Archive for category: Public Affairs

Delving in Together – How Can We Help?

Dear friends,

We find ourselves in uncertain times. While that can sometimes be a good thing for public and government affairs professionals who help create order out of chaos, the evolving landscape today feels different as we’re social distancing, caring for children unable to attend school, looking out for elderly loved ones, and grappling with an unprecedented world pandemic.

Our team here at Delve wants to do our part to help you navigate these uncharted waters because that’s what we do every day. If your organization is facing or anticipating a public affairs challenge, we’re here to help with no cost or obligation. Please contact us to schedule a time to talk through your issue and we can provide you with a short risk snapshot to help you as you begin to plan for the days, weeks, and months ahead.

We are passionate about leveraging our research and analysis expertise to help you prepare your organization for the challenges ahead. Together, we will get through it.

Wishing health, prosperity, and hope,

Jeff Berkowitz
Founder & CEO

As this great era of political disruption continues, commentators, consultants, and political junkies are left to wonder whether or not the old rules of politics still apply to campaigns post-Trump. Some may be tempted to think candidates can now say whatever they want, ignore improprieties and missteps in their pasts, and weather any public affairs firestorm that may come their way during the heat of a campaign. Such thoughts could even lead some to conclude that if the traditional campaign playbook is obsolete, then why would they invest in research to craft their messaging, inform their strategy, and uncover what they don’t know about their candidate and opponents?

Here at Delve, we’ve conducted vulnerability and opposition research for campaigns and independent expenditure groups in 157 races spanning 43 states over the last five election cycles. All of which is to say, we know a little something about the value that a strategic research partner can bring to bear on our clients’ races. In fact, we believe an information advantage provided by research insights is the difference between a campaign that prepares for victory and one that hopes for it.

While there are many things that can’t be controlled during a campaign, uncovering and addressing your candidate’s vulnerabilities is one thing you can. That is why the first step in preparing for victory is understanding your candidate’s professional and personal background and history so that surprises in an ever-evolving campaign environment can be avoided. So why do some campaigns forgo this critical component of a winning campaign?

Even before Trump hit the campaign trail, we heard a lot of excuses from campaigns and candidates, who we thank for helping us pull together the top ten reasons for why a candidate doesn’t need a vulnerability study.

10) “We did a vulnerability study for his first race.” Good research starts getting old the moment it’s completed. Whether your candidate is up for his first reelection or fifth, or seeking a promotion to a higher office, examining the personal and professional history since the last vulnerability study – with the notable addition of an in-depth analysis of his actions while in office whether votes, expenditures, staffing, legislation, meetings/hearings, etc. – will help best position him to stand for reelection again next cycle. Even already known research must be reexamined in the context of the new political environment. What was once a record to tout could now be a record that sows doubt.

9) “We already know his vulnerabilities.” There is a difference between vulnerabilities you see as part of the campaign and those that others independent of it perceive, whether your opponent, the public, or the media. An outside perspective can help uncover insights into vulnerabilities that can be prepared for before they catch you by surprise. Even if you believe a vulnerability has been litigated in past campaigns, the new political environment or a higher stakes campaign against a different opponent can change the dynamics of how voters react to it. The issue may be old to you, but that doesn’t mean it is for voters.

8) “We’ll just focus on our opponent for now.” What if your opponent uncovers a key vulnerability in your candidate’s past and broadsides your campaign when you least expect it? What if you attack your opponent for something that you can be attacked on as well? Part of focusing on your opponent means focusing on what your opponent can leverage against your candidate throughout the race.

7) “My candidate has top secret national security clearance – he can’t have done anything that bad.” As Ronald Reagan said, “Trust but verify.” If thorough research shows this statement is more accurate than not, you will have the verifiable facts to proactively prepare for events in the candidate’s past that could be twisted and taken out of context, as well as dispute false claims. Plus, security clearance background checks are looking for information foreign governments or other bad actors could use to blackmail someone and information that otherwise suggests the individual is not trustworthy. A campaign vulnerability study analyzes the available information through a different lens – seeing how opponents could fairly or unfairly build a narrative for a campaign, not a spy ring.

6) “If there was something to find, it would’ve come up already.” Gut-wrenching revelations about longtime elected officials in high office prove this is not the case all too frequently. Perhaps thorough research was never done in the past, or done well, and the public has been taking for granted that there is no “there” there. You simply cannot know what you don’t know about your candidate’s vulnerabilities, and as Benjamin Franklin wisely counseled: “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

5) “My candidate is unopposed in the primary.” Wonderful! Your campaign is in the enviable position to prepare for the general election and uncover all of the slings and arrows that your opponents are sharpening for the fight. To determine the best contrast messaging you should use to frame the debate in the general election, you need to know your own strengths and weaknesses.

4) “I’ve already Googled my candidate.” An insightful, actionable vulnerability study goes well beyond simple web searches. Instead, it is derived from a broad range of primary and secondary sources, which may even include on-the-ground and in-depth field research, to piece together what a candidate has done, said, and what others have said about her. Collecting this information – from online and off – is just the start. A good vulnerability study is a “red team exercise” providing insights and analysis from the information collected to help campaigns think through messaging and lines of attack that could be used by opponents against their candidates.

3) “I don’t have the budget for a vulnerability study.” With political ad spending expected to hit $10 billion in 2020, figuring out how to maximize your campaign’s spending to deliver your message to voters is vital. In our experience, investing just five percent of your media budget in research to ensure your message has the most effective, impactful, and accurate information to persuade and motivate voters puts your candidate in the best position to win on Election Day. Not to mention, a campaign trail surprise about your candidate’s record is likely to curtail your campaign’s ability to fundraise – how much budget will you have then?

2) “Even if there’s a surprise, the media will just move on to the next thing soon enough.” If the cause of the revelation is known or knowable, it saves time, effort, precious dollars, and reputation to uncover it before the heat of the campaign. As the old campaign saw goes, if you’re explaining, you’re losing. Few candidates are able to withstand the scrutiny, outrage, and attention of a major crisis once it’s illuminated. Victory favors those who prepare for it.

1) “The press will never find that out.” Really?

While you can never ensure victory, understanding and addressing your candidate’s key vulnerabilities ensures you won’t be leaving your candidate’s fate, well, to fate. Let us know how the research bullpen at Delve can help you make a difference in your race, because this list doesn’t go to 11.

Delve exists because our clients – from large companies to major trade associations – need an information advantage that helps them understand, overcome, and anticipate public affairs challenges they face from competitors, policymakers, and other stakeholders.

Since our December 2015 official launch, we have been providing our clients with research insights that do just that, drawing on our expertise that pairs deep political knowledge with a keen understanding of the impact levers of policy and government can have on business. This combination is what separates Delve from other firms that, while they may specialize in politics or business, do not connect both and how they apply to political risks and challenges facing corporate interests.

That is why I’m excited to share with you that Delve has made three key new hires who have not only policy and political experience at the highest levels, but also perspective on how these arenas influence the environments in which our corporate clients operate. With the addition of these talented and tested individuals, Delve is taking the information advantage we offer our clients to a whole new level:

• Lindsay Pitts joins Delve as Vice President of Research and Analysis. Lindsay most recently helped secure gains in the Senate as Deputy Research Director at the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and she also brings significant in-depth policy experience to Delve, having served as Legislative Director for two Members of Congress, including for then-Chairman of the Rules Committee Pete Sessions. As a former Senior Analyst for competitive intelligence at Freedom Partners, she has a proven ability to weave politics and policy together through the lens of corporate public affairs that will help elevate our new monitoring service and ensure our analysts continue to deliver a best-in-class research product that makes a difference for our clients.
   
• Sean McAllister joins Delve as Research Manager, overseeing the production of in-depth, actionable insights from foundational research that empower client decision-making. Sean spent the last three election cycles on the National Republican Congressional Committee’s research team and prior to that, spent nine years building an in-depth understanding of the policy impacts on business while handling state regulatory and legislative affairs at a major trade association. At the beginning of his time in Washington, he served as a Political Liaison for the Speaker of the U.S. House.
   
• Michael Oberman returns to Delve as Senior Research Analyst. A former Research Associate at the firm, Michael has led research and rapid response efforts for the national and several provincial Conservative party organizations in Canada. Earlier this month, he finished his work providing research support for the successful return of the Alberta government to Conservative hands.

Please join me in welcoming Lindsay, Sean, and Michael to the team. While they have already hit the ground running, if you would like to leverage their expertise – as well as that of our entire research shop – feel free to contact me and we can set a time to discuss your research needs.

Onward!
Jeff Berkowitz
Delve Founder & CEO

Here’s what you need to know…

This week, President Trump nominated the second Supreme Court justice of his presidency with the selection of Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the D.C. Circuit Appeals Court. Irrespective of character and credentials – indeed of any personally-identifying information at all – opposition has sprung up immediately and outrage and hysteria are already at a fever-pitch.

Delve CEO Jeff Berkowitz has been involved in four Supreme Court nominations, two in support of nominees and two against, and in the interest of full disclosure, worked with then-Staff Secretary Kavanaugh in President George W. Bush’s White House. While the nomination debate devolves into mudslinging, this week we are delving into the particulars of the vetting process to illuminate the behind-the-scenes tactics used during these high-stakes Supreme Court nomination fights:

• Where Does The Vetting Begin? With The Judicial Record. For a nominee to the highest court in the land, the nominee’s history and actions throughout his or her legal career is the obvious starting point. This examination includes not only prior case law and ruling history, but also whether the nominee was a member of a law review and has produced any academic writings about cases outside of legal decisions. Because Supreme Court nominees are typically lawyers before they are judges, the things they have said or done as a lawyer matter, including – whether they were in private practice, a prosecutor or a defense attorney – the types of cases they took, whether they won their cases, and who they took on as clients. All of this information substantiates a convincing narrative as to whether or not a nominee has the experience, judgment, and credentials to stand up to scrutiny in the public arena.
• Vetting Continues With Public Records And Assessing Vulnerabilities: As should be done with any executive branch nominee or candidate for public office, vetting of public records related to the Court nominee is conducted to better understand the nominee’s financial position, which may include tax returns, property records, business records, and similar documents. If the nominee served in an Administration or state government, records from those entities must be requested through open records laws and secured from the National Archives or similar public and private collections.
• How Far Back Should You Go? A thorough process would also include a deep-dive into the nominee’s family and friends, known associates (including even high-school classmates), political donations and activities, as well as what others have said about him or her going back as far as possible. When it comes to a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court, all materials are game – fair or not. During the Gorsuch nomination last year, there were even news stories critical of the judge’s mother, who served as President Reagan’s first Environmental Protection Agency administrator.
• How Can These Insights Be Leveraged? Unless the insights uncovered during the vetting process are organized into a compelling narrative, all of the time and effort put into the nomination could be for naught. If defending a president’s nominee, a thorough vetting provides clarity on the nominee’s vulnerabilities and allows the rollout team to anticipate and defend against likely challenges. It also allows for the building of coalitions of supporters who can go on-the-record to support the nominee, and help address and mitigate opponents who may be disposed to criticism. Conversely, if opposing the nominee, engaging early and often with facts that tell your side of the story and define the nominee in the public’s mind on your terms improves chances that the nomination could be derailed as your narrative gains traction.

Whether for a Supreme Court nomination fight or a high-profile corporate decision, vetting matters. As the new nominee makes his way around Capitol Hill and prepares for his confirmation hearings, the tactics of those on both sides of the debate – and the eventual outcome – will be instructive on the value of knowing what you don’t know.