|
|
This section covers how to pick and prepare witnesses. Although written specifically for public hearings, much of it applies to getting people ready for all types of public appearances.
Here are a few considerations to help you decide which witness to use if you have more than one who can support one of your important messages. Try for diversity. You may know that there are both LGBT people of every color, religion, political view, etc, and that we are disabled, poor and wealthy. Many people do not know these things. Illustrating that truth with a diverse group of witnesses is the best way to break down the idea that gay means successful white man. Diversity can also be a way to build bridges to other communities. It may be possible to have witnesses who have experienced other types of discrimination draw some important parallels, something witnesses who are not "double" or "triple" minorities might not be able to do credibly. Since parallels can easily offend other minorities, they must be drawn with care.
Think about who will matter most to your audiences. For the board, the best figure is likely to be someone from whom members think they will need help in the future. With the public, someone widely respected can give your campaign credibility.
Some organizers are fond of using parents of LGBT people. The advantage is that most parents who testify have made the intellectual and emotional trip you are asking the board to make. On the other hand, the validity of parents' perspective can be easily discounted because they are parents, and want to see the best in their children.
Another advantage to using parents is that even the most hostile opponents are reluctant to attack them. The difficulty is that one reason parents of LGBT people get respectful treatment is that people feel sorry for them. Left alone, that can be a significant, if subtle, reinforcement of the idea that being lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender is an unfortunate thing. The best parent testimony is usually testimony about what made the parent realize that discrimination is wrong and harmful.
You probably should avoid people who are unwilling to focus on the goal of your campaign, people who are consumed with a desire to tell their story their way, or to present a political perspective which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with your proposal.
Some organizers recommend avoiding persons in "hot button" jobs, jobs which might remind people of some basic fears about LGBT people. These might include teachers or day care workers. You need to think carefully about this. Frequently, opponents will suggest at some point that certain jobs be exempted from civil rights policies. Often, solid testimony from or about an LGBT people in one of those jobs is the best answer to that.
Other organizers suggest avoiding people who are too "flamboyant." This too needs careful thought. It is certainly fair to say to the community that, unless a hearing is purely confrontational, it makes sense to plan the process of persuasion and not to assault on all fronts at once. Maybe people shouldn't come to the hearing dressed as nuns. On the other hand, it can be a mistake to portray the LGBT community as homogenized and indistinguishable from the stereotypes of those who live in the stereotypical suburban tract. You can combat stereotypes more effectively and more honestly by showing range and not just counter-examples. And you may be able to begin getting at the core problem of these stereotypes.
Some organizers put a lot of time into going over testimony and role-playing with witnesses. Although both these techniques are valuable, the most important things you can do to prepare witnesses is to explain the process and tell them how to plan their testimony.
The point of a public hearing is to persuade the audience, not to tell it what you think. You may have a striking theory that civil rights or domestic partnership policies are essential for democratic institutions. That is not likely to matter much with most boards.
Every witness should begin planning testimony by deciding what he or she can say that will reinforce one or more of the basic messages of the campaign. The idea is to help the audience understand why the policy is needed, either by making the arguments for it plainer or by recounting incidents which clearly illustrate one or more of those arguments.
Every witness needs to plan what to say. It is the only way to be sure to stay focused on persuading the audience. It is also probably the only way to make the point in the amount of time a witness realistically has.
Planning testimony does not mean writing out what you intend to say word for word. Most listeners get bored very quickly when people read prepared statements. Except when the witness is a professional actor, memorized statements usually sound just as bad as reading. Instead of a complete statement, most witnesses need a speaking plan, a sheet of paper which has words or phrases which will flag each thing to be covered, in the right order. Writing the words and phrases in large letters with a bold pen makes it easier to refer to while speaking.
Every witness needs to know the formal rules for the hearing, or for any other structured appearance. Witnesses need to know if there are limits on how long they may speak, if there are any limits on what they can say, whether there is an order of witnesses and if so, when they will be called. Witnesses need to know if they have to sign up to testify, and if they will be asked for their names and addresses. They need to know when the hearing will start, and how much time they may need to set aside to be present while waiting to testify.
If members of the group holding the hearing are allowed to ask questions, the witnesses need to be told that in advance. Tell them which members of the group are friendly, which may be hostile, and a little about the perspectives of each. Witnesses should know about the themes the campaign has decided on, and, if questions are a possibility, the answers the campaign has for hard questions.
Witnesses need to know that no matter what the formal rules say, they do not have much time. A witness who is part of a formal presentation, who has got the testimony organized and sharply focused, who is making a point which has not been made at the hearing yet and is not something that people hear day in and day out, who is either explaining well or telling a good story, may have as long as 7 to 8 minutes before she or he loses the attention of some of the audience.
Witnesses who appear early in the hearing generally have a little more time than those who appear later. Most witnesses will have 3 to 4 minutes at the most to work with. This means testimony must be stripped to its essential points. You can not repeat yourself, and you should not repeat other speakers. Look at a closing argument on an "L.A. Law" rerun sometime. Many of them are masterpieces of persuasion, and few take more than 60 seconds. You should tell every witness this:
"If you really don't have anything new to say, give your name, your address if local, state your position, give a one sentence explanation of why you hold it, and sit down."
Most Americans think the process of adopting policy should be rational, and for most, rational means unemotional.
This does not mean emotion has no place in a hearing. But it needs to be conveyed effectively, and it has to be used sparingly. Strong emotion is usually effectively conveyed by carefully describing what happened in a discrimination story far better than by reenactment of the emotions the incident caused.
While one or two speakers who use emotion effectively can rivet an audience if it identifies with the consequences to the speaker, if many more get emotional the audience is likely to think your side is simply unwilling to play by the rules and engage in a rational deliberative process.
Witnesses should never allow themselves to react to things said at a hearing with raw anger. It will usually hurt the speakers' credibility and it can create sympathy for an opponent if it takes the form of an attack. A good way to respond to an attack is calmly, by describing why the attack was unfair, and showing at most just a trace of anger.
If it is plain that you are going to lose an effort to pass a policy, it may make strategic sense to make sure that board members know that you and your supporters are angry. You may want to make sure they know people will not forget, that there will be political consequences, and that you will be back. Even then, an unbridled attack is likely to make the board member forget his or her own interests and simply get angry back.
Witnesses should not try to be anyone other than who they are. They should talk they way they always talk (remembering that public talk is always a bit more polite than private talk) and avoid formality, elegance, even poetry if is not part of their usual manner. Witnesses should avoid jargon, whether political or professional, even if it is part of their usual style.
There is no particular right way to dress for a hearing. Be a neat version of yourself.
If you can, go over all these guidelines with each witness who will be part of a formal presentation individually. Ask each witness to run you through his or her testimony. Insist that the witness cover all points, major and minor, even if the review is not quite a dry run. This way you can make sure there are no unexpected bombs -- statements that contradict your major themes -- and that the witness is not making assumptions the people holding the hearing may not understand. You can help the witness stay focused and terse.
While you can't sit down and prepare all the witnesses who might testify if the hearing is open to public testimony, there are still a few things you can do to help public witnesses get ready. Hold a public meeting. Ask people who plan to testify at the hearing to come. Go over the campaign themes and these guidelines. Distill the themes and guidelines, put them in a short sheet, and ask the local LGBT press or alternative press to print it. Distribute your distillation in flyers at the hearing. There are no secret tricks here, so there should be nothing in a flyer which your opponents should not see.
Individual witnesses with stories of discrimination can present a special problem. Frequently, they will be unwilling to testify for fear of losing jobs and homes, fear of violence, or fear of the reactions of family and friends. Organizers in Greensboro dealt with this by closing portions of the hearing to the press and public. This certainly impressed commission members with how serious the fear of reprisals was. The problem with that tactic, of course, is that you cut out a primary audience.
In a number of cities, organizers have read statements from individuals who were afraid to testify. If you do this, make sure that your readers have some training so that they don't bore the audience. An experienced courtroom lawyer, a good actor or a professional reader should be able to do the training. Try to alternate the readings with live testimony.
>> Next: 23. Writing and Negotiating Policy
|
|
