This weekend, I travel to Washington, DC for a one-week course entitled “Business and Public Policy: How Washington Works and What Issues Matter”. The Kelley School of Business at Indiana University asked for volunteers to blog about the trip – pre-trip, daily recaps (as I have time), and post-trip. I volunteered and have already posted my pre-trip blog on Kelley Direct’s blog. If you are interested, feel free to check this site next week as I blog about the course.
http://kelleydirect.blogspot.com/search/label/Michelle%20Nanney
Modified on 10 August 2012: Added blog posts from IU’s blog to here:
Posted on Kelley’s blog on 7 September 2011:
This weekend, I travel to Washington, DC for a one-week course entitled “Business and Public Policy: How Washington Works and What Issues Matter”. Fourteen other Kelley students and I will join MBA students from 16 other business schools around the country for a week full of tours, speakers, and a computer simulation.
When I first heard about the course, I was very interested, so I talked with my advisor about taking it. Once I registered, I was linked to a website with more details on the trip along with a required pre-reading list of articles. The intro article gave a synopsis of the who’s who in government and how the various agencies and departments are linked together. The remaining articles mostly described the good and bad sides of lobbying and advocacy groups along with some of the attempts at reform. They also gave a glimpse of the topics that would be covered during the week.
Last week, I received the final agenda for the course, and my interest in the course quickly turned to excitement. Seventeen guest speakers will discuss topics covering policy making, roles of lobbyists and interest groups, the federal budget, taxes, China, elections, energy, healthcare, universities, trade policies, the role of media, and more. We will also observe Congress, visit the Supreme Court, and have lunch one day at the National Press Club. One afternoon we will even participate in a computer simulation demonstrating the types of pressures that Congressmen confront. For grading, we have a written exam on the last day of the course and a team project to complete within two weeks of finishing the course.
I don’t know any of my fellow students who are attending, but I look forward to meeting them and other students from around the country. I suspect that I will learn from all of them as we explore how our government works and what issues matter.
Posted on Kelley’s blog on 13 September 2011:
The first two days in The Washington Campus course, “Business and Public Policy: How Washington Works and What Issues Matter”, have been busy and full of valuable information. On the first day, we met our fellow students – 15 students from Indiana University’s Kelley Direct program and 38 MBA students from Ohio State University – along with our faculty director, logistics coordinator, and program coordinator. Then we had four excellent speakers with diverse experiences in Washington. John Shelk, President and CEO of Electric Power Supply Association, spoke about the US Congress and policymaking including the changing roles of congressional committees. Jeff Weinberg, Legislative Attorney for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), talked to us about the executive branch and policymaking and how Presidents have differed in policymaking over the years. Jonathan Gledhill, President of The Policy Navigation Group, spoke to us about the regulatory process and the role of the OMB in that process. Douglas Bennett, Vice President of Federal Affairs for Liberty Mutual Group, talked with us about lobbying and interest groups. Afterward, we had a social event at James Hoban’s Restaurant and Bar.
On our second day, we visited the US Capitol where Marjorie Glick spoke to us about her role as a staffer in Senator Sherrod Brown’s office. Then Senator Sherrod Brown himself spoke to us about being a senator for Ohio and answered lots of questions. Afterward, we were free to choose which Senate or House hearings we wanted to attend. I attended the hearing on Deficit Reduction where all 12 members of the Super Committee presided over it. After lunch, we all met at the Veterans of Foreign Wars building where Mickey Edwards, former representative for Oklahoma in the House of Representatives, reflected on his time as a representative and discussed the changes in Congress today. Afterward, we had a choice to see the Supreme Court or to visit the Senate or House galleries. I chose to see the Senate gallery and heard senators discussing FEMA funding for victims of natural disasters in their states.
The next three days are packed with more valuable information and events, and I’m looking forward to learning more.
Post on Kelley’s blog on 19 September 2011:
The last three days of The Washington Campus course, “Business and Public Policy: How Washington Works and What Issues Matter”, continued to be busy and full of valuable information. We started Day 3 with a grim report on the federal budget and US economy by Joseph Minarik, Senior Vice President of the Committee for Economic Development. Then Shirley Zebroski, Faculty Director of The Washington Campus, discussed US Trade Policy in general and pending trade policy with Korea specifically. After lunch, Adam Cobb, Professor of International Relations at Command and Staff College of Marine Corps University, talked to us about US strategic relationships with other countries. The rest of the afternoon was dedicated to a computer simulation showing us a glimpse of what it is like to be a first-term member of the House of Representatives. We had to make quick decisions about what policies to support and how to handle a variety of situations. With each round, we received a report detailing how our constituents, colleagues, media, and other interested parties felt we were performing. It was a demonstration that a representative can never make everyone happy.
Day 4 started with a lesson on political campaigns and how to run one with Joe McLean, President of McLean/Clark. Then Timothy Brennan, Senior Fellow of Resources for the Future, talked about US energy policy. After lunch, Chris Hansen, President of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, talked to us about US health policy and specifically about the new Affordable Care Plan. The Assistant Vice President for Federal Relations of Ohio State University, Stacy Rastauskas, talked about lobbying Congress for federal funding for research and student loans. Lastly, Kevin Hassett, Senior Fellow and Director of Economic Policy Studies at American Enterprise Institute, made it just in time from testifying to Congress to talk to us about taxes, tax reform, and his ideas for improving the federal budget.
Our last day started with a talk from Shannon Penberthy, Associate Director of Federal Government Relations at P&G, about her work in lobbying Congress and advocacy strategy. Kiki McLean, Global Head of Public Affairs and Managing Director of Porter Novelli, talked about her work on Hilary Clinton’s campaign and how to manage a crisis. After taking our exam based on the readings and lectures throughout the week, we took a bus to the National Press Club. We had lunch, and then Steve Roberts, Professor of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University, talked to us about the changing role of media and its impact on public policy.
It was a fabulous week full of great information, and I highly recommend this course for anyone interested in business and how government and business interrelate.
Posted on Kelley’s blog on 28 September 2011:
It’s been over a week since I left Washington, DC after taking the one-week course, “Business and Public Policy: How Washington Works and What Issues Matter”. I’ve had some time to contemplate all that I learned and thought I would share some lessons from the week.
Companies react or respond to legislation and regulations in three different ways: 1) react to public policy when decisions are made, 2) monitor efforts toward public policy changes, and 3) directly participate.[1] Those companies using the first way generally have the most expenses for adjusting to legislation and regulation since it costs money to make those adjustments, especially when the company was not prepared for those changes. Companies that monitor public policy activity have less immediate adjustment costs since they can make slight adjustments over time as they see public policy forming in a certain direction. Companies that participate directly in the process have the highest costs for monitoring and lobbying but can potentially influence decisions that reduce adjustment costs. When companies evaluate which way they will react or respond to legislation and regulations, they also must consider what their competitors and other external organizations are doing. There is a potential for legislation and regulations to have larger effects on a company if the company does not directly participate and a competitor or other opposing groups do.
The word “lobbying” may have a negative connotation in the minds of many Americans. However, lobbying is a very important part of government and is necessary for educating representatives on the effects of legislation and regulations on constituents. In fact, lobbying is so important that it is protected by the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”[2] Consider this: legislators have many, many bills to consider each year. It is difficult to evaluate all of the effects and potential effects that a bill or regulation would have on individuals and companies. Lobbyists provide that information to legislators through research, surveys, or analyses that have been conducted. Information from all sides of an issue help legislators make educated decisions. The best way to influence public policy is through constituents; therefore, the most important job of a corporate lobbyist is to educate individual employees of the company on an issue so they will be inspired to contact representatives themselves.
Many Americans may have noticed that politics have become more and more party-based over the years. This observation is accurate for two main reasons. First, most moderates or independents do not know their representatives and never contact them for any reason. Therefore, representatives mainly hear from constituents who have strong opinions on the issues, thus pushing the parties further from midline opinion. Second, the costs of election campaigns have skyrocketed. Politicians must spend more time fundraising than ever before since television advertising is the best way to reach constituents and win elections. Since fundraising is done where constituents live, politicians don’t spend time together as they used to so they do not know each other or understand each other’s points of view.
These lessons have inspired me to become involved in the political process by knowing my representatives and expressing my opinions to them – both as a constituent and a representative to my company. This course has changed how I view Washington and has shown me that I can be part of the solution by speaking up instead of part of the problem by being silent. I will no longer stand by and watch; I will become active in the process of improving our nation. This course has been a highlight in my business education, and I highly recommend it.
[1] Keim, Gerry. Political Advocacy in the United States, Chapter 25, Managing Business Political Advocacy in the United States: Opportunities for Improved Effectiveness, pp. 418-433.
