Page 174 - Information and American Democracy Technology in the Evolution of Political Power

P1: GYG/IJD/IBA/IJD
August 14, 2002
0 521 80067 6
CY101-Bimber
CY101-04
Education Policy 18:0
commission, but it appeared these were likely to fail. 114 According to the
representative to EdLiNC from the National School Boards Association,
the group eventually realized that they “needed to be more aggressive”
as organizations if their program was to be saved. 115 It was clear that the
transformation of E-Rate into a high-salience tax issue attracting main-
stream media attention required a broader and more intensive advocacy
effort than the groups had mounted so far. They also felt a sense of ur-
gency because of the pace of the agency rule-making process, which is
faster and less flexible than the legislative process in which the groups
were typically involved.
Two of the EdLiNC groups, NEA and the American Association of
School Administrators, had worked previously with Capitol Advantage,
the largest Internet-oriented political communications firm working in
Washington. 116 EdLiNC representatives agreed that their organizations
would individually contract with the consulting firm for a coordinated,
fast-moving, Internet-based advocacy campaign aimed at persuading
the FCC and Congress to keep E-Rate. The result was to be a meta-
organization existing on the Internet, to be called the “Save the E-Rate
Coalition.” This metaorganization would present a single face on the
Internet, but would effectively consist of the aggregate memberships of
all the participating groups and any other citizens they could attract. As
for funding, the coalition would be supported by the wealthier groups
such as the NEA. The funding arrangements are intriguing because they
were so obscure even to member organizations. In interview after in-
terview, leaders of the smaller groups in the coalition were unable to
describe in any detail precisely how the coalition was being funded.
Most were aware that the NEA was putting up money for the effort,
but few were sure of the amounts, how it was being spent, and whether
other groups were also pitching in. Funding from the NEA’sdeeppockets
clearlywasveryhelpfulinthecoalition’ssuccess,butdecisionmakingand
coordination on financial matters were not an important focus of lead-
ers’ attention. Staffing arrangements and the allocation of responsibility
and tasks were similar. These, along with funding, occupied little of the
groups’ attention compared with the tasks of monitoring developments,

114
The organization maintains an archive of filings at http://www.edlinc.org.
115
Michele Richards, formerly of the National School Boards Association and repre-
sentative at EdLiNC meetings, telephone interview by Eric Patterson for the author,
March 27, 2001.
116
Anonymous former staff member of the American Library Association, telephone
interview by Eric Patterson for the author, June 19, 2000.
157