Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Want to Influence Government? Start With Your Story

Opinion

Someone holding a microphone.

Personal stories from constituents can profoundly shape lawmakers’ decisions. This excerpt shows how citizen advocacy influences Congress and drives real policy change.

Getty Images, EyeEm Mobile GmbH

[The following article is excerpted from "Citizen’s Handbook for Influencing Elected Officials."]


Rep. Nanette Barragán (D-California) wanted to make a firm statement in support of continued funding of the federal government’s Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) during the recent government shutdown debate. But instead of making a speech on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, she traveled to the Wilmington neighborhood of her Los Angeles district to a YMCA that was distributing fresh food and vegetables to people in need. She posted stories on X and described, in very practical terms, the people she met, their family stories, and the importance of food assistance programs.


There is a cloud of cynicism that envelopes American politics, leading many to believe that their voice doesn’t make a difference. And, sure, on some politically charged issues, like guns or immigration, it is probably unlikely that one story will change a politician’s position. But on everything else (which is most of what Congress does), it is impossible to overstate the importance of constituents’ personal stories and the influence they have in the policy process.

During an interview with a member of Congress for a book I was writing on citizen engagement, I asked him to recount to me a difficult decision he made in the past and what were the factors that influenced his final decision. “Oh yes,” he said immediately. “The issue was federal funding for stem cell research,” which is quite controversial due to its connection to the abortion debate. He explained to me that he was genuinely torn on the issue and had not come to a final decision. Then, one day, he was visited by a teenager from his district. “Congressman, I have juvenile diabetes,” the young man said to the congressman, “and it is my hope that this research might someday lead to a cure for me and others like me.” The congressman leaned into me and said, “That meeting just stuck with me.” He explained how he did further research on the topic and eventually became a cosponsor of legislation to increase funding for the stem cell research … and he was a pro-life Republican.

Legislators trying to determine the best policy outcome can wrestle with facts and figures until they are blurry-eyed. And yet, when they come face-to-face with an actual person whom the policy affects, it completely focuses their thinking. They no longer see data and reports associated with that policy; they see a person. And no matter the legislator’s position on the issue—pro or con—she feels an obligation to the person: either to help him, or to adequately explain why she can’t. “The most effective way to influence a lawmaker is for a constituent to talk to a legislator about how the policy will affect the person or a particular group,” said one House Democrat.

If the story is powerful enough and demonstrates some societal injustice or ill, it can actually be translated into legislation. “Meagan’s Law” requires law enforcement authorities to make information regarding sexual offenders available to the public. It was enacted because of the powerful story of a little girl who was abducted, raped, and killed. There is now a popular trend of naming bills after victims, such as “Heather’s Law,” “Rachel’s Law,” “Haley’s Act,” and the Amber Alert system.

On the lighter side, a constituent told a congressman about an unpleasant experience he had at the doctor’s office. After being told to disrobe and put on a flimsy paper smock that didn’t close in the back, the man was asked to sign papers related to his care without fully understanding their meaning. He felt quite uncomfortable and disadvantaged in the setting—and told his congressman so. This led the legislator to introduce a bill, “The No Private Contracts to Be Negotiated When the Patient is Buck Naked Act.” Amusingly, this bill was introduced by Rep. Pete Stark (D-California), so it quickly became known as the “Stark Naked Act.” (It actually gained 18 cosponsors!)

One House Democrat, who was a member of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, had a memorable experience that demonstrates the value of personal stories. “I went to a luncheon that was hosted by cancer centers in my state,” he said. “Instead of having those guys in white coats doing their lobbying, they brought in patients—kids and their parents. They all got up and told their story. When it was done, there wasn’t a dry eye in the room. They gave us the human importance of those dollars we're being asked to appropriate. Every group needs to do that.”

By putting a face on an issue, the citizen-advocate makes the policy pitch real in a way that a lobbyist cannot. “I’ve seen my boss change his mind because of a personal story,” said one House chief of staff. When petitioning the government and meeting with a federal, state, or local lawmaker, the smart citizen-advocate will come to the meeting with the most powerful tool at their disposal: their story.


Bradford Fitch is the former CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation and author of “Citizens’ Handbook for Influencing Elected Officials.”


Read More

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose
white red and blue textile

A Republic at 250: What History Teaches — and What Americans Must Choose

As the United States approaches both a consequential election cycle and the 250th anniversary of its founding, Americans stand at a crossroads the framers anticipated but hoped we would never reach: a moment when citizens must decide whether to allow the Republic to erode or restore it through vigilance. This is not about left or right. It is about whether we still share a common vision of the country we want to be — and whether we still believe in the same Republic.

The Founders never imagined “the land of the free” as a place dependent on benevolent leaders. They built a system in which the people — not the government — were the safeguards against overreach. James Madison warned that “the accumulation of all powers…in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny,” a reminder that freedom depends on restraint, not trust in any single individual. George Washington pledged that the Constitution would remain “the guide which I will never abandon,” signaling that loyalty to the Republic must always outweigh loyalty to any leader. These were not ceremonial lines. They were instructions — a blueprint for preventing institutional strain, polarization, and distrust we see today.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person holding a sign in front of the U.S. capitol that reads, "We The People."

The nation has reached a divide in the road—a moment when Americans must decide whether to accept a slow weakening of the Republic or insist on the principles that have held it together for more than two centuries

Getty Images

A Republic Under Strain—And a Choice Ahead

Americans feel something shifting beneath their feet — quieter than crisis but unmistakably a strain. Many live with a steady sense of uncertainty, conflict, and the emotional weight of issues that seem impossible to escape. They feel unheard, unsafe, or unsure whether the Republic they trust is fading. Friends, relatives, and former colleagues say they’ve tried to look away just to cope, hoping the turmoil will pass. And they ask the same thing: if the framers made the people the primary control on government, how will they help set the Republic back on a steadier path?

Understanding the strain Americans are experiencing is essential, but so is recognizing the choice we still have. Madison’s warning offers the answer the framers left us: when trust erodes and power concentrates, the Constitution turns back to the people—not as a slogan, but as a structural reality.

Keep ReadingShow less
Latest Attack Threatening President Trump Reflects Rising Political Violence in US

President Donald Trump speaks at the White House on April 25, 2026, after the cancellation of the annual White House Correspondents Association Dinner.

Latest Attack Threatening President Trump Reflects Rising Political Violence in US

For the third time in three years, Donald Trump has come under threat by an attacker. Many facts remain unclear after a gunman stormed the Washington Hilton on April 25, 2026, during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

As the investigation into the shooting continues, Alfonso Serrano, The Conversation’s politics and society editor, spoke with James Piazza, a political violence scholar at Penn State, about what is driving the rise of political violence in the U.S. and what can be done about it.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democracy Requires Losing. Americans Are Forgetting That.
an american flag hanging from a pole in front of a building
Photo by Calysia Ramos on Unsplash

Democracy Requires Losing. Americans Are Forgetting That.

Americans believe in democracy. What they don’t believe in is losing.

That distinction matters. Democracy depends on its participants’ willingness to accept loss. Without that, elections stop resolving conflict and start producing it.

Keep ReadingShow less