What is Bird-dogging?

Bird-dogging is a tactic that many organizations, and concerned citizens, use to pressure candidates to take a public stance on an issue, or to question a stance that a candidate has already taken. It usually consists of one or more bird-doggers who go to a public event where a candidate will appear. The bird-doggers ask the candidate pointed questions about issues they care about in order to elicit a response. Because members of the media often attend candidate events, bird-dogging plays an important role in getting candidates’ positions “on record.” We all know that politicians don’t always keep their promises once they’re elected, so this is a vital part of holding them accountable to their constituents.

How to Bird-dog
Here are some tips to help you get started on a successful bird-dogging campaign. Many of these tips come from www.birddogger.org.

Find out where the candidate will be.
Prepare your questions ahead of time.
Other things to keep in mind.

1)Find out where the candidate will be.

One of the easiest ways to find out where a candidate will be is to join his or her email list, or to check the website of the candidate or the candidate’s party. If you have good contacts with the media, you might be able to get information from friendly journalists, or those with a progressive point of view. Stay up-to-date with local newspapers and news websites, as they often publish calendars of candidate events. Find out as much about each event as you can, so you know what to expect ahead of time.

You could also consider organizing your own issue forum or candidate debate. This might be easier to do if you co-host the event with other organizations, or with a prominent coalition. One advantage to this kind of event is that you can invite candidates to speak only to the issues you choose.

2) Prepare your questions ahead of time.

You’ll need to have your questions ready before the event. That way, while every one else is thinking of what they want to ask, you’ll already be prepared. To help you get started, we’ve put together some prioritized sample questions:

• Bring the Troops Home from Iraq
  The war in Iraq is currently costing American taxpayers almost $300 million a day, taking away from critical funding for our homeland security, healthcare, education and other priorities right here at home.  The ostensible purpose of this war was to protect Americans by advancing the goals of the global fight against terrorism.  Using this benchmark, the war in Iraq has been a failure.  An assessment by the International Institute for Strategic Studies notes that the occupation has “galvanized” al-Qaeda and become a “potent global recruitment pretext” for the group.  Because of this, an end to the occupation would be a powerful step forward for American national security and the future of Iraq.  What is your position on a time-lined withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, beginning in 2006/7 (2006 if the candidate is an incumbent, 2007 if they are a challenger)?
  
  
• No Permanent U.S. Bases in Iraq
  The perception that the United States may have long-term ambitions in Iraq creates resentment among the general population of Iraq and aids the insurgency in recruiting supporters.  By unequivocally stating that the United States does not seek a permanent military presence in Iraq, our government would send a clear signal to the Iraqi people that we fully support their efforts to establish democracy and exercise sovereignty. How long do you think it would be appropriate for U.S. troops and contractors to stay in Iraq?  If elected would you support Rep. Barbara Lee’s (D-CA) H.Con.Res 197 or a substantially similar piece of legislation ?
  
  
• Iran
  U.S. intelligence estimates put Iran’s ability to make a nuclear bomb at least five to ten years in the future, however the Bush administration is pushing for punitive measures such as sanctions or military strikes.  In fact, some sources indicate that military plans are already being initiated against Iran.  Iran has already said it will retaliate, possibly militarily, to any punitive measures.  This retaliation could take many shapes that would be seriously harmful to the United States; including: disrupting shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, sabotaging harbor facilities and oil platforms in the Persian Gulf and providing military support to the Iraqi insurgency.  With the U.S. military already busy in Afghanistan and Iraq, military action against Iran seems unadvisable.  What non-military options would you pursue to defuse this situation?  Under what circumstances would you vote to authorize military action against Iran?
  
  
• Nuclear Weapons Disarmament
  The United States, as a signer of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has promised to work to reduce its nuclear stockpile.  Currently, the United States has thousands of usable nuclear weapons in its arsenal.  Many argue that maintaining a stockpile of even 3,500 does more harm to our national security than it deters.  Additionally, the Bush administration has attempted to reduce the required preparation time to conduct an underground nuclear test to no more than 18 months and refuses to send the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty back to the Senate for ratification.  Other nations are threatened by our capabilities and preparations to increase our stockpile and are emboldened to begin and grow their own nuclear weapons programs.  How many nuclear weapons do you think the United States needs and how would you work to make the U.S. a role model for other nations to disarm?
  
  
• New Nukes
  In its 2002 Nuclear Posture Review, the Bush administration called for the creation of a new generation of offensive nuclear weapons, including “bunker busters,” and so-called “mini-nukes.”  In 2004 and 2005, bipartisan Congressional leadership eliminated funding for these new weapons; however, a new program, the Reliable Replacement Warhead, has been introduced for similar purposes.  In FY2006, Congress appropriated $24.7 million for this program, and for FY2007 the Bush administration has requested $27.7 million. These programs send the wrong messages to the rest of the world about the development of nuclear weapons and U.S. regard for the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.  What is your position on the resumption of explosive nuclear weapons testing?  What is your position on new nuclear weapons and the so-called Reliable Replacement Warhead?
  
  
• Common Sense Budget Act
  In 2007 $460 billion of the Fiscal Year 2007 budget request will go to the Pentagon.  This is 53% of the discretionary spending, which does not even include the money the Bush administration will ask for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  To pay for these bloated Pentagon programs, the administration and Congress cut funding for programs such as federal student loans, Medicare and Medicaid, which address human needs.  The Common Sense Budget Act, H.R. 4898 identifies $60 billion in unnecessary Pentagon spending which would be transferred to programs in children’s health care, school reconstruction, job training, energy independence, homeland security, medical research, global hunger and deficit reduction.  Would you support the Common Sense Budget Act or other pieces of legislation that transferred funds from the military budget to pay for human needs?
  
  
• Student Privacy Protection from Military Recruiters
  As the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan drag on, the Pentagon is aggressively collecting personal data on millions of youth and students to help military recruiters target young people for enlistment.  Pentagon contractors are now obtaining private data on young people’s race, ethnicity, income, extracurricular interests, academic record, family background, spending habits and more to store in a national military recruitment database, which violates the federal Privacy Act, costs taxpayers more than $350 million and gravely undermines young people’s constitutional rights.  Youth aged 16-25 are largely not aware that this personal information is being mined and shared by Pentagon contractors.  How would you support efforts to protect student privacy and stop the Pentagon’s consolidated military recruitment database?
  
  
• Domestic Surveillance
  Documents received through an ACLU lawsuit have shown that Peace Action has been spied on by the FBI.  The FBI has used federal “Joint Terrorism Task Force” money to spy on the first amendment activities of Peace Action and many other peaceful, non-violent organizations including Greenpeace and the ACLU.  The FBI’s surveillance of domestic peace groups, and new information about domestic Pentagon and NSA surveillance make clear that the administration’s efforts to stop terrorism are running amok and focusing, illegally, on the wrong targets.  These administration efforts to strip away constitutionally protected rights make us less safe by diverting money from tracking real terrorists.  If elected, would you support efforts to stop the administration’s illegal and sometimes warrantless surveillance of citizens and domestic organizations?
  
  
• Human Rights
  Since 2000, the United States has begun providing new military aid to at least eleven countries with appalling human rights records. In the past, the US has armed and trained the likes of Saddam Hussein, Manuel Noriega, and Osama bin Ladan. What will you do to make sure the United States does not arm or train human rights abusers?
  
  
• Unilateral Militarism
  The invasion and ongoing occupation of Iraq was based on the doctrine of “preemptive” war, which suggests that the US can unilaterally attack any country or other entity that it deems a threat. This doctrine has weakened international law, and now there is nothing to prevent another country from citing this doctrine when launching an aggressive attack. How will you work with the international community to strengthen norms against the use of “preemptive,” unilateral force?

For more detailed question ideas, you may also want to check out our candidate questionnaire.
If there is an open question and answer period your pre-planning will pay off. Most people don’t raise their hands immediately. But as a well prepared bird-dogger you can express immediate interest in asking a question - so get your hand up early and often, and sit up front.

Sometimes only members of the media are allowed to ask questions. In this case, see if you can get a journalist to ask some of the questions you’ve prepared.

3) Other things to keep in mind.

Here are some additional tips to make your bird-dogging effort a success.

Work in teams of two or more people and disperse. Bird-dogging can sometimes make people nervous so it’s best to go in teams of two or more for support. Also, if you have two people in a team, one can ask the question while another writes down the response. It’s best if you can get the candidate’s response on camera, but either way, get an accurate quote of what was said so you can pass the information on. The website www.birdogger.org is a good place to post candidate responses.

When you ask a question, be prepared with a follow up question - you might just get the opportunity to ask it. And, this way if someone else asks your question you’ll have a backup. If you have a group of people at the event, split them up. Dispersing at the event might allow everyone in the group to ask a question.

Keep it cordial. You are likely to get more of a response from candidates, and make a positive impression on the media, if you are calm and respectful in your demeanor. Hardly anyone is 100 percent opposed to your views, so try and come up with a compliment on a candidate’s position that you can mention before you ask your question.

Prioritized Sample Bird-dogging Questions

1100 Wayne Ave. Ste 1020, Silver Spring MD 20910 (301) 565-4050 www.Peace-Action.org