Search

How do nonprofits empower themselves? In this paper we analyze nonprofit advocacy in city politics, emphasizing especially their interaction with local policymakers. First we discuss what we call the "politics of place" in cities, examining the participation of three types of citywide and neighborhood nonprofits. The second section develops two lines of inquiry and articulates a set of hypotheses that grow out of a theoretical construct relating to low barriers to entry. Next, after describing the empirical methodology, those hypotheses are tested with data derived from large scale surveys in 50 of the nation's largest cities. The subjects of these three surveys are city councilors, agency administrators, and interest group advocates. We find that access to policymakers in city politics is relatively easy as the barriers to entry for advocates is quite low. Not surprisingly the evidence points to a privileged position for business, though neighborhood associations also stand out in terms of incorporation into the policymaking process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Washington: The Real No-Spin ZoneAbstractA broad and enduring belief holds that strategic politicians are often able to reframe issues when existing issue definitions are working to their disadvantage. Both scholars and journalists have written extensively about the process by which clever advocates push new frames that alter the way in which an issue is understood. The best known example of this is the reframing of late term abortions as "partial birth abortions." We test this basic proposition, drawing on a large-scale study of Washington policymaking. Specifically, we utilize more than 300 interviews conducted for 98 separate cases to measure the frequency of reframing. We monitored these 98 issues over time from our initial interviews to a follow-up interview 18-24 months later. Our conclusion is that full or partial reframing is exceedingly rare. Three broad lines of reasoning provide a framework for understanding why reframing is so uncommon. In turn we discuss explanations relating to resources, political realities, and beliefs. We conclude by arguing that initial frames tend to be stable and over time debate revolves around the core, not the surface of issues. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]