John Denver: Conservation Crooner

April 2010 John Denver Conservation Crooner

“I’m a global citizen. I’ve created that for myself, and I don’t want to step away from it. I want to work in whatever I do…towards a world in balance, a world that creates a better quality of life for all people.” ― John Denver

Born Henry [...]]]>

John Denver: Conservation Crooner

April 2010
John Denver
Conservation Crooner

“I’m a global citizen. I’ve created that for myself, and I don’t want to step away from it. I want to work in whatever I do…towards a world in balance, a world that creates a better quality of life for all people.” ― John Denver

Born Henry John Deutschendorf, Jr., John Denver’s devotion to songwriting was matched only by his love for his fellow man and the planet. In addition to imbuing hit songs like “Rocky Mountain High” and “Take Me Home, Country Roads” with images of environmental beauty, Denver became an outspoken advocate for progressive causes such as homelessness, poverty, global hunger and the African AIDS crisis. Following his musical successes in the 1970s, Denver founded his own environmental group, the Windstar Foundation, in 1976. He’d go on to help establish the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; serve as on-camera narrator for “In Partnership with Earth” alongside then-EPA Administrator William Reilly for Earth Day 1990; and film an episode for the Nature television series focusing on the environmental inspiration for his songs. Denver devoted equal efforts to his fellow man. He served as a member of the Presidential Commission on World and Domestic Hunger and helped found the Hunger Project, a group dedicated to ending hunger around the world. Denver also used his fame as a songwriter to serve as a cultural ambassador to the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China, hoping to open cultural ties with the United States and promote peace. He remained a passionate progressive advocate until his death in 1997. Denver’s final song, “Yellowstone, I’m Coming Home,” was inspired by the beauty of rafting on the Colorado River.

Personally, one of my least favorite school activities as a student was report card day. While I often knew in advance what the report card would say, I was always anxious about my parents’ reaction. Knowledge may be power, but I think we can all admit that sometimes there are things we wish our [...]]]>

Personally, one of my least favorite school activities as a student was report card day. While I often knew in advance what the report card would say, I was always anxious about my parents’ reaction. Knowledge may be power, but I think we can all admit that sometimes there are things we wish our parents didn’t know about our academic achievements – or lack thereof.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/amboo213/ / CC BY-SA 2.0

Like our younger selves, policymakers don’t like report cards, but the tactic can definitely get an organization noticed in the media and the public. More advocacy organizations are using report cards — or scorecards — to draw attention to the performance (i.e. voting record) of Congressional and state legislators on a variety of policy issues.

Recently Environment America — a nonprofit, nonpartisan environmental advocacy organization — issued their annual Congressional scorecard. It identified members of Congress who are “Washington’s environmental champs” – policymakers who voted for the environment 100% of the time in the past 18 months on major environmental issues. The scorecard also called out policymakers who are “natural disasters” and did not support environmental legislation and/or issues. State affiliates of Environment America also replicate this approach and release scorecards focusing on their state’s representatives, as Environment Washington did in December.

Outside of the environmental movement, other advocacy groups also use the scorecard as a tool to bring awareness to and action on their issue. For example, the Human Rights Campaign issues a Congressional Scorecard each year to show how members of Congress have voted on equality issues. The Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law has an interactive Web site dedicated to their annual scorecards on how Representatives and Senators voted  on anti-poverty legislation. The Web site even allows visitors to compare legislators’ grades.

Federal and state policymakers don’t like their voting records publicized and publicly evaluated. Their constituents (policymakers’ “parents” in this metaphor) are often unaware of the voting behavior and legislative actions of their representatives, and a scorecard can provide them a new, easy to understand viewpoint to evaluate their representative’s performance.

Issuing scorecards can also open doors for organizations looking to build relationships and alliances with key policymakers. Media coverage resulting from a scorecard release draws attention from Capitol Hill and state legislative staffers to your organization and may inspire — or force in an election year like this one — legislators to change their viewpoint and voting record on an issue.  In addition, scorecards provide valuable, concise information and data to reporters covering that policy issue and will help position your organization as an expert and resource for future insights.

In spite of the discomfort it causes lawmakers, the scorecard/report card approach is an effective tool in the policy communications arsenal to expand an organization’s message exposure. Hopefully, it will reinforce supportive policymakers to continue championing the issue or pressure failing legislators to improve their grade and make the honor roll on their next report card.