Provocative New Book Challenges Us to Really Ask "Why?"

By Andrea Batista Schlesinger, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.. Posted July 15, 2009.

The idea driving Lukensmeyer’s Americans Discuss Social Security campaign was that any discussion that might result in a change in the mission of a universal program such as Social Security couldn’t just happen behind closed doors in Washington, D.C. Americans needed to talk. They needed to weigh in on a conversation that was about more than the mechanics of the program, that was about our values and commitments. And if politicians were going to be successful in whatever decisions they made (whether to keep the program or to change it), they would need the support of the American people. Lukensmeyer organized town hall meetings, inviting thousands of Americans to talk about the program, in their own neighborhoods. Although Clinton’s efforts to reach some kind of deal for the program’s future collapsed in response to the scandals of the year, Lukensmeyer saw the promise in engaging people directly in conversations about the issues that affect their collective future.

The forums were far more than sessions designed to make attendees feel they had fulfilled their civic duty. Participants became better educated about the Social Security debate, and consensus emerged about what people expected from the program and desired from its reform. At the forums, diverse participants from diverse communities tackled thorny economic and political issues but were able to engage each other as well as policymakers in developing concrete, plausible proposals for policy action.

Soon after the conclusion of Americans Discuss Social Security, Lukensmeyer founded AmericaSpeaks, where she continues to serve as president. This organization is hired by local and state governments, nonprofit organizations, foundations—anyone who wants citizens to come together to deliberate on a particular issue and reach consensus about what needs to happen next. For example, thousands of New Yorkers who lived in the area affected by 9/11 came together to develop their vision for how they wanted their neighborhoods in Lower Manhattan to redevelop. Thousands of California residents came together to decide on the kind of health care they would like to see the state offer. Six hundred students, university presidents, and young activists met as part of the Clinton Global Initiative to develop plans for student action on issues of global importance, such as climate change, health, human rights, and peace.

AmericaSpeaks calls their events 21st Century Town Meetings, and to look at the forums is to understand why. In person, the sessions resemble a cross between bingo and a trade show. Hundreds or thousands of people are seated at round tables. Each of the participants has a laptop. A facilitator asks questions to help move the group toward accomplishing their goal for the day.

But it isn’t the high-tech tools that make the town halls special; it’s the people. There is no Big Sort here. AmericaSpeaks picks participants through random sampling to represent their broader community. They are sitting next to people they don’t know. There are no ideological cliques. They don’t possess expertise in the issues they are there to discuss, such as health care, immigration, or Social Security, and they aren’t expected to. Their job, no matter what they believe, is to discuss an issue, debate the policy options, and reach consensus. And they do.

The participants are not unlike the residents of the communities that Bishop writes about in The Big Sort, but the AmericaSpeaks experience illustrates that, in the right environment, with the right incentives and support, we can transcend ideological segregation, both as a group and within ourselves.

“Many of [our participants] live in communities like Bishop describes,” Lukensmeyer told me. But “even those people who come from very polarized ideological backgrounds, when placed in a context and facing real human beings who are really different than they are, and given the basic information that they need to participate in the discussion, and given questions designed to make them think—they think.”

The sessions have a significant effect on both policymakers and participants alike. Even Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was visibly excited as he chatted with a group of AmericaSpeaks participants debating health-care reform in California, in a forum called CaliforniaSpeaks: “Your involvement can make [reform] happen—that’s why we need to hear your voices, opinions, and experiences so we can create the best health care for everyone.”

As callous as politicians can be at times, my experience as the director of a public policy think tank has taught me that politicians really do love a good policy idea, especially when you can show them that the public supports it. AmericaSpeaks provides both good ideas for public policy reform and evidence of public support. Organizing the sessions through difficult but manageable questioning, discussion, and response makes the deliberative process transparent and effective; extensive polling results make support for particular avenues of reform obvious. Indeed, a California Health and Human Services assistant secretary said that CaliforniaSpeaks had let policymakers know what California citizens want.

Perhaps the most striking element of the AmericaSpeaks forums is the capacity and willingness of participants to transcend their personal interests to consider—and to consider acting on—policies that might force them to make trade-offs in their personal lives. In a session to discuss recovery priorities for New Orleans, for instance, one attendee humbly noted to his discussion colleagues that “I am going to vote for [priority] three, but I am personally affected by number two.” The AmericaSpeaks forums are about inspiring participants to think beyond their own policy ideas and political ideologies; at the forums, participants must listen to and engage with other reasonable, respectful people with contrasting ideas, responsibilities, and life experiences. At Schwarzenegger’s urging, the California health-care forum concluded by asking, “How willing would you be to share in the responsibility of paying for health-care reform that covers all Californians?” Eighty-four percent of participants expressed some level of willingness.

See more stories tagged with: elections, democracy, voting, ideology, political media

Andrea Batista Schlesinger is the executive director of the Drum Major Institute for Public Policy.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Politics! Sign up now »