facilitation and training with government members. These staff will also plan and coordinate education for government, legislative, and community programs.
Community outreach- Persons in this position will focus on citizen involvement, community engagement, and training. This position will also oversee the youth program.
Discussion
This paper has explored the need for a citizen-lawmaker facilitation program is necessary to re-establish some level of common order within the government in its current state. To confirm this research I spoke with an attorney who has been involved with legislation and activism throughout his career. His name is Jeff Carter. He’s been a practicing lawyer for over 30 years in Boston, Massachusetts, and has worked in many areas of law.
When discussing the idea of a citizen-lawmaker facilitation program, Jeff felt this idea is necessary but wondered how it would be implemented. He wanted to know if the program would be mandated in some way, or be offered as a consultation service? My response to this is we would like to create a mandated education requirement for all lawmakers, but the citizen education would not be required in any way. The entire program will be centered around education by training lawmakers to work as facilitative leaders, and citizens to work from the mutual learning model in regard to problem-solving and political matters.
As we further discussed the program, I asked Jeff what led him to participate in political activism and protests. He told me he only felt the need to protest and take a stand when there was a situation of denial about an important issue, or when certain misinformation was being propagated. “Sometimes you have to stand up, organize, and do what needs to be done. That can involve going in jail, which has been the case for me on a small number of occasions. When people are willing to give up their freedom to fight an injustice or untruth the necessary light may be shed on the problem, but it’s something that has to be done cautiously and sparingly” (2011).
Jeff’s statement is in alignment with knowing when to intervene, and when it comes to politics there are plenty of opportunities. Some issues aren’t as detrimental as others, so an important thought to keep in mind for the CLFP is to stay away from political positions and focus on the interests of the whole group. Doing so will be in accordance with rule number five of the ground rules.
As our conversation continued, I asked Jeff how he felt about the need for facilitation training for the legislative body. He expressed agreement of the need for a facilitation training program, and feels this type of program would be beneficial in other areas of government.
“Over the span of my career there has been a shift in the court system to move certain types of cases to mediation. The longer a case draws out the more it costs everyone. Many child custody cases and civil lawsuits are worked out through mediation or alternative forms of intervention” (2011).
Jeff points to an important factor that hasn’t yet been considered, which is the benefit of cost reduction by prevention and education. The cost of passing a bill that’s later challenged in court and found to have caused damages in violation of a person’s constitutional rights is much greater than managing the process appropriately from the beginning. Facilitation training would offer the tools to lawmakers to avoid unilateral control, and to clearly identify it when occurring.
The Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program will address many issues which result from poor leadership and resigned citizens. The program will work to educate lawmakers and citizens, while involving youth in the political process from an early age. The CLFP will help gap the ability of citizens to perform their own checks and balances in a system where corruption exists, and is deteriorated by such corruption. This corruption is the root of many costly issues which arise in the U.S. lawmaking process, and the ground rules of effective facilitation address these issues. The Citizen-Lawmaker Facilitation Program hopes to bring these theories to practical use through education for the betterment of the government which belongs to all the citizens of the United States.
References
Carter, Jeff. 2011. Interview by author. Eastham, MA, March 7, 2011.
Gundersen, Adolf, Jack Byrd Jr., and Jeff Owen Prudhomme. 2006. “Why Political Science Should Teach Democratic Facilitation–and How.” Conference Papers — American Political Science Association 1-19. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed February 28, 2011).
Nye, Joseph S. 2008. “Recovering American Leadership.” Survival (00396338) 50, no. 1: 55-68. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed February 28, 2011).
Schwarz, Roger. 2002. The skilled facilitator. 2 ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Taibbi, Matt. 2006. “The Worst Congress Ever. (Cover story).” Rolling Stone no. 1012: 46-84. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed February 28, 2011).
Waxman, Henry. 2006. “Good Government.” Nation 282, no. 5: 24-25. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed February 28, 2011).
Woods, Neal D. 2008. “The Policy Consequences of Political Corruption: Evidence from State Environmental Programs.” Social Science Quarterly (Blackwell Publishing Limited) 89, no. 1: 258-271. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed February 28, 2011).
1Walter Brandimarte, “UPDATE 2-Moody’s: Debt impasse could spur US ratings review,” Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/24/usa-ratings-moodys-idUSN2428028120110224?feedType=RSS (accessed March 4, 2011).
2Angela Macdonald, “(1 of 3) HB 10-1284 Senate Hearing 4-27-10,” The Reefer Report. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgW_rZvVIxI (accessed April 27, 2010).
3Jim Abrams, “Lawmaker cusses out fellow Missourian in House,” AP News. http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Lawmaker+cusses+out+fellow+Missourian+in+House-a01612021069 (accessed February 28, 2011).
4Jake Sherman and Meredith Shiner, “Lawmakers mum on ‘baby killer’ comment,” Politico. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34810.html (accessed Feb 26, 2011).
5Carl Hulse, “In Lawmaker’s Outburst, a Rare Breach of Protocol,” NY Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/us/politics/10wilson.html?_r=1 (accessed February 27, 2011).
6United States Constitution, “Legislative Department,” Cornell Law School. http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/art1frag17_user.html#art1_hd47 (accessed march 4, 2011).
7“Protester Screams at Foreclosure Hearing,” INews. http://www.realestateradiousa.com/2010/11/17/protester-screams-at-foreclosure-hearing-video/ (accessed February 3, 2011).
8Terry Tang, Amanda Lee Meyers and David Espo, “Arizona Rep. Giffords shot, at least 5 killed,” Associated Press. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110108/ap_on_re_us/us_congresswoman_shot (accessed February 2, 2011).
awresearch 