LITTLE ROCK — Every so often in the life of a public agency, it becomes necessary to defend the agency's programs and, more important, its funding. In fact, the legislation that creates many government agencies requires them to hold public hearings to present their plans for the next one to five years. These venues offer everyone who wishes to testify, pro or con, a chance to voice his support or opposition. In public and on the record. Everybody who wants to be heard is heard (in theory), and all viewpoints are vetted in public. This way, something akin to due process is observed, and the agency in question is supposed to carefully weigh the opinions of the electorate in formulating its work program for the next budget period. If my friends and I object to what these bureaucrats are trying to ram down our throats, they'll have to sit up and take notice, won't they?
Sounds like democracy in action, right?
Well, the wily bureaucrats are fully aware that not all citizens will support their program, and knowing this, they aren't about to allow a bunch of obstructionist "civilians" to foil them. They have to be several steps ahead of citizens who object to their plans and would seek to thwart their will. Fortunately, some methods have been developed and honed to keep things on track. And that's where the fine art of stacking the deck comes in.
Here are procedures that have been proven to work extremely well.
Stage the event on your turf. Urban war zones work especially well, and a fewslashed tires discourage all but the most determined opponents. Try to keep large numbers of opponents away from the event-use your cops to herd them off your premises and, more important, keep them away from the media, especially the TV cameras.
Have your proponents lined up and ready to testify. Since all testimony, pro and con, becomes part of the official record, the objections (rants) of opponents can be offset with a coherent body of carefully orchestrated support for your program. Vocal supporters, consultant/ "experts" and others can be identified and mobilized in your behalf. If possible, you can guide, even prepare their testimony for maximum impact.
More important, pack the meeting. Bring as many staffers and known friends as possible at the gathering. Seat them not in blocks but randomly, so that knots of protestors will be less able to congregate and achieve anything like critical mass for the news cameras. If any sort of protest does erupt, have your adherents prepared to sit quietly and look straightahead, appearing bored. That way, there's no visual picture of disagreement to roil things and provide grist for TV news, which thrives on confrontation and conflict.
Either have carefully vetted questioners provide your speaker with softball questions, or have the speaker pretend to answer "objections" from opponents.
Taken together, these tactics have been used not only by bureaucrats seeking to protect and expand their turf, but by savvy politicians who seek to appear in the limelight and "defend" their policies and programs, yet wish to duck the really hard questions.
An interesting case study of these tactics was recently presented by, of all people, President Obama, who traveled to Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to shill for his proposed health care overhaul. Let's see how well the event was organized.
Portsmouth is Democrat Party turf-his turf. Check! Attendance was by ticket only, and most people who had been graced with tickets included such lifelong democratic supporters as union members,Democratic politicians and their families. One TV estimate had about 70 percent of attendees being "friendly" to President Obama and his program. Check! Receiving very little news coverage was an area that had been cordoned off, away from the meeting, where protestors could protest among themselves, but not in front before the cameras. Portsmouth police had been mobilized to keep them in their place. Check!
When the meeting began, President Obama gave a long speech plugging his program. He received much enthusiastic applause. Afterwards, he took questions that had been carefully vetted, since his handlers have discovered that without his teleprompter, his attempts at winging it tend not to play out too well (consider his ill-considered remarks immediately following the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Gates). His answer to one tough question, seemingly chosen at random from a token child in attendance, who read her question in her best fifth grade manner off of a crib card, received a hearty round of applause. It came out later that the child was the daughter of a Massachusetts Democratic Party officer and Obama supporter who just happened to have driven up to New Hampshire that day. This leads one to conclude that all questions, and questioners, had been carefully chosen in advance, that the affair was as painstakingly orchestrated and conducted as a performance of Beethoven's Fifth by the Chicago Symphony. Check! When the affair was over, the President got a hearty round of applause from most of those present. One wonders if event organizers held up APPLAUSE signs, off camera, of course,just as they do for TV quiz shows. Either way, double check!!
All in all, well done. Grade: B+. It would have been higher if the event weren't so obviously stage managed. All in all, a wonderful parody of democracy in action.
William B. Parker writes about stacking the deck in public hearings, dealing with protestors and budget cuts, and much more in his book The Agency Game: Inside the Bureaucratic Jungle.
Perspective, Pages 74 on 08/23/2009