Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter One: The Ties
Ted Mondale, son of former Vice President Walter Mondale, took me into his garage for a fitting of the ties. Unbeknonst to yours truly, Ted was parting ways with his youthful and still politically green field campaign worker that day. The honor was really mine, as Ted is a great employer, and perfect at the timing of "letting personel go".
"Doctor", as Ted liked to call me, "take any of these ties you want. Some are mine, and some were given to me by my father." Which means in my green eyes, some of these had been worn at the White House.
I can imagine the silk two-toned ties chosen somehow helping President Carter and Vice President Mondale make it through all those tough nights hoping and searching for an end to the Iranian Hostage Crisis, or backstage at a campaign event in the protracted debacle that was the Reagan/Carter contest. So I chose five and left the garage with a smile on my face knowing that someday I'd be on a political campaign again.... Ah, Democracy. Once it's in your blood, it's there forever.
I don't blame the campaign staff led by Tina Smith for insisting on my release. After all, I stepped into a big pile of manure, literally, by accident more or less, earlier that month - which justified my release. See, the local NPR Radio was having a debate on what to do with the millions of gallons of hog waste and manure being generated at larger-than-normal factory farms in Minnesota. Most of the hog farms dotting the prairie landscape when we were growing up contained maybe a thousand head at the largest. But due to the consolidation in the hog industry, farmers were joining forces or having their smaller operations bought up by feedlot corporations. The result was large - too large according to environmentalists - hog farms, you should pardon the expression. The waste and manure from these massive "factory farms", as they were called, created air pollution in the form of sulfides and leeching of manure into streams, rivers, and lakes throughout the state.
So the debate that day centered on a moratorium being pushed by environmental non-profits to limit the size of each of these operations, thereby to limit the quantity of emmissions of air and water pollution to more manageble levels. Ted's campaign staff had developed an alternative policy on these hog feed lots; rather than focus on a moratorium based on an arbitrary number of hogs, Ted's policy was that regulations on hog manure needed to occur for all sizes of operations, and yours truly got the hairbrained notion to call into the radio debate to espouse our solution.
Well, to say the least, it didn't go so well, and Ms.Smith took exception to me representing the campaign in such a way on public radio. I recall being told by the campaign manager at the time that field staff, meaning me, do not belong on the radio, even if I articulated our policy position clearly and accurately.
The two-toned ties served me well in subsequent interviews, and I was able to land a phone position at Clean Water Action in Minneapolis. Clean Water Action likes to think of itself as a progressive organization, and is ultimately responsible for pushing Minnesota away from reliance on coal and nuclear energy, and toward development of wind and solar with the passage of CWA-backed energy legislation. I lasted about three months at CWA until one night I was assigned to train a new employee on the intracisies of phone canvassing. Much to my surprise, the new employee stated "I know who you are. You're the traitor." In other words, because I worked for a governor's campaign that put forward a policy position on hog manure regulation which fundamentally differed from the policy position at Clean Water Action, I was dubbed a traitor to the cause. Thus the non-profit oganization, carrying the banner of the hog waste cause and carrying the legislation and fundraising efforts, felt slighted. Another lesson in politics: policy matters.
I walked across busy Hennepin Avenue that night and never returned to Clean Water Action. I figured that was the end of politics for me, and I would take one of the two-toned-ties to a temporary agency and hone my computer skills at a for-profit corporation in Minneapolis. Much to my surprise, I got a call from the old Mondale campaign manager the next day. He explained that there was a research director position available in Iowa on the campaign of then State Senator Tom Vilsack's gubernatorial cmpaign. See, Governor Terry Branstead had decided not to run for governor that year so the contest came down to State Senator Vilsack versus Congressman Jim Lightfoot. The salary was very generous for a guy from Minnesota with little to show for his first foray into gubernatorial politics; some two-toned silk ties and a Ph.D. in political science. So I jumped at the opportunity.
I loaded up my Volkswagen and headed down to Des Moine on I-35 for job placement and desk duty. I had no idea that research directors worked six days a week for twelve to sixteen hours a day and six hours on sundays. But then, so do most of the campaign staff at statewide or national races.
Redemption occurs daily in America, I thought. What dumb luck to be fired as a field staff person and then hired as a research campaign director on a completely different campaign in a completely new state all within two business quarters.
This political research, after all was going to work out for me, since research is my strong suit, and, well, no one could stop my success now. I would organize like Paul Wellstone had taught me, and stick to the facts, like Ted Mondale had insisted on. Really, truthfully, if you want to get something great built in Minnesota, like lightrails or a new stadium, get a Mondale on it and you'll succeed.
Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter Two: The Car
As I drove down Interstate 35 to Iowa from Minneapolis, Minnesota, I thought back to a recent conversation I had with Senator Paul Wellstone. We discussed the effects of low levels of radiation from daily doses to larger levels of exposure due to the emmitance from moving radioactive water and debris from cooling ponds inside nuclear plants at Monticello and Prairie Island into dry storage casks. Such emmitances were frequently the subject of "a-connect-the-dots-campaign" by some of the scientists who had worked on the Manhattan Project, and all MIT grads to boot. The theory that I debated with the good Senator centered on whether or not citizens exposed to daily low-level doses of radiation from nuclear plants had increased rates of cancer. The scientists espousing this theory had done measurements of such doses at nuclear plants across the United States, and noticed a trend that cancer levels decreased within one hundred miles of nuclear plants that had been recently decommisioned.
Senator Wellstone argued the point that government studies were needed on local populations around nuclear plants to see if cancer rates had risen since their construction and fallen since decommisioning. Ask residents that live near the nuclear plant at Prairie Island, Minnesota, they would say yes. Many of their fellow community members had indeed passed on due to unexplained cancers. I thought about what kind of research I would be doing once on foot in the gubernatorial campaign, how to best organize it, and the challenges of presenting it to a candidate for governor and campaign staff. I rolled down my windows, opened the sky roof, and enjoyed the five speed VW ride.
It took a few hours to get to the Iowa border, but once I crossed over, I could tell that this was going to be different from Minnesota. Within forty-five minutes of being in Iowa, I could smell manure, and see endless rows of corn. Strong, almost overpowering, was the stench of manure from feedlots. With the sulfides making my eyes water, I hoped that if I drove faster, somehow - I would escape the rotten egg-like quality of the air. No dice; the stench was everywhere and coming from nowhere all at the same time. Finally upon nearing Ames and then Des Moines, the air turned back to breatheable.
I entered the Vilsack campaign headquarters around 3 pm that afternoon, and was quickly introduced to the staff on hand at the time. First order of business was to explain to the candidate's inquisitive driver why I would not be selling my car. See, he was a loyal party member, and apparently my Volkswagen, as a "foreign car" would send the wrong image for the campaign. Naturally, my response was "forget it". My car is a product of NAFTA. It was made in Germany, with some parts made in Mexico, imported into the United States via Canada, and assembled in South Carolina. If NAFTA was good enough for a democratic President to sign, then surely my car was good enough to be driven by the Research Director at a campaign in Iowa.
My argument seemed sound enough; however, it won me no friends on the staff for keeping my car. That car came in so handy on many research missions for the candidate. Campaigns for governor are statewide affairs. It's why senators make good gubernatorial candidates - and why governors make good senatorial candidates - because once you win a statewide race, the candidate then knows how to work the state itself geographically speaking and how every town can make or break your candidacy, putting you over the top or presenting the last wall to victory.
My first assignment was a bit uncomfortable. I was so glad to pursue it from the comforts of a fully functioning five speed VW. See, before doing research for the candidate, I had to do research on the candidate. In this case, on his law practice and rulings he was associated with during his time as a lawyer. This type of opposition research is necessary for modern campaigns, since the campaign needs to know from former coworkers, family and trusted friends, what dirt can be thrown up against our candidate, prior to the press or the other campaign knowing about it, and using that dirt for a storyline or attack ad.
So here I am, straight out of Minneapolis, interviewing law partners and close personal friends of Tom Vilsack with the express purpose of discovering his dirt first. Now I'm not popular in the campaign for two reasons; digging up dirt, and driving an "imported" car.
Honestly, if you're good at opposition research, it will definitely put you in some extremely uncomfortable situations, especially with the close personal friends of a candidate, who tend to resent the line of questioning one must ask to do a good job. Taxes, infidelity, work history - all subjects that are uncomfortable for the best of friends to discuss, must be known for research, and to anticipate an attack ad on your new boss. We need to know first, this was the directive, of course the hardest part was borne out by those I inteviewed, since the candidate, State Senator Vilsack at the time, exemplified grace, faith, and family. He was well thought of, even by his political opponents, and had rather easily been vetted prior to my arrival in a primary campaign, so I was merely going one step deeper, or intrusive, depending on the point of view. I asked my questions, got my answers in a straightforward way, and was really impressed by the honesty and candor of those I interviewed. In modern political campaigns, opponents almost always take things out of context to try to persuade the public that a candidate is anything but honest and straightforward.
My research on Iowa voters and voting patterns suggested otherwise. Iowans, in polling data, had systematically reinforced that the ethics of a candidate was as important to them as his/her policies on healthcare, education, agriculture, environment, class-sizes, retirement income, home care, energy, and taxes. To the people interviewed at length in these polls, there were still virtues of honesty in the culture of Iowa, and candidates who did not adhere to this ethics line did so at their own peril. Iowans loved their hog farms and could tell when a candidate was full of manure.
So I stepped into campaign headquarters again with the opposition research files, hoping that my first effort at gubernatorial research would be well thought of and useful for the candidate and his staff. Next up was a drive to the State Capital to meet with Senate researchers and photocopy every piece of legislation, or amendments to legislation, or legislative opinions ever written or voted on by State Senator Vilsack.
Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter Three: The Dummy Waiter
To get the exhaustive record of a state senator in Iowa in 1998, one would have had to employ the services of a dumb waiter. Legislative records at that time were kept in very large, leather-bound books in the legislative Library. Each book weighed twenty pounds at least, and were to be checked out one at a time. The leather bound books were kept in stacks some seventy-five steps high. It was up the spiral staircase to find the correct volume, then walk it to the dumb waiter, then down the spiral staircase to the first floor and use the dumb waiter to bring each volume to you, and proceed with copying. This process took a full forty-hour work week, and tried my patience, as no other process of research had before. I was looking for the needle in the haystack, so to speak, as my main goal was not only to photocopy the obvious bills and amendments to bills before the legislature, but also to find the obscure votes my candidate had taken on issues that might seem mundane at the time but could be taken out of context to smear his reputation.
One such example ocurred with an amendment to a legislative bill to bring the Statue of David to Iowa using government appropriations. Our opponent, Representative Lightfoot, had taken a moralistic tone to his candadicy, betting that churchgoing Iowans would back him for Governor, and arguing for himself on moral grounds -- God, Faith, and Guns, so his slogan went, I recall. One day, quite early in the campaign, Representative Lightfoot had put out a commercial that a vote for Vilsack was a vote for pornography, and cited the amendment to appropriate government tax dollars to bring "naked art" to Iowa. By "naked art", he meant specifically the Statue of David, a world reknowned sculpture from Italy. Deep in my legislative research, I found the amendment he was using as campaign fodder and within days our candidate had a new commerical explaining what Lightfoot was really distorting -- in other words, fighting political distortion with the truth, and a correct legislative record. Never had my instincts been spot on as that moment, and as my earlier research showed, Iowans responded to our ethics and honesty with a bump in the polls.
That lesson was not lost on our commerical and advertising team as we began to use legislative footnotes in all our commercials going forward. Now I must inform you that there are a great many discussions that go into any political commercial. There are communications coworkers with their polling data, as well as advertising agencies with an entirely different set of data, and there are field reports given to a research director and campaign manager, which are compiled by those in the field canvassing Iowans at their doors. To me, I put more stock in the field research, and this almost cost me my job. Let me explain.
We were looking for a commercial to appeal to Iowans on healthcare, and getting little traction on the standard "Healthcare, because we care" line of reasoning, or so field research put forth. What the field research did say positively was Iowans would respond to healthcare as it relates to elderly care and nursing homes specifically. The demographics of Iowa were small towns, more small towns than any other state, with an aging population due to youthful flight to cities like Des Moines, St. Paul, and Minneapolis. Just about everyone in the State had someone they loved in a nursing home, or were retiring soon, or retired already and looking at nursing home care as a solution to long term healthcare needs, so this was really a no brainer.
Since field research aligned with demographic changes in the population, we needed to focus our healthcare commercials on nursing homes. Pushback came from David Axelrod himself on a conference call with his ad shop in Chicago. I recall him arguing "I'm not taking content directions for our million dollar commercial from some research director from Minnesota." As such, I figured I would take the advice of my campaign manager and take a few days off. Which I did, and it was great, I went back to Minnesota, recorded music with my original rock band, the Executive Branch, had a hoot, and got refreshed.
When I returned, there was a new healthcare commercial for me to review content-wise, with an emphasis on Tom Vilsack's legislative record supporting nursing home care, with footnotes for verification purposes. Sometimes you need to know when to walk away... Did one commercial turn the campaign around? Absolutely not, but it was great to know I had the confidence of a political master such as David Axelrod.
Time off during a gubernatorial campaign is rare indeed. I was on call or in the office every day, sixteen hours a day, with a good six hours on Sunday. So you get to know your coworkers quite well, given the amount of time spent together all with the same common goal of getting a governor elected. This was surprising to me given the competitive nature of those drawn to politics and political campaigns. Sometimes, the competition, internally, is just ruthless. For example, the file cabinet episode.
One day, I arrived to find my research files thrown about campaign -headquarters. Folders and research files taken from a steel cabinet with a locked door by my desk, strange indeed. Someone had smashed the corner of the file cabinet and grabbed as many research folders as possible, out of the cabinet and placed them where they were visible in the campaign rooms. Why? What motive would you have if you were going to steal research from a campaign and leave research in that office? Just strange.
To make lemons into lemonade, I decided to use my time wisely to build a wall of distraction. First step was to get a new file cabinet. Next was to recycle all of the current research out in the open and build a new set of research files on the topics that were lying around. Second, I retaliated personally by looking at the personal, i.e psychological, research on Representative Lightfoot. If someone was going to try to psych me out, then let's fight fire with fire. The personal profile of Representative Lightfoot was contained in a number of reliable sources. The best, however, was in a free music magazine that specialized in political articles and where to go to hear live bands in the Des Moines Area. This profile stated very clearly that Representative Lightfoot had an ego which could not be challenged. That if he was questioned on the voracity of his statements, he would get testy and if then shown publicly to be incorrect, his testiness would turn to anger. In essence, rule one: Jim is always right, if you have a question, refer to rule one.
We had him. In the next debate, I would try to find some time to prep our candidate with the express purpose of getting Representative Lightfoot to lose his composure, and to keep our candidate calm..... a challenge, but not undoable. In other words, turn his ego from a strength to a liability. Perhaps get a bonus coverage by catching him in a lie onstage or a distortion on live TV.
Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter Four: The Price of Corn
State Senator Vilsack had garnered the endorsement of a major farming members organization and the Sierra Club, an environmental organization with national roots. This was an unique combination of endorsements considering at the time most farming organizations did not meet eye to eye with environmental groups since mechanized agriculture creates challenges for soil, air, land, and water conservation and protection. Farmers in Iowa, like farmers everywhere, are uniquely suited to know how to take care of the environment upon which they depend for a living. However, changes had occured in agricultural communities whereby family farms were being bought by agrobusiness corporations, some of which had no roots in Iowa, or to any connection to the land via an Iowan family.
Thus, tensions certainly existed between those seeking to preserve the family farm, agrobusiness corporations, and those wanting to protect the environment. State Senator Vilsack's approach was textbook Iowan, as he wanted to balance the interests and concerns of all of those involved in agriculture and land use and had been a realistic advocate for finding common ground on a host of related issue. Thus endorsements from groups often thought of as contested, in his case, flowed freely.
The next debate was coming, and I needed to remind the good Senator that these endorsements mattered, and to figure out a way to get Representative Lightfoot to lose his composure. To accomplish the first goal, I set out eight-by-eleven sheets of paper in campaign headquarters and in the candidate's personal office, with the names of the two endorsing organizations in rather large font. He wasn't very pleased with me for doing this, but sometimes in order to get the candidate's attention, one must resort to over the top reminders of the message. To accomplish the second goal, I simply argued in debate preparations with the candidate himself to focus on a simple fact -- to ask Jim Lightfoot, for instance, the price of corn. And to know the answer by the bushel, market value, and recent trends in the price of corn, a percurssor to being able to respond to a Lightfoot dodge of the question, or retort to the good Senator in the debate.
Well, during that debate, agricultural policy came up, State Senator Vilsack mentioned his endorsements, and Representative Lightfoot was embarassed by not knowing the price of corn, while State Senator Vilsack did, they call it debate prep for a reason.
One of the best memories for me on the campaign was my role during the debates. I had a desk set up with all of my research, organized by topic, and in alphabetical order. When Representative Lightfoot would make outrageous statements, lie outright about State Senator Vilsack's record, or distort his own record in Congress on any of the major issues being debated, I was ready. In real time, I was able to pull up the correct record, vote, or quote, and hand it off to the communications director, who somehow got it into the candidate's hand who then corrected the record live on TV, a thing of beauty.
The art of telling the truth on live telivision cannot be measured or emphasized enough. Everyone has heard of fake news being created to distort the record of an opponent in a campaign, summed up by the phrase "going negative." It's really easy to go negative on a political opponent -- just find something in their past that is questionable, and bring it up to the media first. In this way, the opponent has to deny the accusation in order to respond to it, which is the second round of that topic being in the news cycle. Of course, the media will seek comment from the perpetrator of the accusation, about the denial, and the public is exposed to a third news cycle on an issue that began with a false accusation. Add the swirling vortex that is internet media sites and a full-blown crisis develops.
One response could be to not allow the comment to be a crisis. Former President Clinton developed this strategy effectively with his team. Their famous "war room," was where paid staffers monitored news outlets and responded to accusations in rapid fire fashion, within the same news cycle in which the accusation was created.
I did not have the resources for such an endeavor, nor would the campaign. Instead, I developed research charts on all of the major categories of issues, which compared and contrasted State Senator Vilsack's Iowa record with Representative Lightfoot's congressional record. At first, the campaign hierarchy did not embrace this strategy, as apparently using footnotes and legislative source material from the records in the Iowa legislature and United States congress was "too-academic" and "over-the-top-boring" for use. My response was simply, don't hire a Ph.D. in Political Science as a research director if you want fluff and unsubstantiated campaign material.
Just as the field operation had given me the data on nursing home care as an issue Iowans were concerned about, so did the same field operation provide me with the major comparative categories. Field staff members are the lifeblood of any political campaign, because they find out what voters want at their doors, by literally knocking on doors and asking. And in Iowa, whoever knocks on the most doors usually wins.
In this case, I asked our field staff to present a top-ten list of major issues (education, healthcare, taxes, pollution, etc) to those Iowans that answered their doors during our voter identification efforts. With thousands of responses to tabulate, it became pretty clear what the top six concerns of our sample of Iowans were, and those six concerns created the basis of my "boring" comparison one-sheet handouts. Vilsack on the left side, Lightfoot on the right side, because people tend to read left to right, and as an underdog in the campaign, we needed to make a good first impression. Down the column heading were the comparison categories in large font so the reader knew what we were discussing at their door. In each column were Vilsack's voting record contrasted with Lightfoot's voting record on that particular issue, footnoted so any one could look up the record theselves, giving us validity, reliability, and authentification with each Iowan.
So Education had five contrasting categories; funding, higher education and community colleges, skills development, early childhood education, and classroom size, for instance. So forth and so on. Well, the response from the field operations staff was overwhelming. They could not get enough of the comparison papers, as they called them. And why not? Why should it be surprising that those who knock on citizens' doors and chat with them about their concerns, know and are more in tune with the concerns of Iowans than those campaign officials who sit in an office and deliberate over polling numbers generated by telephone-based research?
Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter Five: The Chair
The field operations Staff gave me good feedback on each of the comparison papers, as some of the issues that were important during one month of the campaign, were not nearly as urgent in the eyes of Iowans later in the campaign. It wasn't that those voters changed their minds about the importance of say, education policy versus transportation policy, it was more a function of responding to real world events. Flexibility is key to gaining momentum in a campaign, and to keeping momentum once it is built. The constant for the research was a foundation of trust and ethics, and the comparison papers did that. They served the purpose of establishing and maintaing trust with the voters. Anyone could go and do their own research and see the votes taken on any of the subtopics in any one of the comparison papers wherever they pleased. The press could, and did, check the veracity of each footnote, for each piece of legislation that I used on each comparison paper, and they found no distortions, no statistical manipulations, no dirty tricks, just straight forward citing of the legislative records.
I was asked by the campaign manager to meet with lobbyists from the chiropractors of Iowa organization in order to build a new comparison paper. Honestly, I really had a lot of other work to do preparing for the final debate, but when a campaign manager gives a directive, it is best to follow it. So lunch was on my docket for the next day with a couple of chiropractor lobbyists. I did some research on the group and surmised that their main point of contention was to have the chiropractic symbol added to every piece of legislation passed at the Iowa legislature that contained a symbol for MDs. In other words, the chiropractors wanted the same standards applied to themselves that were applied to medical doctors. If a medical doctor could do it, then a chiropractor could do it, so to speak.
This seemed a bit fishy to me, as medical doctors are not chiropractors and chiropractors are not medical doctors. The fishiness turned downright slimy at lunch the next day, as I was presented with an offer for future research employment once the campaign was over, and a ten-point plan on chiropractic care by the lobbyists. The two gentleman lobbyists insisted on paying for lunch, which I vehemently denied under my interpretation of ethics and philotimo. Philotimo is a Greek word with a non-direct translation into English, but roughly it means to do the right thing, especially when no one is watching. My ethics were being questioned by slimeball one and slimeball two, right over a black-and-blue cheeseburger in a dumpy Des Moines restaurant. The long and short of it is, I took the ten point plan for chiropractic care back to the campaign headquarters along with the receipt proving I payed for my own lunch.
Iowa has a very good system of tracking donations to political campaigns, and wouldn't you know it, the chiropractic lobby had donated to both campaigns. The ten-point-plan was looked over by State Senator Vilsack, he circled four of the ten points he had already voted for, measures easily confirmed in Iowa legislative records and I proceeded to build a Vilsack stance on chiropractic care position paper on our website. Not one day went by before a call came in for me from Slimeball one, who wanted to know about the other six points in their plan, and why were not listed on the website as well. So I informed slimeball one that the candidate did not support the other six points in his plan, nor had he voted on such points in his legislative record. Well, it was specifically asked of me by slimeball one to add greater emphasis on our website for their group, as after all, a job was waiting for me at the end of this "yellow brick road" of a campaign. To which, I summalarily declined over the phone and promised that the chiropractors would have a greater presence on our webiste by the end of the day. I enlarged the font size on the four points that existed on the website, and received a very nasty recorded call that evening.
Some people are in politics for themselves, their professional associations, or a political party, and others are in politics to assist people in a democracy. Don't be fooled by those without philotimo.
Power couples also exist in politics and one such power couple on our campaign was Rachel Z the scheduler and her adoring research director based in the Senate office of then-Senator Harkin in Washington D.C.. Schedulers have the power to make or break any aspect or coworker in a campaign. This position determines where a candidate goes, for how long, and to a certain extent, who has access to the candidate. One wants the campaign scheduler on your side as a co-worker in a campaign. If he or she is an enemy, your campaign career will be hell and then toast. And lucky me, Rachel Z literally wanted the chair I occupied to be filled by her adoring boyfriend from Harkin's office in D.C..
So, getting on the schedule for the third debate preparation was extremely difficult. There were always last minute, more important events that delayed and took precedence over debate prep. It really didn't matter how negative of an effect on the candidacy those intrustions were; Rachel Z had her way and debate prep was put off, cancelled, postponed, etc.. The only way I could get scheduled was literally walking with the candidate as he came in and out of the office daily, and to leave research notecards in convenient locations where the candidate was located. All because Rachel Z wanted my chair. Literally.
Unable to prevent me from presenting my research, she had the audacity of actually stealing the chair at my desk. I guess her point was to try to make me upset, and then use that anger as justification to oust me from the campaign. Luckily I had been prepared for such psycho battle by the best training force possible; a political science PhD dissertation committee.
I appealed to the campaign manager, who got me the requested time and the final debate prep and the debate itself went smoothly. By this time, Representative Lightfoot had become more and more negative with his campaign commercials, in contrast with our issue-based comparison ads. Iowans were starting to gravitate towards Vilsack's candidacy. Our internal polls showed momentum. After the last debate, there is a period in an election season when research is needed, but not as crucially as in previous times in that campaign cycle. We were in this type of a period, and the campaign manager, candidate, and old political pros in the headquarters knew it. I was being reassigned to the field, and the adoring research director from Senator Harkin's Office would be coming to the Des Moines office of the gubernatorial campaign for its duration.
At first, I did not like it one bit. Coming to Iowa from Minnesota was tough. But now, we were finally turning the corner, our poll numbers were up, enthusiasm was up, and volunteers, especially young people and students, were flocking to headquarters, working all day long, eating pizza and drinking pop. These volunteers assisted in calls, on a database, and provided a new energy to the campaign. Just as we started the path of victory, it felt like I was being demoted, when in fact I was being placed in a field office to get out the vote and to work with voters directly, I just needed to have some faith and courage to embrace change and sit in a new chair!
Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter Six: The Boonies
All along the lonely road to Boone, Iowa I thought of issues. Abortion politics are the worst kind of politics ever devised by humankind, bar none. Abortion rights advocates are steadfast in their beliefs that a woman's right to choose and make decisions over her own body is between herself, her faith, and her doctor. While opponents of abortion are equally steadfast in their beliefs that life begins at conception and abortion is therefore murder of an innocent child. Neither side gives an inch, so candidates for office must be forced into positions that are polarized by their respective advocates, in Iowa and other state and federal offices in the U.S.. Another day or time maybe we could all work toward better solutions, perhaps teaching young girls and boys how to defend themselves against unwanted sexual assaults and unintended pregnancies.
Another polarizing issue is that of gun rights. Since Iowa has a rich hunting tradition, it makes sense that guns are a part of Iowa culture. The National Rifle Association rates all of the legislators in Iowa and other states on their votes and policy positions regarding gun rights and gun controls. The NRA also conducts large-scale work in Iowa schools to show young people gun safety and training. So perhaps it would make sense to double these efforts at gun safety and training as a means to work to reduce gun violence. The problem for our society is that any effort at controlling gun violence is depicted by gun rights advocates as a slippery slope to eroding such rights. This type of advocacy ignores the constitutional right to bear arms that the U. S. Supreme Court has consistently reaffirmed, this settled law remains a foundation in U.S. society. At this time we need to focus on reducing gun violence itself, perhaps by using the UPS solution, where employees and visitors must go through a guard shack to enter the Minneapolis UPS Hub. It is a relatively straightforward solution to ending gun violence in the work place, but would take a great amount of resources to create such barriers to gun violence. Gun-control advocates are equally steadfast in their approach -- as they seek to use the "well regulated" militia clause in the second amendment to regulate certain types of guns -- the main problem with this being that gun manufactures will always find a way around gun-control laws, and U.S society itself has decided, along with the Supreme Court, that guns fall under private ownership. Perhaps by combining gun-safety measures and access to workplace prevention measures, we could at least reduce the number of gun-related incidents at schools, hospitals, private companies, and government buildings and campuses.
A third issue that was greatly debated in Iowa was the use of windmills, especially in rural areas, to provide power to local school districts. Some work was being done on this during the Vilsack campaign, where local officials could see, by real-world examples, just how much money a school district could save with the use of a windmill. Battery -storage technology was getting better all the time, providing a back-up source of power when the wind did not howl. A larger debate centered on the decentralization of energy sources and the feasibility of using solar power on government buildings wherever prudent, along with wind energy, to reduce the total amount of electricity created by coal, nuclear and other, more traditional forms of energy - that rely on centralized power plants and electrical grids.
By the time I arrived in Boone, Iowa, I had absorbed enough coffee and public-radio debates for three candidates. It was a new beginning, and I was determined to make the best of it, although I was profoundly disappointed with being to a field office by the campaign. The field office was set up in a law firm near the town center. We had three phone lines and long lists of potential voters to contact. Each number had to be dialed once to identify the voter as a likely Vilsack, likely Lightfoot, or undecided voter. The likely Vilsack supporters were called back to pleasantly ask if they would help volunteer calling other voters. At this stage, if a voter was identified as likely Lightfoot, they were not called again to persuade otherwise.
Free pizza and pop seemed to be a volunteer's dream, and can be a most useful tool to secure phone support. So my budget went to pizza and pop, and it worked to nearly carry the county. Another tool to recruit volunteers is to gain the support of young activists. They have more energy and can make calls for more hours, and do not give up at the first sign of trouble. I would not say that the younger voters are more idealistic, they just kept hammering away at the lists, and created contests among themselves to see how many more volunteers could be recruited in a two- hour shift. Headquarters had instructed me to create four-hour volunteer shifts as a calling strategy. I tweaked this strategy to two hours, twice a day, since Boone was relatively easy to get around in and most of the volunteers were locals. This strategy paid dividends, since it did not burn out the volunteers and provided some flexibility for their busy schedules.
I had a great experience there, and met some very dedicated people who took politics seriously, and had fun doing it. We came pretty close to carrying the county for the Vilsack campaign, but in the end it went for Lightfoot. On election day, that law office was humming with activity -- all of these people who did not know each other well were pulling for a candidate for governor in an excellent display of patriotism and love of democracy. There were no signs of voter fraud or misrepresentations in that town - it was loud, proud, and got out the vote.
As I had been anticipating for months, State Senator Vilsack was pulling even and starting to gain a lead on Representative Lightfoot. Now my job was to make sure election returns properly came into headquarters from the county clerk, gather up the voter lists, clean the law office, and hightail to Des Moines for a victory celebration or defeat party -- either way, my time in Boone, Iowa was done. I gathered everything, gassed up the VW, and drove to Des Moines. About halfway there the public radio broadcast Vilsack as the winner! We had won -- amazing! It was pitch dark on the lonely road when the news came, I pulled over to just look at the stars and wonder how we did it, all the way back from twenty down in the polls..... wow!
Headquarters was still so far away, this was the cruelest irony of them all -- here I was alone, on one of the biggest political nights of my life, without any living thing to share it with, truly in the boonies. I felt so isolated and unimportant, embarassed almost, that I had put so much time and effort to get someone elected governor, only to be cast aside by the campaign in the final days. I understood the necessity of this, still, just understanding did not lessen the pain.
It was late when I arrived at the victory celebration. The speeches and stories had already been told. The candidate was heading to bed, I was too late to partake in the fancy champagne, too late for a victory dance, too late to shake the candidate's hand and say thank you. The next day, the campaign took us all to lunch where we all celebrated together. There were volunteers, campaign staff, labor leaders, farm advocates, the candidates and their families. It was an enormous lunch and well deserved celebration.
It is a small number of people who make up the mechanics of a campaign. It takes endurance and perserverance, it takes willpower to place the campaign first, for months at a time. Win or lose, campaign workers are spent once the votes are all counted. All that is left to do is to either get ready for another campaign elsewhere, or join the winning campaign's governance team. In my case head back to Minnesota and begin a new journey of teaching political science at universities. With victory comes open doors.
Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter Seven: Applying Knowledge
The governor's ball was especially sweet for me, as I was able to see again the actual people that made this campaign a victorious one again. All of the staff at the office of course, and all of the field staff, were there. Each region of the state was broken down into precincts, and ultimately into sections of cities or counties or townships. Normally the idea is that rural voters , rural areas of Iowa, would vote for conservatives more often than moderate or liberal candidates. However, our campaign's philosophy was to do what we could to not take any part of the state off our strategic map. This came from State Senator Vilsack himself. We were using the Lightfoot campaign as a roadmap, so to speak, and engaging conservative, moderate, and liberal voters where they lived. In rural areas, we stressed the endorsement of farming groups, many of whom had come onboard at the end of the campaign and some that had stuck with us from the beginning. It stood to reason that if enough rural voters voted Vilsack instead of Lightfoot, we would secure victory statewide. State Senator Vilsack was serious about issues that affected rural voters lives. The use-of-land debate centers too often on an us - vs - them mentality, when in fact we all need farming to be succesful, and Iowa's rich farmland provides ample opportunities for success of the whole community. This lesson actually was taught to me by my cousins, uncles and aunts in Southern Minnesota as a young lad. There we would rise at four A.M, milk cows, then spread manure, and go to work taking in the hay bales. Each family farm was tended by the family itself, but all of the neighbors also would eventually be needed to bring in the crops, and make hay while the sun was shining. Neighbors helping neighbors in every day life, this was a way of life. It taught me that working together is a stronger form of work and a successful mode of operation.
State Senator Vilsack held his own in all areas of the state, and we had a relentless field operation, and get-out-the-vote effort to thank for that victory. I danced, laughed, and talked policy that night of the governor's ball. It was just a great feeling to know that our work had accomplished something worthwhile. I expected the policies we campaigned on to become law. I expected policies promoting wind power to lead to financial and economic benefits for rural communities, school districts, and small towns across the state. The wind howls across the fields in Iowa. It reaches levels that allows for storage in batteries and uncharted territory as an energy source. In addition, wind power has great potential for jobs, making manufacturing of windmills a basic strategy of rural economic development to increase economic fortunes. It's a conservative principle to save energy and create jobs, and many rural Iowans didn't buy the Lightfoot argument against this industry. For conservatives to argue against wind industry in Iowa. For conservatives to argue that wind power in Iowa is not feasible, they have to shed the proposition they always put forward -- that local control and local government work better and align with local residents' views better than centralized state control. Such a philosophical lack of consistency can be seen by some Iowans as disingenous. By others, though, it may have been enough to not vote for Lightfoot.
Local control and decentralized energy sources are seen as threats by industries that benefit from centralized power plants and energy sources such as coal, oil and nuclear industries. It is necessary and expedient to figure out a way for such utilities to make money and profits from decentralized power sources, such as purchasing excess power from home owners using wind and solar, or solar farms and windmill farms distributed across rural, urban, and suburban communities.... first as a secondary source and eventually as a primary source of electrical generation. So, in many ways, State Senator Vilsack's energy vision was conservative and likely won us votes in rural areas that typically do not support a Democratic candidate.
My time as a research director were coming to an end as the campaign had ended succesfully and a glut of Iowans from the Democratic Party flooded former campaign officials to obtain jobs or employment in the Vilsack Administration. I had experience perk left, however, and that was to fly to Washington D.C and visit the White House. Little did I know that two tickets to the presidential suite at the Kennedy Center were waiting for me there. It was exciting to sit in the same suite as a presidential guest. I tried to temper my enthusiasm during the experience, but to no avail. The champagne and food was as tasty as any I've ever tasted. Even the napkins had the presidential seal on them, detailing that I had not known before or expected to know again.
The powerful in this country live at a level of economic status that is remarkable. Their wealth supercedes ones' circumstances to provide comfort and solutions to life's challenges that poverty compounds. So as I sat in the presidential suite, I thought of Presidents that came to Washington D.C. determined to change policies, sought to improve the life of their fellow citizens, that planned to use their power, prestige and privilege for the greater good. It is appropriate to think of a favorite quote or deed from a President in such conditions. Will the President succeed, and once the President's successes are known, will those successes translate to success for the whole nation, or just those voters that supported that presidential candidate? Do all boats rise together in this nation and in this world, and can a President of the United States really make a difference in our lives? On a state level, Tom Vilsack was setting out to change Iowa for the betterment of Iowan society, rural communities, and economy. The drive that presidential candidates must have can only be explained by an overwhelming desire to improve the lives of all citizens. Otherwise, why are we chasing the Executive Branch?
The only plausible explanation is the best one I saw firsthand working with State Senator Vilsack. His desire was to improve Iowans' lives by using government to succeed. It is a realistic view, policies are created to establish progress. The true test is political character, since voters can see through fraud and frequently call it as it is, no matter the political party. Power may lead to corruption, it can also lead to better lives for the many in a democracy. Our system of government splits responsibilites to three co-equal branches. Such decentralization of power to the states and local communities is still the best plan for governance. We need to encourage youthful energy each election cycle, greater voting times, and ease to vote for those caught between juggling jobs, and family. More democracy breeds more democracy, and should be embraced; otherwise, why are we chasing the Executive Branch?
Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter Eight: Mentors
I have academic mentors, and life mentors, so I'm a lucky man. My life mentors are my parents, Glenn and Theodora Highum. There were many times in my academic career that I wanted to throw in the towel, and encouragement from both of my parents kept me going back at it. One semester at Florida State was particularly daunting, as I was given an ultimatum by the dissertation committee chair, Dr. James Lee Ray, that I would have one more chance to write a perspectus correctly, or he would petition for my removal from the department of political science. Dr. Ray was the foremost expert on international relations, my major field of study, so his opinion of my work carried with it repurcussions far beyond the walls in Tallahassee.
I was on the phone outside on campus discussing this with my parents -- rather, I should say, crying like a little baby.... so much work.... twenty three drafts of the perspectus, each finely researched and footnoted, each over thirty pages in length, applying realism theory to environmental protocols among nation-states, and yet no means of advancement through the committee of five professors. And nothing but disdain from Dr. Ray, who actually had the power to boot me from the department at that stage of my work.
So I'm wiping away my tears, and here comes Mr.Kim, a fellow PhD candidate and a very respectful colleague. "Why the long face, Dr. Highum?" he asked. He liked to address me with the title of doctor even though I had not yet earned it. I told Mr. Kim about the twenty three drafts and the petition ultimatum, and the conversation with my parents, and he referred me to Dr. Patrick James, a new political science professor from Canada that had recently joined our department. I called my folks back and got the encouragement I needed to continue my path towards a PhD..
The next day, I showed up at Dr. James' office. He took one look at the most recent perspectus and concluded that I was being set up to fail. My perspectus was written incorrectly, in that part A was where part C should be, etc.. Dr. James gave me a new plan- fire your committee and name him as dissertation chair, then reconstitute the committee under his leadership with at least two of the previous five members joining the newly constituted committee. I did, and it worked. I started with a new committee the following day. And with Dr, James' guidance, I graduated within six months.
Dr. Pat James and I really don't have the same political perspectives, but he respects the work ethic of all of his students, myself included, and he fights for their success. He is the best mentor a student can have, and I was honored to work with him and learn from his wisdom.
Academically, I was inspired by two family members I consider mentors. My cousin Ann Highum, who served as a Dean of Student Life at Luthor College in Decora, Iowa, and my uncle Thomas Adams, who taught for decades in the Californian higher education system, and who is editing this work. Ann Highum would always ask me sincerely about my educational plans and provide sound advice about the next steps forward, and dealing with academic politics. She truly cared how professors treated their students and without knowing it, prepared me for some pitfalls that lay ahead on my educational journey. I am forever grateful to her for such guidance and support.
My Uncle Tom, well, he provided life and academic guidance. In life, my Uncle has the philosiphy called philotimo - which roughly means doing the right thing, even when no one is watching. It's a philosophy my wife Julie and I have adopted and live our lives by. Doing the right thing, even when no one is watching is not always easy, mainly because it sometimes is not clear as to what the right thing is in certain circumstances. My Uncle Tom seems to thrive in these situations and has set an excellent example for Julie and me. We strive to keep our work ethic strong, at times being challenged in our careers, but always thinking of things through the lens of philotimo.
I was always encouraged by my Ucle Tom to not give up on my academic dreams, to perservere through the rough patches and work towards the main goal. Julie and I keep that in mind in our marriage as well; ike any couple we experience our ups and downs, but keep working together and encouraging each other.
I've seen firsthand how an education can drive success, allow one to move forward in life and provide for a family. I have experienced how politics can make life better for others, and can prevent progress from occuring.
Chasing the Executive Branch
by Erick Highum (c) 2019
Chapter Nine: The Teacher's Pet
For those students of life, I offer a humble view of love and honor as provided to me by my beautiful and courageous wife, Julie. After my campaign days were over I worked as a business analyst during days and taught classes as a part-time adjunct professor of political science at various college campuses, including St. Olaf, Hamline University, and the University of Wisconsin branches at Rivers Falls and Stout. Many days were spent in my eighteen-year teaching career holed up in a makeshift cabin of sorts with Julie. She liked to call herself the Teacher's Pet, for she provided guidance on the timing of life's events, especially the weekends.
As any teacher can attest, it takes a weekend of work to keep up to date with course work, preparation of lectures and exams, or the evaluation of exams and research papers. So, we set aside one of the two weekend days each week for school work, the oher for her agenda. As I looked at the stack of research papers, or examinations that needed grading and evaluation with awe, Julie would kick into full gear. Providing snacks, and monitoring the clock to build in break times, including many walks in the woods, she would set the cadence for that day's work, inevitably giving me encouragement to keep at it until my duties were completed. This allowed me to have one of the seven days for complete rest and recharge.
It made my full time work and part time teachind schedule more manageable. It also gave me the ability to give the students back their exams orpapers quicker, and to be able to check for errors. The highest compliment paid to Julie was from students who exclaimed, "I can't believe you have all our tests (or papers) done already! Thank you!" The Teacher's Pet is truly my greatest ally; her guidance and love kept me in the game, focused, and productive.
We agreed on a working principle - grade all but the last five exams or papers, go for a long walk, talk about our views, feed the birds, or sit with each other over coffeee at the fire. Then go back and finish strong, so all the students were given the same level of energy and detail as they deserve.
The Teacher's pet used to say that I was honored to teach at the university level, and I needed to be serious about it, and about life, to be serious about the student's succeeding. I only hope that I am as good a husband to Julie as she is a wife to me. I got lucky when she agreed to to marry me. Julie is still my inspiration and life partner, and no matter if I teach in the future or not, she will always be "the Teacher's Pet."
I have experienced how politics can make life better for others, or prevent progress from occuring. My only advice to the reader is to continue to work together, challenge yourself to view the world through a diverse set of opinions, and love life itself.