Chaos in Congress as the U.S. Government Shuts Down

In Detroit, we can live with a municipal bankruptcy as the government continues to function -- albeit not at an optimum level, the government still works. However, when Congress focuses on politics rather than sound public policy, it is the American people who suffer, and it is "Brand America" that gets its reputation damaged across the globe. And at such a crucial time as we become more involved in international disputes. Congress has had ample opportunity and time to work out their differences, even with complex policy disputes mired in politics and controversy. When it would have been clear that the House could not reach a consensus among themselves they should should have tapped trained non-partisan facilitators, including those from the Federal Mediation Conciliation Service, a federally funded agency,  to provide a forum for resolving the toughest public policy disputes and create a process by which to bring the stakeholders together.

Consensus building is a process by which the parties seek unanimous agreement.  It involves a good-faith effort by each stakeholder to meet the interests of each other. In today’s legislative environment, politics often trumps policy and public policy dispute resolution can assist lawmakers and regulators in reaching consensus and bring closure to a number of issues that have long been unresolved, while overcoming outside political pressure.

However, in this situation chaos trumped consensus because not all the stakeholders sought an equitable solution in good faith.  It is time politics takes a back seat to agree on a vision for this country. Once our elected members of Congress can agree on a vision, we can then work to re-establish trust and begin to engage in civil and productive discourse leading to resolving complex policy disputes for the sake of moving our Nation forward.

However, this takes leadership and I am not sure we have that today in Congress.

Too many politicians and not enough policymakers

Politics is about compromise and lately we have had too much politics and not enough compromise. Detroit Free Press reporter Nancy Kaffer recently referenced this in a recent article, Michigan legislators need a lesson in compromise.

Yet, this week, a Michigan Senate Committee will convene to see how the Medicaid Expansion can move forward in the state. Long-term road funding continues to remain a perennial issue and the issue of expanding the Education Achievement Authority and implement Common Core standards in education remain unresolved.

Peter Luke, a reporter with The Bridge, recently wrote that legislators should be problem solvers when in fact, many just use their position to voice an opinion rather than work to find resolution through chaos.

"A governor working in a politically divided government often has no choice but to concede some measure of power to a legislative chamber controlled by the opposition party," Luke wrote. "When government is unified, a governor has two choices in pursuit of policy aims: Hope that intraparty disagreement can be resolved with a civil tone and tasty carrots. Or take out the stick."

There is no about that politics is about division. But it also is about discourse, discussion, debate and dealing with the issues for the benefit of the state. Agree to disagree, but agree to work together to address the issues plaguing our state.

With unfinished business and a long summer recess, I hope our lawmakers return refreshed and ready to remove the barriers to progress and work to resolve the issues before them.

Challenging the Status Quo by Creating a Vision

Gone are the days when you found a job and stayed in that job until you retired. Today, the workforce is more mobile, in part due to the economy and the need to go where the jobs are and in party due to technology. As times change, so too must our political system and our political leaders should work harder at communicating their vision for improving their world. But that vision should not be theirs alone. It should be consensus-driven so that others can stand with the Mayor, Governor and others in supporting that vision. Once they have that vision, they can now create their agenda.  What issues will become their priority and how will they go about implementing that agenda.

So communicating that vision and agenda will be vital to seeing it through. Why is this the right thing to do now? Does it reflect reality so that I can get others to rally behind it?

To lead the conversion, our leaders need to lead the conversation, but also listen to what others have to say and adjust their plans to reflect the political and economic realities. People are looking for solutions. Solutions that are immediate but also pro-active with long-term benefits

Change is never easy, but in order to change we have to know where you are going. To help you in the process we need to understand the why, the what and the how. We need to become emotionally-connected through common values. We will help you only if we can trust you and for that we need to start developing a relationship.

Once we begin the discussion and build the trust we will come to realize that we are all in this together and we each have a role to play -- So let’s support each other.

A New Way Forward & A Consensus Approach to Public Policy

The honeymoon is over. The dust has already settled on the President’s Inaugural Address and the State of the State for many Governors. The Mayors have returned from their winter conference and special interests already staked out their positions on legislative agenda’s across America. Over the next legislative cycle, what issues will be tackled, which ones will be resolved and which issues will our government leaders punt to the next session will depend in large part to how well our legislators can get along.

We elected our leaders to represent a common mission not a party platform. Yet in legislating, most often it is politics that trump sound public policy.

It is time to shift how government decisions are made and for our elected leaders to find:

a new way forward while seeking consensus instead of controversy.

It is time our leaders lead us forward, not back. This starts by reframing the problems plaguing our state or nation in a way that each side could identify with. Once we find a connection to an issue, we are most likely to work hard at finding a resolution. In doing so it is hard to look beyond the politics, but as long as we can agree to concepts and work to make small steps towards building or rebuilding trust in finding a common agenda, our lawmakers can eventually find common ground and those difficult issues, the ones that kept getting put off or “re-authorized,” will move off the agenda so we can focus on the next great challenge.

Who can help Detroit and Michigan Find Resolution Throughout all the Chaos?

I am extremely frustrated by how partisan politics has become. In talking with lobbyists and lawmakers about the good old days of lawmaking, in both Washington and Lansing, it used to be that during the day, legislators would fight like crazy for their issues, they would debate and argue for what they thought was right and in the best interest of the people. And after a hard days work, they would shake hands and grab a drink or have dinner. In fact that model still works in various Parliaments, including the EU in Brussels. Not today and not in America. In the Michigan Legislature you are lucky if they know each others name. In Washington, Members of Congress take their cues from their party leadership and everyone points fingers at the other person to say why they are not making progress. And that is in a non-election year.

So in Washington, you have a highway transportation bill that expired a few years ago that still has not been authorized -- only extended for two years. The education bill also expired and has not been authorized, leaving a generation behind instead of "no child," punctuated by an election year that brings little hope of progress to a bitter end, at least and until sometime next year.

In Lansing and Detroit we are still discussing bridges and transit. In fact, in 1976, President Gerald Ford offered funds to build a rail transit system in southeast Michigan. Instead, we just got the People Mover and today, we are still talking about the need for regional transportation.

Today, there is a lack of progress in moving forward on the difficult decisions that affect our nation and impact our state. Some would call it an impasse while others just chalk it up to politics. However, these are issues that can be resolved and resolved in a way that preserves the relationships, maintains the political differences and helps move the agenda forward collectively.

The use of ADR processes by the courts and federal government has been widely celebrated as a more efficient and cost effective method of conflict resolution. Mediation is a voluntary, confidential process in which a trained, impartial mediator helps people examine their mutual problems, identify and consider options and carefully consider possible resolutions. A mediator has the experience to bring disputing parties together and help them draw out a successful resolution while preventing an impasse during the negotiations, or otherwise prevent the discussions from breaking down. Unlike a judge or arbitrator, a mediator does not make the decisions nor do they offer solutions. They help separate the politics from the process, help the parties find a common ground, build trust and identify potential solutions to agree on.

Public policy dispute resolution focuses on the resolution of issues affecting the public, such as: Transportation; land use, special education, election districts and healthcare. With public policy disputes, the issues tend to be a bit more polarizing, emotional and there are often a number of stakeholders from the community, including non-profits and business groups, and governments at a local, state and federal level.

Whether it is a public policy dispute or a dispute between neighbors, the goal of public any dispute resolution is to save money, preserve relationships and take control over the decisions. When it involves a public policy dispute, it is helpful and most effective if it creates the opportunity for all voices to be heard. It is a process being used in the planning process of multiple projects, including economic development projects in Austin, Texas and Salt Lake City Utah.

In any mediation, the first step in the mediation process is to get both parties to agree to use a mediator. That is actually the first agreement both parties make together and we are on the way to developing trust and building a relationship.

While many states have dispute resolution clauses in key legislation or dispute resolution centers at universities, the State of Michigan does not. The ADR Section to the State Bar of Michigan, continues to talk with universities about creating a "Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution Services," and continues to talk with legislators. However, since no university has yet to step forward in creating such a center, in part due to funding, The ADR Section is trying to show by example, the benefits of ADR.

The National Policy Consensus Center has found that legislators are becoming problem solvers, facilitators and conveners of issues vital to their state. Yet in Detroit and throughout the State of Michigan, we still cannot accomplish enough to move the state forward. It is time to rebuild and repair relationships in the City of Detroit and throughout the State of Michigan. It is time the people we elected to lead our government and help move it forward. It is time that they ask for someone, or a team of neutrals to step in and help find resolution throughout all the chaos.

Policymakers can avoid making difficult decisions on controversial issues by creating a process by which public policy disputes can be resolved. Through a facilitated consensual process, issues such as consent agreements, transit, new infrastructure projects, transit and councils-by-district can be avoided and we can all move on to other issues to help our city, state and nation move forward.

If we just talked earlier and learned about the real issues underlying the bigger ones, than perhaps today, we would be talking more about basketball instead about a bridge, debt ceilings, transit or a consent agreement. It is time we brought in neutrals to help resolve the bigger issues plaguing our nation.

About Daniel Cherrin

Daniel is a public relations + affairs executive who just happens to be a lawyer. Cherrin also is a certified, SCAO-trained mediator. He served as the Communications Director for the City of Detroit and Press Secretary to former Detroit Mayor, Kenneth V. Cockrel. He also has served as spokesperson for an 1800 MW off shore wind farm in Southwestern Ontario and also for Mackinac Island. He also led efforts to support a deep injection well in Romulus, Mich. He currently serves as a spokesperson for The Ann Arbor Art Fair and advises a number of clients through a variety of crises, B2B marketing, brand development and lobbying. This includes the Detroit Windsor Tunnel, Detroit Wayne County Port Authority, City of Windsor, ONT, Grand River and Mentor Ohio (on a proposed Lake Erie ferry project between Ohio and Ontario), Cassidy Turley, Vistage International and Guardian Industries among others. For more information, see http://fraserlawfirm.com/ourlawyers/lawyers/profile/daniel_j_cherrin.

What I do ...

I am a public relations executive, who just happens to be a lawyer. So if you have a story to tell, I help you tell it. Whether or not you have a reputation, I help you build it and enhance it. If you have business goals, I help you achieve it and if you are looking to build trust with key decision makers, I help you build it. I also,

• Inform legislators and regulators;
• Engage stakeholders;
• Empower people;
• Notify employees;
• Create trust;
• Mobilize a community;
• Re-assure a public;
• Change behavior;
• Share a story;
• Develop relationships; and,
• Suggest action

Who can help Detroit and Michigan Find Resolution Throughout all the Chaos

I am extremely frustrated by how partisan politics has become. In talking with lobbyists and lawmakers about the good old days of lawmaking, in both Washington and Lansing, it used to be that during the day, legislators would fight like crazy for their issues, they would debate and argue for what they thought was right and in the best interest of the ‘people.” And after a hard days work, they would shake hands and grab a drink or have dinner. Not today. In the Michigan Legislature you are lucky if they know each other’s name. In Washington, Members of Congress take their cues from their party leadership and everyone points fingers at the other person to say why they are not making progress. And that is in a non-election year.

So in Washington, you have a highway transportation bill that expired a few years ago that still has not been authorized. The education bill also expired and has not been authorized, leaving a generation behind instead of “no child,” punctuated by an election year that brings little hope of progress to a bitter end, at least and until sometime next year.

The only progress in Washington, D.C. are the Cherry Blossoms, and in Michigan, the only progress is Michigan State University moving into the next bracket.

In Lansing and Detroit we are still discussing bridges and transit. In fact, in 1976, President Gerald Ford offered funds to build a rail transit system in southeast Michigan. Instead, we just got the People Mover and today, we are still talking about the need for regional transportation.

Today, there is a lack of progress in moving forward on the difficult decisions that affect our nation and impact our state. Some would call it an impasse while others just chalk it up to politics. However, these are issues that can be resolved and resolved in a way that preserves the relationships, maintains the political differences and helps move the agenda forward collectively.

The use of ADR processes by the courts and federal government has been widely celebrated as a more efficient and cost effective method of conflict resolution. Mediation is a voluntary, confidential process in which a trained, impartial mediator helps people examine their mutual problems, identify and consider options and carefully consider possible resolutions. A mediator has the experience to bring disputing parties together and help them draw out a successful resolution while preventing an impasse during the negotiations, or otherwise prevent the discussions from breaking down. Unlike a judge or arbitrator, a mediator does not make the decisions nor do they offer solutions. They help separate the politics from the process, help the parties find a common ground, build trust and identify potential solutions to agree on.

Public policy dispute resolution focuses on the resolution of issues affecting the public, such as: Transportation; land use, special education, election districts and healthcare.  With public policy disputes, the issues tend to be a bit more polarizing, emotional and there are often a number of stakeholders from the community, including non-profits and business groups, and governments at a local, state and federal level.

Whether it is a public policy dispute or a dispute between neighbors, the goal of public any dispute resolution is to save money, preserve relationships and take control over the decisions. When it involves a public policy dispute, it is helpful and most effective if it creates the opportunity for all voices to be heard. It is a process being used in the planning process of multiple projects, including economic development projects in Austin, Texas and Salt Lake City Utah.

In any mediation, the first step in the mediation process is to get both parties to agree to use a mediator. That is actually the first agreement both parties make together and we are on the way to developing trust and building a relationship.

While many states have dispute resolution clauses in key legislation or dispute resolution centers at universities, the State of Michigan does not. The ADR Section to the State Bar of Michigan, continues to talk with universities about creating a "Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution Services," and continues to talk with legislators.  However, since no university has yet to step forward in creating such a center, in part due to funding, The ADR Section is trying to show by example, the benefits of ADR.

The National Policy Consensus Center has found that legislators are becoming problem solvers, facilitators and conveners of issues vital to their state. Yet in Detroit and throughout the State of Michigan, we still cannot accomplish enough to move the state forward.  It is time to rebuild and repair relationships in the City of Detroit and throughout the State of Michigan. It is time the people we elected to lead our government and help move it forward. It is time that they ask for someone, or a team of neutrals to step in and help find resolution throughout all the chaos.

Policymakers can avoid making difficult decisions on controversial issues by creating a process by which public policy disputes can be resolved.  Through a facilitated consensual process, issues such as consent agreements, transit, new infrastructure projects, transit and councils-by-district can be avoided and we can all move on to other issues to help our city, state and nation move forward.

If we just talked earlier and learned about the real issues underlying the bigger ones, than perhaps today, we would be talking more about basketball instead about a bridge, debt ceilings, transit or a consent agreement. It is time we brought in neutrals to help resolve the bigger issues plaguing our nation.

Action Through Collaboration

A region just north of Detroit saw a problem and created a collaborative effort to create, adopt and implement a five-year regional economic roadmap.  During the process of creating the strategic plan, more than 400 stakeholders were asked to identify their top two priorities for the local economic development corporation to tackle.  Earlier this month, the Windsor-Essex (Ontario, Canada) Economic Development Corporation announced their five-year plan at a Windsor-Essex Chamber luncheon. The communities, including government, labor, business and acadamia, collaborated and everyone made a commitment to change.

Since the Windsor Essex collaboration began in 2010, 1,862 new jobs were created, $73 million in investments were made, 6,069 jobs were saved and 28,092 small business inquiries were made.  To find those numbers in Southeastern Michigan, one would have to contact Automation Alley, the DEGC, the Detroit Regional Chamber, Ann Arbor Spark, TechTown, Velocity, and others.  Unlike our Canadian neighbors, our region continues to be fragmented and polarizing.

As a result of their efforts, Windsor has gained international attention for its efforts, seeing such headlines as:

• “Top 7 intelligent community of the year”(Intelligent Community Forum)
• Windsor-Essex to lead nation’s economy Growth (Conference Board of Canada)
• Top 5 Best Places to Invest (site Selection)
• Canada’s auto capital named city of the future (CBC news)
• Mini Motown Finds there is life after autos (Calgary Bean, 3.20.11)

Last week, the Business Leaders for Michigan announced their turnaround plan for the State of Michigan. A great plan that any lawmaker could pick up and start using. While it is a great plan, we need the input of all the interested parties, labor, university and others, if we are to truly implement an agenda that we can all agree on and start moving forward with.

In addition, Detroit's business leaders, if not those throughout the state of Michigan, need to reach out to Windsor’s business leaders. We need to collaborate across borders and work collectively for the good of our region, as a region.

Cutting through the clutter

This week marked the official kickoff of the 2012 Presidential Election. From now until August 2012, we will be bombarded with candidates announcing their candidacy, being critical of each others policies and otherwise complicating the issues that are now before Congress. This already in an age where we are bombarded with information. So much information that we just don't know what to believe. WorldPublicOpinion.org, a project based at the University of Maryland, conducted a study that found "strong evidence that voters were substanitally misinformed on many of the issues prominent in the (2010) election campaign."

Congressional Quarterly featured this issue in this week's edition of CQ Weekly. Despite having access to a lot of information, what this study and a recent CNN-Opinion Research survey found was that there is still a knowledge gap of how much we know what goes on in government and how it impacts our lives. In fact, according to the survey, we do not have a clue about which level of government (local, state or federal) does what and for whom. In fact, according to the CQ article, "President's get blamed for local problems, mayors for national problems." In fact, I would get calls almost every week from Detroitiers when I was the Communications Director for the City of Detroit and Press Secretary to former Mayor Kenneth Cockrel, Jr.  about issues out of the realm of local government. Also, as a  intern for William D. Ford (Ann Arbor) in the 1990's, I would get calls from constituents wanting their street lights fixed.

So as we being a new election cycle, it is important to know what issues are important to you and who is responsible for those issues at either a local, state or federal level. It also is important to reach out to those people and offer your opinion and solution.

In addition, it will benefit you to have a relationship with those individuals so that you can help shape public policy. Retaining a lobbyist or someone who has the connections can prove to be beneficial to you as an individual or as a business. Lobbyists not only know the people involved, they know their personalities and politics surrounding issues. They not only know the policies, they also know the process and can help you navigate above and beyond the rhetoric, to help you achieve your business objectives.

For more information, please contact Daniel Cherrin at dcherrin@fraserlawfirm.comor visit www.fraserlawfirm.com.

Seeking Consensus Through Controversy

Why do we always have to wait for the last hour before something gets done in Washington? No, I take that back, Congress exceeds the deadline by which to decide on important issues so they or The White House pass extensions on laws, such the Transportation Equity Act or the No Child Left Behind Act or even the budget so they by time before a decision has to be made. The stalemate on what to do about the debt ceiling is no exception and just the status quo. While the Democrats and Republicans have been talking there seems to be an impasse, where no one is agreeing with anybody, even on the most basic of issues. It seems that Washington, needs the support and guidance of a neutral third party to resolve these disputes and bring some closure to a number of long standing issues, most importantly today, the debt ceiling. In public policy dispute resolution, for example, all the interested stakeholders come together with the help of a third party neutral who will assist the stakeholders in reaching consensus.  Public policy dispute resolution provides for a nonpartisan process for resolving public policy disputes, and has proven successful at all levels of government.  In fact, it is emerging as a more effective way of dealing with some of the most polarizing issues.  It leads to innovation, creative solutions and relationship enhancement.  But is that what Democrats and Republicans want?

The National Policy Consensus Center has found that legislators are becoming problem solvers, facilitators and conveners of issues vital to their state. Yet in Washington, D.C., Members of Congress fail each year to come to a consensus on health care, the budget, various re-authorizations and the debt ceiling.

Today, public policy disputes have the potential of polarizing communities with the affect of delaying important decisions on vital issues of public policy, often resulting in diluted policies or no action at all.  Facilitation or mediation helps in resolving some of the high-profile policy disputes and find resolution through controversy and clarity amidst chaos. To assist governments in resolving disputes by and between each other, the disputants need a trusted third party neutral, who is knowledgeable about the issues and the process, while being sensitive to the politics of the day.  A university provides elected leaders with an unbiased academic approach to public policy dispute resolution. Perhaps the President, the Speaker, Senate Majority Leader and their colleagues should turn to a University President or perhaps neutral world leader such as the Prime Minister of Canada or Tony Blair or perhaps co-mediators with former President’s George Bush and Bill Clinton, to help resolve the issues.

Policymakers can avoid making difficult decisions on controversial issues by creating a process by which public policy disputes can be resolved.  Through a facilitated consensual process, issues such as government shutdowns, delayed projects and other missed opportunities can be avoided and we can all move on to other issues to help our nation move forward.

Decisions that are reached collaboratively can result in high-quality outcomes that are easier to implement, receive fewer legal challenges, make better use of available resources, and better serve the public.

Collaboration is not appropriate for all decisions. It is not necessary or recommended to use a formal collaborative process for routine, simple, or urgent decisions. Collaborative processes are often effective when applied to complex policy questions that affect multiple, interdependent interests, where all the diverse parties affected have compelling reasons to engage with one another in a search for a joint policy or program outcome, and where sufficient time and resources are available to support the process.

However, the following conditions help to sustain collaborative processes:

• Clear Role and Purpose
• Transparency of Decision-Making
• Interest-Based Decision-Making
• Every Effort to Bring Affected Stakeholders into the Process
• Stakeholders Represents Organized Constituencies
• Upfront Exploration of Interests
• Common Understanding of Problems and Joint Fact Finding
• Policy and Technical Expertise
• Respectful and Authentic Process
• Transparency of Products

Washington did not have to wait this long. If the parties talked earlier and learned about the real issues underlying the bigger ones, than perhaps today, we would be talking football instead of debt ceilings. It is time we brought in neutrals to help resolve the bigger issues plaguing our nation.

For more information, please contact Fraser Trebilcock or Daniel Cherrin atdcherrin@fraserlawfirm.com.

Is it political? Managing Legislative Disputes

Conflict among lawmakers and regulators is inevitable. The issues that come before the legislature and other government bodies can have the potential to divide a community. As a result, policy makers tend to avoid controversial issues or postpone crucial decisions hoping to avoid conflict. At the same time, key constituencies work to weigh in and share their views, meet with lawmakers, send emails or call them directly, hoping to help the lawmakers reach a consensus. However, carefully structured dialogues, mediated or facilitated by skilled third-party neutrals could offer a more effective and durable method to resolve conflicts and build consensus around controversial and often complex public policy issues. As the Detroit City Charter Commission evaluates the existing Charter, it is recommended that they create a process by which to resolve disputes, at the Council Table, between citizens and with the business community. I will present to the Charter Commission a recommendation on what that policy can be and look forward to working with them in assisting in the creation of a public policy dispute resolution process. A full copy of the report can be downloaded at www.northcoaststrategies.com.