 |
|
|
Jerusalem Letters
No. 364 12 Av 5757 / 15 August 1997
Strengthening the Ties between the American Jewish Community and the States
Daniel J. Elazar
The Resurgence of the States / The Jewish Communities' Response / The State Public Affairs Offices / The Survey and Responses to It / Issues of Greatest Concern: Welfare or Education? / Greatest Successes / Greatest Needs / What Issues are Most Important Now? / Jewish Awareness of Activity in State Politics / How to Increase Jewish Awareness / Conclusion
The Resurgence of the States
The enactment of comprehensive welfare reform by the U.S. Congress in summer 1996 and the signing of the measure by President Clinton marked the apogee to date in the sea change in state-federal relations that has been building in the United States at least since the Reagan presidency at the beginning of the 1980s, and which became intense after the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. For the first time in sixty years, it is realistic to believe that the tide has turned from Washington toward strengthening the states, at least in the domestic sphere of the American governmental system. Moreover, with the racial issue no longer rooted in issues of state rights, for the first time in American history issues of state empowerment can be considered on their own merits.
In fact, states and their leaders have been consistently, if irregularly, gaining status, power, and influence since the Yom Kippur War-induced Arab oil embargo and the rediscovery by state governors that they were not simply Washington branch office administrators but had significant policy-making powers in their own right. At first their own power gains were more a matter of filling vacuums left by Washington, but in the past fifteen years, significant segments of the leadership in Washington have assisted them and their states in regaining or asserting state powers. Indeed, the states have been the primary initiators of domestic governmental change during all of that period, although they usually went unrecognized by the broader public for what they were doing. Thus the formal devolution of 1994 to 1996 came in the wake of what has been an almost hidden devolution for nearly twenty-five years.
The Jewish Communities' Response
During the past decade or more, the organized Jewish community has taken notice of this development. In response to it, Jewish federations and/or community relations councils in eighteen states have established state government affairs offices. Nevertheless, many in the Jewish community paid little attention to this change until the Republican victories of 1994.
Strongly liberal throughout the modern epoch, since the New Deal Jewish liberalism has been marked by overwhelming support for the Democratic party and, concomitantly, for an increased role for the federal government. Because of that ideological commitment to liberalism, many Jews and their organizations or institutions have been very slow to recognize either the reality or the utility of the changes taking place in the federal-state relationship. Yet, today, in order to pursue their humanitarian and liberal social goals, Jewish institutions and organizations must learn how to be more effective in working with the states as they have learned how to work with the federal government so effectively in the past.
The lack of connection between so much of American Jewry and the states was further reinforced by the fact that the vast majority of American Jews arriving after 1880 settled in the nation's major cities at a time when urban areas were struggling against the rural-dominated state legislatures to assert and gain satisfaction for their needs. Jewish political attitudes toward the states were formed in that period of struggle when the states in which most Jews were located were slowly being transformed from rural to urban-dominated civil societies and polities. While in an America nearly three-quarters urban the days of that struggle have long since passed, the attitudes formed then have been slower to change.
Today, most American Jews no longer live in large cities but have become suburbanites or exurbanites. While they still may identify with the great cities where their forbears settled and from which their parents moved, they are not part of those cities any longer. As Americans discovered after the reapportionment decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court in the early 1960s, the shift in balance generated by the new legislative apportionment strictly according to population did not empower the big cities, but further weakened them by empowering the suburbs. The latter were more likely to look to their states for governmental services as rural areas always have, than to look to the federal government as did the cities. That, indeed, is what has happened in the past thirty years.
In this respect the Jewish community has come to more closely resemble the American population as a whole. At their highest point, cities of half a million population or more never reached 20 percent of the total population of the United States, and now are below 10 percent. Most Americans, while they are located in metropolitan areas it is true, live in political jurisdictions of 50,000 population or less.
As already indicated, in nearly two-fifths of the states, Jewish community federations have taken substantial steps to build relations within their state governments. In a few states with very small Jewish populations, Jewish federations have even reorganized themselves on a state-wide basis. This is just the beginning. Now the issue is how will the Jewish community work with the states in this new era, while the need to do so has now become intense, immediate, and undeniable.
What is needed are programs that will help Jewish communal leadership in their efforts to connect with their states in new and more effective ways. As it happens, some institutional connections capable of providing that effort have developed over the last number of years by the organized Jewish community, often unnoticed or little recognized beyond an inner circle. Chief among those institutions are the state governmental affairs offices of the federations and community relations councils (CRCs). Some other Jewish bodies also have developed state ties.
The State Public Affairs Offices
State public affairs offices have been established by federations and CRCs in eighteen states. The Minnesota office also serves the Jewish communities of North and South Dakota in their states. The Baltimore Jewish Council and the Greater Washington Community Council share responsibility as the leading partners in the coalition in Maryland. Each of these offices reflects a coalition of federations and CRCs in the particular state, but in most, the one or two largest federations are the driving forces and major funders of the office. The Washington office of the Council of Jewish Federations and its director, Diana Aviv, play a coordinative role linking the offices through regular reports, contacts, and a bi-weekly conference involving Aviv and the state office directors.
The eighteen state public affairs offices, their functions, and sponsors are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Jewish Community State Government Affairs Professionals
State Name/Position Employed by/Works for Functions and Responsibilities CA Helyne Meshar, Legislative Director Jewish Public AffairsCommittee of CA (JAAC) Represent the organized Jewish community and affiliated social service agencies. CO Jennifer Gilbert, CRC Director CRC Director has many responsibilities besides state government issues. Monitors and tracks legislation and works with Jewish coalition for state issues. Contracts two professional lobbyists to work for Jewish issues. FL Bernie Friedman, outside part-time consultant Florida Association ofJewish Federations,Nan Rich, Chair Lobbyist for federation and agencies, funding, church-state, tax exempt issues, Florida-Israel Institute, Holocaust education. IL Leonard Lieberman, Director of Govt.Affairs Jewish Federation ofMetro. Chicago/Jewish Federation in Illinois Govt. Affairs Program, Joel Carp, Senior Vice-Pres. of Chicago Federation Lobbying as impacts Jewish community and Jewish agencies, issues of concern to non-profit organizations, issues of interest to the Jewish community. MA Charles Glick,Director of Gov.Affairs JCRC/Mass. Assoc. of Jewish Federations,Nancy K. Kaufman,Executive Director Represent the government affairs concerns of the eight Jewish federations in Massachusetts and their respective constituent agencies. Ongoing relationship-building with key government elected and appointed officials. Identify and secure funding in support of Federation agencies. MD Lauren Kallins, Director of Govt. Relations and Public Policy;Susan Schneidler, Asst. Dir. of Govt. Relations and Public Policy Baltimore Jewish Council, Arthur Abramson,Executive Director Community and government relations arm of the organized Jewish community of Baltimore. Representing 16 agencies in addition to 50 area synagogues and organizations, and advocating for a variety of religious, social, cultural, and economic issues. MO David Winton,Independent lobbyist Missouri Jewish Federations (mainly St. Louis) Represents Jewish community in the state legislature and to other groups such as the Department of Social Services and Department of Education. MI Cindy Hughey Michigan Jewish Conference (state-wide group of Jewish groups) Represents Jewish interests at state capital. MI Alan Gale, Assistant Director Jewish Community Council of Metro. Detroit Works with Michigan Jewish Conference and also an outside lobbyist at state capital working on appropriation issues. Works to establish, maintain, and strengthen relations with elected and appointed officials; gives testimony at hearings and public panels; arranges for public officials to attend seminars in Israel; advises legislators on legislative issues. MN Jay Tcath, Director JCRC Retains an independent lobbying firm. NJ Eleanor Stone,Executive Director Association of Jewish Federations of New Jersey Monitor legislation of importance to federation and its beneficiary agencies; work with legislators and their staffs to make known the Jewish community's positions; develop strong relationships with the state administration and its staff. NY Ronald Soloway, Director of Govt. Relations UJA Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of NY, Stephen Solender, Executive Vice-President Research, lobbying, grant availability notification, public education. OH Joyce Garver Keller, Executive Director Government AffairsCommittee of Ohio Jewish Communities Secure government funds to enhance the Jewish community's ability to serve human needs; encourage sound public policy; educate public officials about the work of the Jewish federations and their local agencies; maintain relationships with state and federal officials in all branches of government. OR Bob Horenstein, CRC Director Jewish Federation ofPortland Monitor legislation at the state level and be proactive for issues beneficial to the Jewish community. PA Joel Weisberg,Executive Director Pennsylvania Jewish Coalition (2 full-time staff) Monitor and report on the activities of state government and act as an advocate for the Jewish community. TX Randy Csarlinsky, CRC Director CRC Inform, educate, and advocate for funding and allocation of funds for Jewish agencies through coalition and individual efforts. WA Randy Abrams, State Govt. AffairsDirector Jewish Federation ofGreater Seattle,(est. Aug '96 with one half-time professional) Protect the flow of government money that goes to federation agencies. WI Mordecai Lee,Executive Director Milwaukee Jewish Council for Community Relations Policy supervisor of state government affairs director handles the functions relating to the federal government. These responsibilities were assigned to me by the Milwaukee Jewish Federation, which funds both the JCRC and the SGAD. WI Michael Blumenfeld, Legislative Director Wisconsin Jewish Conference, Daniel Chudnow, Chair Statewide community relations organization. Overall objective to create linkages between Jewish communities in the state, to engage in coalition building, education and outreach, and legislative monitoring and lobbying activities.
The Survey and Responses to It
In 1997, the Center for Jewish Community Studies of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs conducted a survey of those offices and their work as part of their "Jewish Community and the States" project sponsored by it, the Center for the Study of Federalism at Temple University, and the National Association of Jewish State Legislators (NAJSL). (NAJSL is a non-partisan, not-for-profit corporation whose purpose is to identify Jewish state legislators and facilitate interaction among the legislators as well as between the legislators and other Jewish organizations.) Questionnaires were circulated in preparation for the first conference-workshop of the project which was held February 2-3, 1997, in Philadelphia. The responses to the first questionnaire are based on information gathered from state public affairs professionals.
The state public affairs offices are coalitions of Jewish community federations within each state, often with CRC involvement. Increasingly, other Jewish organizations work with these offices. A number were mentioned by the respondents including:
Agudath Israel (Ohio and Oregon)
American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) (Oregon)
American Jewish Committee (Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Texas)
American Jewish Congress (Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Oregon, Texas)
Anti-Defamation League (Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Texas) Hadassah (Michigan, Ohio, Oregon)
ORT (Michigan)
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism (Ohio).In addition, Maryland and Oregon list "synagogues, congregational social action committees, and havurot" as working with their offices. Pennsylvania works with "other religious and social service agencies."
In most cases the state offices are immediately responsible to a separate board or committee of the largest federation in the coalition. In some cases there is a joint committee representing all of the federations and the state office has its own board of directors. In general, federations and CRCs either separately or in coalitions set the agenda for the state public affairs office in their state.
Our survey of Jewish state legislators drew nineteen responses from thirteen states, about 10 percent of the total number of Jewish state legislators on the list which includes 165 legislators in 21 states. In great part this relatively low response was due to the shortness of time and our inability to make follow-up efforts before the workshop to gain a greater number of responses. States represented in the responses included California, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Minnesota, North Dakota, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin - states that embrace perhaps 80 percent of the Jewish population.
Six of the nineteen respondents, or approximately one-third, were women. Six were state senators and the rest were members of the assembly. They range in years of service from one newly elected in 1996 to one with thirty-two years of service beginning in 1965. The states represented were in all parts of the country and ranged from North Dakota with 750 Jews to New York with close to two million.
Issues of Greatest Concern: Welfare or Education?
When queried as to the major legislative issues with which they dealt in the last biennium, the state public affairs office directors provided a long list presented in Table 2 in which they ranked social welfare and immigration issues highest. The legislators provided a shorter and quite different list. Not only did the legislators list fewer issues, but they ranked school funding and education as the most important ones. One legislator commented that some of the issues listed may be of concern to the Jewish community, "but [that concern] has not been voiced by constituents or local media."
Table 2: Major Legislative Issues in Last Biennium
State Offices State Legislators Welfare reform (14)
Immigration/refugees (11)
Adult education (as it relates to immigrants)
Anti-hunger/poverty
Emergency shelter
Preparing non-citizens for the citizenship exam
3rd party reimbursement to licensed social worker (2)
Child care (2)
Nursing home (3)
Medicaid (4)
Home care
Health care
Mental health services
Social justice
Emergency aid
Services for the elderly
Funding for mentally retarded adults
School choice
Public funding for private schools
Public education (2)
Education reform (2)
Holocaust education (2)
Church-state (3)
English only legislation
Anti-terrorist acts
Against "Religious Right"
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Militia
Hate crime
Gun control
Death penalty
State property tax
JCC sales tax
What is a public charity
Taxation of non-profits (2)
Employment non-discrimination based on sexual orientation
Workforce development
Funding for health and human services
Kosher subsidy for Jewish home
Campaign finance reform
Microenterprise fundingEducation (14): kindergarten, school funding, education budget, education funding for public school, equity in K-12 funding, tuition vouchers, higher education
Budget, taxes (9)
Crime (7)
Welfare reform (7)
Health care (5)
Stadiums (3)
Gambling (2)
Establishing economic business base for future revenue, economic development (2)Telephone deregulation
Electric deregulation
Workers' compensation
State employee contracts
Transportation
Vehicle emissions control/education
Ethics
Tort reform
The difference between the state office professionals and the state legislators seems to be that the former have looked at the issues from the perspectives of their offices' present range of concerns and no more, while the state legislators looked at the whole legislative agenda and how they see it affecting the Jewish community. So education, which is not a specifically Jewish issue for the professionals, is listed most often as the issue most important to the Jewish community right now by the state legislators. The other issues are more in the community relations field such as hate crime and black-Jewish relations. The issues which the legislators mentioned as the major ones in the legislatures in the last biennium were, with one or two exceptions, not of particular interest to the Jewish community in their view or in that of the professionals. It is interesting to note the list of other issues the legislators deemed important in the Jewish community but that are not being addressed.
By all accounts, welfare reform and how it relates to immigrants and/or refugees was the issue that dominated the agendas of these offices. In addition, issues relating to the agenda of the Christian Coalition and the "religious right" were of concern in several states. An increasing number of state offices also were concerned with the issue of taxation of non-profits and the definition of what is a public charity.
Greatest Successes
When asked what they considered to be the greatest successes of their offices since the offices were established, we elicited the range of responses shown in Table 3.
Table 3: What do You Consider to be the Greatest Successes of Your Office since Its Founding?
Within Jewish and General Community
1. Making community aware of importance of state issues (3)
2. Growing involvement of Jews in both parties
3. Getting various agencies to work together, maintaining coalition of federations to pursue a unified goal
4. Visibility
5. Getting started
6. Becoming central focus of community and government relations area
With State Officials
1. Fostering openness in state legislature to listen to Jewish voices
2. Developing relationship with governor who had little previous contact with the Jewish community
3. Government leaders aware of the presence and interests of the Jewish community
4. Strong relationship-building with government officials and coalition partners
5. Creating a group of public officials for Soviet Jewry
Legislative Issues
1. Holocaust curriculum
2. Defeated prayer in school
3. Defeated parental rights initiative
4. Defeated amendment to tax churches and synagogues
5. Defeated anti-gay initiative
6. Legal immigrants/refugees to receive benefits, insuring anti-immigration bills did not get on the ballot
7. "Bed Hold" legislation
8. "Moment of Silence" appeal
9. Passage of anti-militia and anti-terrorism legislation
10. Rates legislation for nursing homes
11. Inclusion of JFS in mental health grants
12. 100% success rate on legislative efforts (WI)
13. Securing funds for microenterprise initiatives
Other
1. State investments in Israel Bonds
2. Funding and opening of Israel trade office
3. Keeping the Jewish hospital open
4. Creation of services for immigrants (2)
5. Securing funding for ESL classes
6. Services for the homeless shelters
7. Maintaining social safety net for vulnerable people
8. Increasing state and federal grants to Jewish agencies
Greatest Needs
Staff and resources were clearly the greatest needs of many offices (Table 4). Many government affairs professionals work on state government issues in addition to other responsibilities outside of the Jewish field, not allowing them to spend sufficient time on Jewish state issues. Even in cases where a professional works full-time on state issues, they are oftentimes not based in the state capital. This compromises their ability to both motivate and rally support in the Jewish community and also be aware of what is happening in the legislature on a continuing basis. One respondent commented that one of the greatest issues of the office is the "struggle to communicate with the field and spend most of my time at the State House." What Issues are Most Important Now?
Welfare reform is the issue most mentioned as being the most important to the Jewish community right now (Table 5). While several respondents mentioned aspects of welfare reform relating to issues of funding being taken away from Jewish agencies (such as nursing homes), more than half listed welfare as their top concern because of its relevance to immigrants/refugees from the former Soviet Union. Adult education and Medicaid were mentioned mainly in the context of how they relate to welfare reform and immigration.
Table 4: Greatest Needs of your Office
1. Staff (10)
2. Money and time (3)
3. More participation by lay leaders and other community members (2)
4. More access to lay and professional leadership
5. Greater awareness of Jewish community of their stake in state legislative issues
6. Getting lay leaders more interested in state government affairs
7. Better communication with administrative, legislative and general public
8. Closer to state capital, someone working at state capital, internal Jewish lobbyist
9. Better coordination with Federation agencies
10. Information on Federal developments
11. Ability to take state officials to Israel
12. Struggle to adequately represent the needs of both large and small federations
Hate crimes seem to be a much bigger concern to the state legislators than to the Jewish professionals, even those with the CRCs. In general, the legislators seem to have a broader view of the Jewish agenda. This reflects their broader conceptions of their state and state politics as state legislators serving all their constituents, not just Jews among their constituents. This is not reflected in the legislators' perception of Jews' awareness of state issues, about which there seems to be greater agreement as indicated in Table 6.
When asked how receptive the legislature is to the work of the state office, half of the respondents said "very aware" and "positive" (8). The legislatures seem to be quite responsive to the efforts of professionals working for the Jewish community on state issues. A few directors mentioned that governors are another group who have been helpful with state issues concerning the Jewish community. Jewish representation in the states is also important if only for educational purposes. Many state officials are unaware of but are learning about the Jewish community and the types of services the state provides for that community as well as the larger community.
Jewish Awareness of Activity in State Politics
One of the problems that we have identified in terms of the Jewish community's relations with the states is a lack of sufficient community awareness of their stake in state politics and in state issues. Accordingly, we asked our respondents about that awareness. Their responses are summarized in Table 6. The responses indicate that nearly half of the state office directors believe that the members of the Jewish community in their state are aware although only a small number could be considered very aware. On the other hand, overall, state government affairs professionals think that members of the Jewish community are not as aware as they should be about state politics and issues. In a few states, professionals commented that Jews who live in larger cities are more aware than Jews living in smaller cities or in rural areas, though the basis for those conclusions was not provided. The Jewish agencies they know seem to be very aware and concerned about their stake in programs being transferred from the federal to state governments.
Most Jewish state legislator respondents suggest that Jews are not very aware of state politics. One said, "It seems that some people are very involved in the community and some are very involved with state politics (but not both)." Another said "some are extremely aware and involved, most are not involved." The legislators were somewhat more optimistic about Jewish communities, agencies, and organizations, whom the majority see as beginning to be aware or already aware.
How to Increase Jewish Awareness
When asked how the Jewish community might be motivated to become more active, the professionals provided a range of suggestions summarized in Table 7.
The legislators are in closer agreement with the Jewish public affairs professionals with regard to how to motivate the Jewish community to become more active, with the common view being that there should be more personal contact between the Jewish and other lawmakers and the Jewish community.
We asked both groups what they saw as the ways in which a partnership between NAJSL, the federations, CJCS, and CSF would be helpful. Their responses appear in Table 8.
Both the state office professionals and the Jewish state legislators see a place for the development of a partnership between the state offices, the NAJSL and the CJCS. Indeed, there is a high convergence between the lists of each group.
Table 5: Issues Most Important to the Jewish Community Right Now
State Offices State Legislators Immigration/welfare reform (16)
Education (vouchers, school prayer, funding) (5)
Medicaid (2)
Christian Coalition agenda
Civility of society as it affects communal life
Need to preserve human service infrastructure during budget negotiations
Adult educationEducation (12): State funding of private schools, school choice, vouchers, school prayer
Hate crime (5)
Black/Jewish relations (3)
Swiss banks returning funds to Holocaust survivors
"Land for Peace" policies in Israel
Health and social services
Welfare reform
Other issues important to the Jewish community not being addressed and listed by our respondents included:
State Offices State Legislators General issues regarding whose responsibility it is to provide services for the Jewish community
Prevention of restrictions on rights of non-profits to lobby
Charities entitled to tax exemptions
Correction/prison issues
Issues regarding children
School prayerSchool prayer (2)
Campaign reform
Long-term/elderly care
Attempt to outlaw circumcision
English only
Table 6: How Aware are Members of the Jewish Community of their Stake in State Politics and Issues?
State Offices State Legislators Not very aware (6)
Moderate, aware (4)
Very aware (3)
Some are very aware, some not aware at all (2)Not very aware (7)
Moderate, aware (5)
Very aware (5)
How aware are Jewish agencies and organizations of their stake in programs being transferred from the federal to state governments?
State Offices State Legislators Very aware (11)
Each day develop more awareness, pretty aware (3)
Not very aware (2)Not very aware (2)
Beginning awareness, aware (9)
Very aware (7)
Table 7: Ways to Motivate Jewish Community to become more Active
State Offices State Legislators Education (6) and awareness, speaking to all boards and agencies, political education symposium for the community to discuss political process at federal, state, and local levels
Need to be made aware of significance of local crises situations as was done with Israel and Soviet Jewry campaigns
Publicity
Get more Jews to run for political office
Make issues more personal, "personal is political"
Assigning specific tasks to lay leaders
Organize missions to the state capital
Have state officials address federation board meetings
Focus on building relationships with local officials (not as glamorous, but it pays off)
Better press coverage of events at state level
Elevate importance of state government relations by federations with involvement of highest-level leaders
Annual program, like Advocacy Day, for members of the Jewish community to meet face-to-face with their representatives
"Boards of agencies and organizations need to be briefed and included [in the process of advocating]. Community must be made to see the link between advocacy and hands-on social justice initiatives."Education: "make them realize the effect legislation has on their lives" through Jewish publications, pulpit rabbis, lay leaders, educational forums, conferences and meetings of localities, Jewish organizations, shuls, etc.
Disseminate more information through publications, and the federations need to heighten awareness
Professional and lay leaders of the Jewish community and Jewish state legislators must speak out more
Publicize issues to temples and get word out
Contact with religious and congregational leaders to reach community
Educate them (2)
Community doesn't see threat, status quo in US is unthreatening
Legislators speak to various groups
Educate agencies and organizations about shifts in priorities in state spending and its impact, information on "block grant" proposals
More personal contact between lawmakers and Jewish leaders
More information on impact of proposed new laws
Communication/information/dialogue/interaction
One-on-one recruiting
"Why should we do this [motivate the Jewish community]? There are few Jewish agencies or organizations in North Dakota."
Outreach by organizations such as NJC
Table 8: Ways in which a Partnership between Najsl, Federation, and CJCs would be Helpful
State Offices State Legislators Collecting information, publishing a newsletter with information on what is to be done in different states through Jewish community efforts and what is happening in other state legislatures as well
Sharing resources, cross-pollination of ideas
New ideas on how we can be more effective in influencing state government
Coordination, would want trade association services
Form fellowship with others in the country doing the same thing
Providing pamphlets and information such as "Jewish concepts of caring for the needy" which provide an understanding of Jewish perspectives.
Issue position papers
Background papers and talking points on issues especially with Jewish ethics/moral perspective
Organize regionally, (West, Midwest, South, East Coast)
Higher prioritization of health and human services on Jewish communal agenda
Practical strategies and ideas of how to be more effective with state government
Also include National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council and Washington Action Office of the Council of Jewish FederationsTasks that go towards the shared agenda could be distributed to the agency that does it bestSharing information, coordinate information and strategies (9)
Showing broad-based interstate concern for matters of importance, timely receipt of relevant information on issues, clearinghouse for information on matters of concern
Prioritize issues of concern (3)
Update on legislation in other states, federal legislation (2)
Disseminate information back to Jewish community, educate Jewish community about organizing activism, grass-roots support (3)
Get more people involved
Establish relationships between legislators, Jewish professional leaders, and members of the Jewish community
"It would give Jewish organizations a greater voice in NY state politics. Many issues are bypassed due to apathy or noninvolvement of the Jewish community."
"Support of local Jewish organization to form Jewish coalition to deal with the issues which relate to Jews." (NY)
"Bring Jewish activists and Jewish legislators together in either a political or more informal setting. All legislators are usually invited. We deserve some special opportunities to meet with our leaders and activists." (MD)
Conclusion
The Jewish community state public affairs offices in their short years of existence have carved a place for themselves on the Jewish communal scene, but it is one that is not widely known nor understood. As the states become more prominent in policy-making as well as implementation, the Jewish community's need for these offices will grow and one can assume that the organized Jewish community will respond even more than it has responded to date.
Obviously these offices need to be concerned with all members of the state legislature, not only with the Jewish members. Nevertheless, the Jewish members can be special allies if a partnership is developed between them and the state offices. Indeed, at least to some extent the Jewish state legislators expressed their desire for that to happen, feeling that they have been neglected by the Jewish community as an important element of Jewish influence. At the same time, they are ambivalent since they see their role first and foremost as that of representing their districts, Jewish and non-Jewish constituents alike. Nevertheless, the development of such a partnership could extend the reach and deepen the strength of the Jewish community state public affairs offices.
* * *
Daniel J. Elazar is President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
The Jerusalem Letter and Jerusalem Letter/Viewpoints are published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 13 Tel-Hai St., Jerusalem, Israel; Tel. 972-2-5619281, Fax. 972-2-5619112, Internet: jcpa@netvision.net.il. In U.S.A.: 1515 Locust St., Suite 703, Philadelphia, PA 19102; Tel. (215) 772-0564, Fax. (215) 772-0566. © Copyright. All rights reserved. ISSN: 0792-7304.
The opinions expressed by the authors of Viewpoints do not necessarily reflect those of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.