Federal policy tends to get most of the attention from academics. But the public-policy decisions that affect people most significantly tend to be made at the state and local levels, and surprisingly few professors understand how to work effectively with those policymakers.
It’s a skill worth learning. On the federal level, the new administration has not signaled an openness to academic expertise. But you have plenty of opportunities to influence state and local policymaking, which is my area of expertise. I direct a state-policy clinic at a large research university. This is my advice for academics who are interested in advancing evidenced-based, data-driven policies closer to home.
Timing is everything. The most common cultural disconnect that I see between academic researchers and state and local policymakers concerns their different conceptions of time. On college campuses, there is often no particular sense of urgency aside from the rhythms of the academic calendar and of publishing or grant deadlines. But in politics, it’s not uncommon for a legislator to text me and need an answer right away; I often ask our clinic’s students to turn around a reply within the same day.
Timing is essential because very few academics command enough influence to “change the conversation” on their own about a particular topic — policy windows open and close based on events outside of our control. Policymakers’ schedules are often tied to budget deadlines and legislative-session calendars. When the right political moment strikes, you have to be ready to make your case. To exert influence, you have to engage even when you don’t feel that your research on the matter is 100 percent ready.
Academics do not like to share research or data publicly until their arguments are as close to publication-ready as possible. In the world of public policy, however, you don’t worry about being “scooped” by a competitor — in fact, you hope that your ideas will be “stolen” so that you don’t have to do all the time-consuming work of ushering them through the political process.
In politics, no one expects your arguments to be perfect. Often, you are not trying to figure out the best solution to a particular policy dilemma, but rather, a reasonable solution that (a) is better than the status quo and (b) can actually be put into practice. Change happens on the margins, and that is OK.
While ambitious policy innovations are sometimes put forward in order to shift the Overton window (what political theorists call the range of policies that the public will find acceptable), it is important to understand the constraints facing policymakers, so that you can scale ideas appropriately while simultaneously building political support for more ambitious asks down the line.
It’s best to defeat really bad ideas before they capture legislators’ imaginations and become law. But keep in mind: Most ideas — good and bad — never make it into law or regulation. Often, ideas are advanced for political or symbolic reasons and for media attention or constituent relations. So you do not need to waste your time arguing against them. In fact, posting critiques of harmful bills on social media often just serves to give their authors the attention they want. Opposing a bad bill usually isn’t necessary until it’s made it out of at least one committee.
The most important currency in this arena is relationships. Yes, far more important than specific policies.
To build a strong relationship with whichever lawmaker or government official you’re trying to persuade, you have to be an honest broker. Politicians often get away with exaggerations for rhetorical effect; policy analysts don’t. In my public-policy courses, I often tell my students that one “overambitious” citation on a one-pager for legislators destroys the entire argument.
Few public policies are so important that they justify sacrificing a relationship. As generalists, state and local lawmakers do not have time to master every area of public policy; by necessity, they must rely on relationships with people they trust and like. To have influence, you want to be the person they trust. You also have to be easy to work with.
Certainly you want to stand your ground and conduct yourself with integrity. But displaying frustration at a legislator for failing to do something they just politically cannot do will only undermine your credibility. Turning good ideas into policy is the art of listening to all sides and balancing competing interests. Policymakers like to work with academics who understand that.
It is also important to be comfortable with “agreeing to disagree.” Often legislators say “no” to a particular idea at a particular time. Accept the rejection gracefully, and leave the door open for future conversations.
Propose a concrete solution. At conferences, I often hear academics say that policy engagement is about putting an accessible description of their research up on their website so that “the public” can understand it. That advice misses the mark. If your scholarly papers are written well, the public won’t need an “accessible” translation. The real issue is that neither the public nor the policymakers are actually checking faculty websites. If you have a good idea, you need to reach out to them.
What state and local leaders do need help with is translating research into policy — actionable, concrete rules and procedures that can be enacted or adopted in the real world. Unfortunately, the recommendation section of many academic papers in the social sciences and other public-policy fields are often too general or abstract to offer practical advice to a legislator. Academic recommendations often state that “more X should be done” rather than setting forth clearly who should do more X, along with why, when, and how.
Policymakers also need help choosing from among a slate of good ideas and evaluating opportunity costs. Legislators often tell us “I understand the problem; please just tell me what you want me to do about it.” What that means for academics with good ideas to share:
- Bring a clear solution. Spell out how your idea would be implemented and by whom.
- Approach the right person. Asking a policymaker to do something that is not within their constitutional or statutory power is seen as amateurish or disrespectful.
- Bring both data and stories. Lawmakers love stories, but they generally will not make policy decisions without data and evidence. While the evidence can be comparative (e.g., what other states have done successfully), at least some of the data should be jurisdiction-specific.
- Show legislators how your policy idea would help their constituents. At the state level, lawmakers are laser-focused on meeting the concerns of voters within their districts. They are not moved by arguments that appeal to the “general good” — they want to know whether the proposed policy will benefit their constituents and whether their constituents will support it.
- Do your homework. Academics pride themselves on their willingness to engage with counter arguments. Good politicians are keen at spotting weakness; it’s best to anticipate policy and political concerns in advance and come prepared.
Don’t wait until your research is “finished” to start spreading the word. Even if you are just 75 percent sure that your solution is a good idea, it is essential to start the process of negotiating and “socializing” the idea with a diverse group of stakeholders who will bring their own experiences and insights. That group could include policymakers as well as people in advocacy nonprofits, community organizations, think tanks, businesses, labor or trade associations, and religious institutions. It is often wise to reach out to organizations with opposing interests or viewpoints sooner rather than later, even if it feels like you are “tipping your hand.”
As an academic, you may feel like you should figure out everything for yourself in order to make your mark. In policymaking, anyone who thinks they have found the answer on their own is either wrong or has found a solution that will never be implemented in practice. Leveraging the insights of diverse coalitions is an essential part of policy design and advocacy, and it’s the only way to ensure that there is sufficient “buy-in” for a policy change to actually be implemented.
