Liberty group leaders – what is your objective?


Liberty group leader – what is your objective? I’ve asked this question to hundreds of people, and at any given time only a handful of people have a definitive idea of what they are trying to accomplish.

Most say something like – “To save the country.” Or, “To get rid of Obama.” Another regular response is, “To uphold the Constitution.” But, perhaps the most common response is – “To take the country back.”

I would imagine these responses sound familiar to you – probably even resonate with you. They certainly resonate with me. But then I ask the question that stumps far too many people – how do you define success on those ideas?

How do you know if you are any closer to saving the country or upholding the Constitution? What happens if Obama is re-elected? Does that mean the country wasn’t “taken back”?

You see – far too often, liberty group leaders and the “tea party movement” as a whole aren’t defining their objectives or success. Real success can be defined, measured, accomplished and re-stated as success or failure and hopefully duplicated.

The article below from Michael Rothfeld hit me as particularly relevant in the wake of the campaign frenzied craziness of 2012 and the relationships that many liberty group leaders have formed across Ohio with their legislators or political leadership at the state and county levels.

I fear too many liberty group leaders are settling on access to elected officials and a sense of belonging to a club to which they were previously excluded and thinking this is enough. It isn’t.

Who cares who holds office, title or position if the policies don’t change. The objective isn’t to change a person or persons – the objective is to change the policies, because only by changing the policies can we “take the country back,” “uphold the Constitution” and “save the country.”

Of note – there are really only three ways to change policy in Ohio (short of legal intervention, which has great potential BTW):

1. Direct Citizen’s Initiative (like Healthcare Freedom Amendment) – achieves desired policy result by changing policy at ballot box- directly through voters

2. Change the people who make policy – by placing people in office who will actually achieve the desired policy – obviously only possible through the voters

3. Influence the people making policy – only possible if they fear you can affect their re-election – through the voters

As you can see – electoral impact is paramount in achieving policy success, which is the only way to accomplish all the things we want to see happen in the state and nation. If you build a group and system that can achieve electoral impact, and then push policy in these key areas – nothing can stop you.

So – you’ve got to ask yourself – do want to have real electoral impact and change policy? Or will you be content with saying the right things, but never actually impacting elections. Will you be content being a member of the club, or will you push the club in a direction that advocates for liberty as the end?

My fear in the 2012 elections is that too many people will take their eyes off the real goal of changing policy, by putting their faith and trust into people who don’t actually care to advance the right policy, but are content to embrace your exuberance because it’s convenient for the moment (see 2010 for a case study).

By investing your energy into the current crop of candidates as an exclusive means to change things (which seems highly unlikely given their background), you may just be neglecting the very thing your group needs to facilitate real and meaningful change – resources, infrastructure and a long lasting coalition not dependent on candidates – but on policies achieved with common liberty minded principles as the guide.

What will you take away from 2012 that is defined, measured, accomplished and can be re-stated as success or failure – even duplicated in the future. If your investment of time and money is going into a candidate – what is the expected result? Don’t wake up November 7th with nothing to show for your work. Whether your guy wins or loses – are you advancing your ability to change policy or not?

Bottom line – are you defining success in the right terms?

Don’t be content with access to shiny people, or with a little pat on the head. Only be content when the policies you desire come to fruition and you can confidently say, my group can unquestionably define and duplicate our success even without a candidate or party. At that point – we the people are back!

Enjoy the article below from a political strategist names Michael Rothfeld. I think you’ll find the read very informative in how you’ll define success in the future. Not sure of time his article was written as this was e-mailed to me in a document with no link.

Must Read!

By Michael I. Rothfeld

Few of the lectures I give on political technology and campaigning make people as agitated as this one.

None is more important.

Simply put, politics is not about the common good, appealing to men’s better angels, nor serving our Lord.  These may be your motivations.  I pray they are mine.  Occasionally, they will be a politician’s motivation.

Politics is the adjudication of power.  It is the process by which people everywhere determine who rules whom.

In America, through a brilliant system of rewards and punishments, checks and balances, and diffusion of authority, we have acquired a habit and history of politics mostly without violence and excessive corruption.

The good news for you and me is that the system works.

The bad news is it is hard, and sometimes unpleasant work, for us to succeed in enacting policy.

There is absolutely no reason for you to spend your time, talent, and money in politics except for this:  If you do not, laws will be written and regulations enforced by folks with little or no interest in your well-being.

The following pages may challenge everything you thought you knew about politics, and everything you have been told about politics from your high school civics teacher to the lead editorial writer in your local paper to the politics “expert” at a respected organization.

But if you read carefully and understand, you will become capable of leading a successful fight for your values.

Politicians — Not Education and Not Public Opinion — Make Policy

The first mistake most folks make when they set out on a good-faith crusade to do good is to completely misunderstand their targets.

Sometimes, activists make the local newspaper or media the target.  The thinking goes, “If we can just get them to understand the problem, things will change.”  It is fortunate that this is not correct, because the media in the U.S. is overwhelmingly committed to big government, gun control, and the supremacy of state-controlled education over parent controlled education.

The fact is newspapers cast no votes.  The national evening news controls no elections.  If this were not true, Ronald Reagan would never have been President.

An even more common mistake is to believe that the key to victory is education.

The “education is the key to political victory” theory claims that if we educate people as to the problem and the solution, then the elected officials will fall in line.


Polls show huge majorities of Americans in favor of parental notification before a minor has an abortion.  Yet the mere mention of the issue drives most politicians into fits of terror.  Similarly, three-quarters of the American people oppose forced-unionism and favor Right to Work laws; however, such laws exist in only 22 states.

It is important to understand the two reasons why the education theory of politics is a mistake.

First, the theory assumes no opposing “education” effort.  This is rarely the case.

Polls showed a majority in California favored education choice, yet the 1992 School Voucher Referendum lost 2-1 on election day.  Why?  Because the NEA-teachers’ union bosses and pro-government-school-monopoly forces out-organized school choice forces, had a more focused message, and spent a lot more money.

The second, and more important, reason the “education is the key” theory fails lies in the nature of politics and politicians.

Policy in the Margins: Why Grass-Roots Politics Works

What follows is a generalized breakdown of voting in any given election:

People Percent for Victory
100%, all people 50%, plus 1
70% eligible to vote (excludes aliens, felons, and minors) 35%, plus 1
40% registered to vote (approximately 60% of eligible) 20%, plus 1
20% vote on election day (50% of registered voters) 10%, plus 1
7% almost always vote Republican  
7% almost always vote Democrat  
6% swing votes 3%, plus1

Three percent of the populations plus one voter.  Here is where politicians live and die.

In some local and state elections where turnout may be only 20 percent of registered voters, the margin may be far less than three percent plus one.

The average politician lives in constant fear of alienating any substantial portion of this three percent plus one voter he needs in a hotly contested race to win re-election, or to gain higher office.

What is the best way not to alienate these voters?  Do nothing to make them mad, which almost always means … do nothing.

This is why even when new politicians are elected, little seems to change.  Inertia — or the status quo — is the most potent force in politics.

However, by mobilizing and directing voters rallying around a specific issue, you can change the political environment for a politician or even a group of politicians.  One relatively small group can make it more costly for the politician not to act than it is for him or her to act as you want him to.

This is what I mean when I say that policy is made at the margins.  Over time, the number and effectiveness of activists determines political success or failure.

This is also why the homosexual lobby, labor unions, and organized groups so often get legislation they want.  They have groups of voters who can, and will, vote on their issue alone.  And they often have workers and sometimes money to use against any politician who crosses them.

By becoming a grass-roots leader, you can, too.

That’s where the fun, and the danger, begins.

How Politicians React to Pressure

In a better world, you would mobilize, the politicians would immediately agree to do everything you want, the policy would be changed, and we would all live happily ever after.

Of course, it rarely happens that way.

When a provision harmful to homeschooling parents was located in the 1994 Education Bill (H.R.6), Mike Farris’ Home School Legal Defense Association directed some one million calls and letters to Congress in a three-week period.  The amendment to strip out the offending language passed the U.S. House of Representatives 434-1.  Another amendment by Representative Dick Armey (R-TX) to positively protect home schoolers passed 374-53.

It was a rout.

The rout occurred not just because the home schooling community was so mobilized (though they were) but because they were mobilized for a very specific purpose, to which there was virtually no organized opposition.

It was an easy decision for members of the House of Representatives.

This is not the case for most controversial issues.  It is certainly not true for any legislation relating to the right to keep and bear arms or abortion or right to work.

So how will a politician react to your organized pressure when he knows there is or is certain to be, organized pressure against your position?

The first thing the politician will do is try to make you go away without giving you anything of substance.  If he gives you anything of substance, then those organized on the other side will be mad.

So most politicians will try to make you quit by intimidation, explanation, or buying you off.

Many politicians — especially those used to being treated like royalty rather than public servants — may try to threaten and intimidate.  Statements such as, “If you ever try something like this again, I’ll vote against you for sure,” or “I’ll tell the newspaper you’re a trouble-maker” are not uncommon.  A rudely spoken, “I don’t know who you think you are, but that’s not how we do things here, and no one will work with you again” followed by a slammed-down phone receiver is another favorite.

Remember, you are not running for office.  The politician is.  Then remember the three percent plus one voter margin, and double your efforts to mobilize.

Before long, even this politician will go to a new tactic.

Most likely, a politician (whether or not intimidation is attempted) will seek to placate you by “explaining” what he or she calls “the political reality.”  Sometimes the explanation may be made by a surrogate for the politician; a member of his staff, a lobbyist or even, in many cases, a well-known advocate for your issue.

The message usually takes the basic form of, “I’ve been doing this for a long time and believe me, I share your concerns but we just can’t pass that bill right now,” or “even if we could pass what your people want, the Governor (or President or a judge) will kill it,” or “It’s the best we could do,” or simply “We’ll lose.”

First of all, so what?  Rome was not built in a day, nor is major policy passed overnight.  Sometimes it may take years.  But policy will never change if politicians never vote on it.

Policy is changed one vote — one politician — at a time.

Second of all, the reason this is often true is that politicians succeed in ducking difficult votes, thus preventing voters from ever knowing exactly where they stand.

Your job as a grassroots leader is to convey to the politician your supporters’ insistence on his or her personal, public and on-the-record support for your position.

Of course, you do want to pass your legislation (or defeat your opponent’s legislation), but first and foremost, you want the politician’s complete public support.  As an aside, a commitment in writing is better than a verbal commitment, and a vote on the most controversial piece of the bill (not necessarily final passage) is better than a written commitment.

Private promises are worthless.

When you have insisted on the politician’s support for your position, they will then try to buy you off.  Here is where the best grass-roots leaders fail.

Power, Access and Selling Out

Politics can be seductive.

The chance to rub elbows with elected officials, being looked up to by people in your community as someone in the know, invitations to and recognition at special events, being quoted in the media, helping to write “acceptable” compromise language, an appointment to some committee or task force, or even a paid job in the politician’s office or campaign — all this could be yours if you become a grassroots leader.  These are the trinkets for which leaders sell out their political agenda.

Of course, most everyone thinks he is strong enough, smart enough, and committed enough not to sell out.  Few people are.

Before long, instead of delivering to the politician the grassroots’ message to pass or defeat specific legislation, you become the politician’s representative, telling grass-roots activists what they must settle for.

Right now, today, decide whether you want access or power.

Access is calling a politician and having him take your call.  He listens to what you want, and may or may not do it.  It is what most grassroots leaders end up settling for.  This is the way most non-controversial (e.g. business accounting before Enron) and high-interest versus low-opposition (e.g. farm subsidies) political business is done.

Power is the ability to tell a politician what you want, and either get it or deliver substantial pain (maybe even get a new politician) at the next election.  This is the ONLY way ideological, controversial legislation can be passed or defeated (e.g. abortion, guns or homosexual special rights).

Again, I urge you to remember the three percent plus one voter.

You and your grassroots group may be able to single-handedly bring the politician down.  Or perhaps you will be one of a handful of groups organizing at the next election.

No matter what, you will make it harder for the politician to win re-election, costing him extra time and money.

If the politician loses, every other elected official will fear you and your group.

If the politician wins, he (and other politicians) will remember the extra pain you caused him.  And he will know you may do it again or worse.  When you return to continue fighting for what you believe in, you will find him and his colleagues more willing … and surprisingly, sometimes more gracious (though do not count on the latter; personal pleasantness is cheap coin).

As the late Everett Dirksen said, “When I feel the heat, I see the light.”

Winning in the Long Run

There is a great deal more I could tell you.

  • How to recruit for your grassroots organization.
  • How best to communicate with politicians.
  • The differences between offensive and defensive legislative strategies.
  • Choosing a leader who is an elected official (Hint: Be very careful).
  • When and how to use the media.
  • The best ways to raise money for the short-term and the long-term.

But what I would like to close with is the importance of taking a long-term approach to fighting for your values.  If you remember from the beginning of this article, I said the good news is that the system works.  I hope by now you see what I mean.  Namely, the politicians are still subservient to the people who elected them … to you and me.  However, most of the time, a fight to really make a difference may take years.  This is especially true the further from local politics you get.

It’s true Mike Farris and the Home School Legal Defense Foundation won the battle for home schoolers in the U.S. Congress in just a few weeks as described above.  But Mike Farris spent years building his organization of home schoolers.  More importantly, as I noted, there was little or no opposition to the mobilized home schooling force.

Since then, in fights to pass any kind of school choice — much more, a full tax credit — the results have been very different.  In fact, President George W. Bush easily abandoned the conservative opposition to federalized education and passed the No Child Left Behind Act with overwhelming Republican support.  The size and effectiveness of the advocates of bigger government schools dwarfs those of us who are committed to school choice.

When you first start out, expect not to be taken seriously; especially if you insist upon principle and refuse to compromise or to be bought off.

The key will be for you and your grassroots activists to aggressively make politicians pay a price for their failure to pay attention to their constituents (you and your group).  Every year, every session of the legislature, you must return pushing for your principles.  And every election, you must cause pain to as many politicians as possible; starting with those who claim to support your cause, but vote and act in opposition.

At the same time, you should be continually recruiting more members, raising more money, and expanding the areas in which you are active.

By doing this, you can win in the long run.

Mike Rothfeld is a 24-year political consultant with a national reputation for political confrontation and success.  He has taught political tactics to thousands of activists and guided the formation and growth of many gun rights organizations, including Rocky Mountain Gun Owners and the National Association for Gun Rights

Share this article

Recent posts

Popular categories


  1. Good points all. As a “liberty” candidate for US Senate is frustrates me that people who wax poetic about liberty issues more often than not do not put their words into actions. They sadly revert to tribal politics when pressed too hard. You are not going to change the policies until you change the players in the game. Politicians will tell you what you want to hear & more often than not “go native” once they get to DC. You need to seek out candidates that are not new to the liberty cause who have a track record of preaching liberty well before the tea party movement emerged.

Recent comments

Chris from Holmes County on Why Conservative Ohioans Oppose John Kasich
chrislittleton on My Case Against Saint Nick
chrislittleton on My Case Against Saint Nick
chrislittleton on Why I Left Ohio
Danielle on Why I Left Ohio
Eric on Why I Left Ohio
chrislittleton on Why I Left Ohio
chrislittleton on Why I Left Ohio
Eric on Why I Left Ohio
Thomas Cochrane on Why I Left Ohio
Chris Gallion on Why I Left Ohio
Cody RAgle on Why I Left Ohio
Marlene on Why I Left Ohio
mileaway on Why I Left Ohio
Kevin Donahoe on Stealing the Future
Kevin Donahoe on Stealing the Future
chrislittleton on Stealing the Future
Kara Coates on Stealing the Future
chrislittleton on America Is Not Dead
chrislittleton on America Is Not Dead
chrislittleton on States to Stop ‘Obamacare’
chrislittleton on America Is Not Dead
chrislittleton on America Is Not Dead
Theresa on America Is Not Dead
chrislittleton on America Is Not Dead
chrislittleton on America Is Not Dead
Ronda Miller on America Is Not Dead
chrislittleton on Obama won – what now?
Ronda Miller on America Is Not Dead
chrislittleton on America Is Not Dead
The Old Coach on America Is Not Dead
chrislittleton on Obama won – what now?
chrislittleton on Obama won – what now?
Shawn Blauser on Obama won – what now?
AndyKatona on Obama won – what now?
chrislittleton on Why is Romney losing in Ohio?
chrislittleton on Why is Romney losing in Ohio?
Born Christian American on The GOP can, because you’ll take it
Born Christian American on The GOP can, because you’ll take it
Len Pohlarlp on GOP Rules Mess Gets Worse
Tiffany Hoelscher on Why Ron Paul in 2 Minutes
Andrew Benage on Why Ron Paul in 2 Minutes
Larry Mc Phillips on Death of the Tea Party
Don Goodman on Death of the Tea Party
Tod Mills on Death of the Tea Party
Susan Sharpless on Death of the Tea Party