The Last Hurrah?: Soft Money and Issue Advocacy in the 2002 Congressional Elections

Chapter Four. Get On TeleVision vs. Get On The Van: GOTV and the Ground War in 2002

Ground-war efforts played a critical role in competitive contests in the 2002 election. The ground war refers to nonbroadcast campaign communications, such as telephone calls, direct mail, and person-to-person contacts, which are often designed to increase voter turnout. Other elements of the ground war include voter registration and early and absentee voting. While it is often used synonymously with fieldwork or get-out-the-vote (GOTV) operations, as used here the ground war includes any nonbroadcast campaign activity, regardless of its primary purpose.1 The ground war, in contrast to the air war, concerns campaign communications that are below the radar screen.2 That is, they are communications that most people never see or hear about and are typically not reported in the media. For this reason they are also more difficult to track and study. A strength of the case studies in this book is their ability to effectively track ground-war communications. In addition, because they are less noticeable, ground-war communications are often quite hard-hitting, using messages and images that would not play well to a large television audience. The various components of a ground-war strategy are often integrated and use the same theme and message; each contact serves to reinforce previous attempts to persuade and mobilize the potential supporter . For example, over a period of several weeks a potential voter might receive multiple contacts from a campaign in which the various 90 FOUR Get On TeleVision vs. Get On The Van: GOTV and the Ground War in 2002 j. quin monson communications would use the same theme and message, through personal contacts, telephone calls, and direct mail. Without the presidential election campaigns to command media attention and spark voter interest, midterm elections suffer from lower turnout. Thus, in a midterm election, voter mobilization efforts operate in a different context than in a presidential election year. More effort is required to get out the vote, especially among voters with irregular voting habits. In midterm elections, candidates, groups, and parties target their messages even more to particular subgroups of voters, hoping to motivate them to vote. The low stimulus and low turnout context of a midterm election means that a good ground-war effort can have a disproportionate impact on the outcome, compared to a presidential election. As discussed in chapter 1, the growth of soft money and issue advocacy spending in the 1996 election was focused mostly on broadcast communications, although both parties dedicated some of their resources to fund voter mobilization efforts.3 However, in 1998, voter mobilization became a significant part of the story, especially for Democrats and their interest-group allies. Turnout among union households and African Americans was high and helped propel higher-than-expected Democratic gains.4 Going into the 2002 midterm election, there was a growing feeling among some professionals that the ground war was gaining in importance.5 Ground-war methods were seen by some groups as a more cost-effective way of communicating their message. Political parties and allied interest groups waged expanded groundwar campaigns in 2002. In the 1998 and 2000 elections, interest groups produced more direct mail, print and radio advertisements, and phone banks than did the political parties; the parties focused more on television advertisements.6 However, in 2002, while maintaining their presence on television, the parties also expanded their ground-war efforts to exceed those of the interest groups. This happened even while several interest groups expanded their ground-war efforts. In short, the emphasis on grassroots political mobilization has been increasing over time by both parties and interest groups across the political spectrum. The increase in the ground war by parties and interest groups has occurred primarily because these techniques are increasingly seen as effective at increasing turnout of targeted groups. This continues a trend among Democrats and their allies that began in 1998. For Republicans it is a gotv and the ground war in 2002 91 fundamental shift in tactics that grew out of much smaller efforts in the 2000 Bush campaign. In 2002, as they have done for several elections now, Democrats and their allies, especially labor unions, made extensive mail and phone drives and GOTV efforts a major priority. Republicans and their allies, especially business groups and the National Rifle Association (NRA), pointing to the voter mobilization successes of Democrats and labor unions in 1998 and 2000, also invested heavily in voter mobilization in...