The Campaign Strategist - Dana Johnson
Dana Johnson: [00:00:00] (MUSIC sting) if you are not focused on democracy and holding the line there, anything else you're doing is just busy work.
Peter: (INTRO_VO + MUSIC fades under Act 1) it's really interesting you went from communications to leading large organizations and then
Dana Johnson: Yeah.
Peter: advocacy.
Dana Johnson: Yeah.
Peter: and now advising clients more broadly,
Dana Johnson: Yeah.
Peter: has that sort of journey and those lots of different roles, um, been helpful in shaping your understanding of what drives change.
Dana Johnson: Yeah. So I think that the through line in all of the work was really to like, know your audience. Understand your audience. So if you're trying to get, um, you know, a groundswell of, of energy around the approval of a drug, for example, or people to adopt into making sure that they, you know, have up-to-date home safety equipment, um, or even to get a member of [00:01:00] Congress to, um, to pass legislation that benefits your community.
It's really like being intimate with the audience and understanding what motivates them and really targeting, like your strategy and all the, the things that support it, um, in a meaningful way. So I, I felt like that part of like. Probably some of who I am, but also the training that came, um, through academics and their work experience probably, um, made it easy for me to adapt that kind of thinking to whatever work I'm doing.
Peter: It's really amazing because
Dana Johnson: Yeah,
Peter: knowing your audience and how to talk to that audience and thinking in terms of audience, I mean, is particularly how so much politics works
Dana Johnson: yeah, yeah.
Peter: really. Audience is influence.
how do you approach designing campaigns? Like do you have a process? 'cause that's of [00:02:00] course one of the, one of the points of the podcast is to share, Hey, how do different people go about doing this?
So I just wanted to hear how do you tackle it when you know a client or an organization comes to you and says, we need, we want to get to this help.
Dana Johnson: Yeah. Oh, that's a really great question. And I think a part of that is probably something that's like innate, but I do try to, um, I think go back to what I said at the start of the podcast, like what's the real, what's the big sky objective here? And then I probably come down the layer and I think about like, how do I get to that?
And there are oftentimes like multiple strategies for doing that. And I try to think about like the audiences like to power map toward who, who's primary in this strategy. And um, if we say all of them, then, then I'm going down [00:03:00] another layer and I'm thinking about the tactics related to it. Um, or maybe I'm even pairing it down.
I will say I do have difficulty pairing things down 'cause I could just see it all and I wanna do it all. Um, but I'm usually best served by somebody outside of me saying, we, we need to pare this down. So being in connection and relationship with other people can be really, really important for me in that regard.
Um, and. Then I start to think about like the vehicles for how do we get there and who's the best messenger? Am I the best messenger? So then I'm probably gonna talk to people and I'm probably starting to early sale. So I'm trying to enroll other people in like this vision and take taking into account what people are saying back to me.
So, um, they're probably either co-signing it, like, yes, go forth and be great. Or people are like, Hey, maybe you need to think [00:04:00] about this. Um, and then that part about enrolling other people is important because I probably, another area is I like to do it. I'm gonna get in there and do it, but I'm probably in some instances not the best person to do it.
Peter: Yeah.
Dana Johnson: And so, um, it's trying to bring people into the vision and, um, I'm probably also thinking about how do I approach this in a way that other people aren't? So like, what's the gap? In this space. And so when I was at, we act and we were, uh, we act for environmental justice and we were talking about the models, for example, related to the inflation reduction Act and the greenhouse gas emission, the carbon emission reductions.
And I kept feeling like this is such an incomplete conversation. Like the gap that we need is how do we go down level? So how do we look at regions? Can we look at states, can we look at communities? [00:05:00] And so it was like we need a researcher on our team. So we ended up hiring someone, um, who could have that like peer-to-peer conversation with other researchers.
And I could say something in the most eloquent, uh, in eloquent way that I would say it and have them translate it so that we could, um. You know, so that we can start looking at like, other criteria, pollutants, and how do we think about the, the cumulative impact of being exposed to pollution or the, the cumulative effect of a particular policy pathway.
And so, yeah, uh, I'm probably trying to think about what's missing from this conversation. Who's missing, and how can we get them in there? So that's probably my process. It's gonna go like this
Peter: Yeah, because if you
Dana Johnson: and then like this. Yeah. So it's like it's hierarchy this way and then it's gonna go this way.
Peter: this Trump regime has been waging
Dana Johnson: Yeah.[00:06:00]
Peter: bipoc led organizations.
I mean,
Dana Johnson: Yeah,
Peter: people of color in general, um, environmental justice organizations, it, they've been stripping funding. They
Dana Johnson: yeah,
Peter: um, wielding the power of the federal government against these kinds of organizations. and I, I. What's your take on how is that affecting these communities
Dana Johnson: Yeah, I think we are in an extremely tough time, and so as you mentioned, you and I work in the federal space, so we are up close and intimate with, you know, what we see happening with congressional Republicans in terms of going after community groups as well as this administration. And, um, I think one thing, it has certainly made it a lot more difficult to be able to engage and enroll community groups, uh, community-based [00:07:00] organizations in, um, federal advocacy and federal work.
I think people are a lot more cautious, so they're. You know, sign in letters are one of those tried and true tools that we use at the federal level around issues where we wanna have Congress take a particular action. And people are a lot more cautious about, um, signing on to things. People are a lot more cautious about coming to Washington, DC for, uh, lobby days.
Um, I think that people, uh, don't approach the, um, the executive branch of the government. Um, I, myself, um, in this, this new, since the inauguration, I have not engaged with any agencies, um, or departments because they don't feel like safe spaces. And if we still have people that we know in those places, you think a lot about how will my engagement.
Perhaps make that person [00:08:00] vulnerable in their work. Um, and so I think it has, you know, caused us to really slow down and, um, be cautious in what we do. Um, I will say one benefit of it, um, that I think goes back to the, the conversation we were having around social media is it is really required that we pick up the phone more and have conversations with each other.
So probably even a little less on Zoom, but actually making phone calls and talking to people and sending less emails. And so perhaps the positive part of this is that it is pushing us more toward, um, reigniting or redeveloping those one-on-one connections and relationships that we have with one another.
Um, and I think it probably is the last thing I'll say is, you know, and you may mention of this, um, the funding that was coming into. Organizations for work. And so you had [00:09:00] EJ organizations, like I've talked to people in Louisiana and people in California who may have had like an EPA grant, for example, that dates back years way before we had the bipartisan infrastructure law and the Inflation Reduction Act.
And people saw those grants, um, um, even be revoked in this, um, in this kind of process. And so I think it probably is impacting the financial stability of, um, the environmental justice movement. And so people are, are also, you know, holding that. How do they preserve the work that they're doing? How do they, um, preserve their teams?
You know, how do you ensure that people are able to be paid? And so, um, uh, it's an, it's an interesting moment, but you also, I think, see. Organizations. If you have environmental justice in your name, there's no way you can fly under the radar. And so I think some people are even, you know, [00:10:00] digging in, in that regard because really, what, what do we have to lose?
Peter: Yeah.
Dana Johnson: So, yeah.
Peter: hard to change your name away from what your particular
Dana Johnson: Right.
Peter: is.
Dana Johnson: Yeah. Exactly.
Peter: have other NGOs been showing up for and showing solidarity
Dana Johnson: I feel like as a whole, especially here in Washington, DC I think there was a wholesale kind of retreating and people sort of turning inward, organizationally, um, probably as a protective mechanism, but also as people tried to figure out. What they would, would do next. And um, I think that you do see some continued relationship and partnership on, um, issues and probably if we moved down a, a couple of levels and organizations, so you have maybe like your [00:11:00] mid-manager level staff continuing to engage with environmental justice communities, especially if that's where their work has been, um, centered for a while.
Um, I think you do see some of the larger organizations that have, um, a legal focus or a legal apparatus still partnering with organizations to file suits to push back on Trump administrative actions. Um, but I do, I do feel like there was a, a wholesale retreat within, um, the environmental movement in DC
Peter: the instinct to duck and cover when in this kind of situation is,
Dana Johnson: yeah,
Peter: I think. It's very understandable,
Dana Johnson: yeah.
Peter: but also the right, it's just the wrong answer. I mean, the studies of authoritarianism make it very clear that it's actually really important for organizations to increase their connections with others and [00:12:00] act in solidarity so that you're not letting a few get picked off early on.
Dana Johnson: But that also, not to, yeah, I don't wanna cut you off, but I feel like in larger society we miss the opportunity to be in solidarity with one another. So if you look at, you know, the administration focusing on the legal community, focusing on higher education, um, focused on international aid, we had the opportunity as a society to, and that's what I meant about that focus on individualism.
I'm gonna save my individual firm, or I'm gonna save my individual academic institution or, you know, environmental organization, just insert the name as opposed to thinking about how we could all stand together and be a line of resistance. And so I think we missed the mark, um, in a large way across the board.
I even think I'm gonna add, um, the other branches of, [00:13:00] of government. To that list as well. And so, um, I, we, we, we missed the mark. We missed the mark. I really feel like Congress, if you are not focused on democracy and holding the line there, anything else you're doing is just busy work. Your focus in the paint should be around how do we preserve the democracy?
How do we protect our citizens? How do we protect our environmental laws and statues? You know, we can always make these things better, but we, we needed to have a line that we all stood at, um, holding hands and, you know, whatever. And I think we just miss that as a larger society.
Peter: we haven't really confronted this before in this way
Dana Johnson: Yeah.
Peter: um, in, uh, in the before times.
Dana Johnson: Yeah. Yeah.
Peter: There was some entity that usually would come in and be like, whoa, hey, this
Dana Johnson: Right,[00:14:00]
Peter: That used to be
Dana Johnson: right.
Peter: or the courts
Dana Johnson: Or the court. Yeah, yeah,
Peter: that didn't happen this time and we're like looking around and going, holy crap.
The safety, the, the net or the is very thin. Or actually not, there's really not as much of it as we used to think there was.
Dana Johnson: yeah.
I feel moments of worry. So I'll say in the beginning of this administration, I was full of angst and anxiety and felt powerless. And right now I think I'm in a neutral space. Um, and I'm probably feeling like, I think I can use Virginia as an example with the ballot measure to redistrict, you know, in the middle of a, a district team term, and there were two members [00:15:00] of the state legislature.
Who really like pushed for a new map, right? Really pushed for that ballot measure. And I think if we see, or if I see that kind of energy and effort at every level of government, even if we lose, I felt better about a fight that we actually got in right? As opposed to just surrendering. Um, it's what I love about what we saw in Minneapolis is what, um, native Chicagoan is what I love.
Um, when I see mayor, uh, Johnson and the governor, you know, pushing back, I think if I see moments of that, um, or efforts in that way across this country to really push back, um, can we beat cheaters? You know, I don't know, but we should at least be in the game.[00:16:00]
Peter: Yeah.
Dana Johnson: Yeah.
Peter: to, I think.
Dana Johnson: We, yeah,
Peter: we really have to.
Dana Johnson: we don't have a choice. Yeah,
Peter: but I also, yeah, the worst times. Give rise to moments of real grace and
Dana Johnson: yeah, yeah.
Peter: and actions that we can look up to.
Dana Johnson: yeah.
Peter: I think, uh, the neapolitans, um, like lit the way for many of us in how fiercely they resisted
Dana Johnson: Yes.
Peter: ice. I recently, I don't remember if it was on a podcast or read about one of the reasons that were so organized and able to, you know, deploy themselves and they had communication systems set up was
Dana Johnson: Yeah.
Peter: um, in the wake of the murder of George Floyd, so many people in Minneapolis came together
Dana Johnson: Yeah.
Peter: for protests and they started to develop these networks
Dana Johnson: [00:17:00] Yeah.
Peter: connections and
Dana Johnson: Yes, yes,
Peter: Literally became infrastructure
Dana Johnson: yes.
Peter: a tremendous difference, um, uh, this, uh, uh, when, when, when ICE came to town.
Dana Johnson: Yeah,
Peter: and so, yeah, it's sort of like the breathing exercise. It's important to take those kinds of moments of
Dana Johnson: yeah, yeah.
Peter: and try to ingest, you know, breathe them in as well.
Dana Johnson: Breathe them in. And I also think for as much as we wanna have immediate relief, we probably won't. And so it does give us time to build those kinds of infrastructures across the country. And you know, we get to look at, even like Hungary for example, what we saw happen with that election where people decided like, enough is enough.
And so if we have that infrastructure in place, we. [00:18:00] Build that groundswell of energy that we need to really, um, have the kind of democracy that includes everyone. I mean, that's what America was, right? Wasn't it? Well, in theory it was,
Peter: At times.
Dana Johnson: at times, right? A um, a place where everyone, um, could come or could be and create a life, um, a meaningful life for themselves.
And we've, we've had a ugly, ugly moments along the way, but I think as a, a country, we were most poised to do that. And I, I still think we are. Um, for as much as there seems to be roadblocks being set up to it, uh, it'll be difficult to stop this country from being a multiracial democracy. It just. It [00:19:00] just will and so we can move into it together or you know, what we see now this tug of war for
Peter: Yeah.
Dana Johnson: what was, and I think in some ways the fantasy of what was as opposed to all that we can be.
Let's choose all that we can be.
Peter: So if Democrats take back the house or the whole of Congress,
Dana Johnson: Mm.
Peter: what would your, what would your campaign plan be for, um, should, um, what should the environmental justice and environmental communities. Try to prioritize or get them to prioritize what? What do we need to start working on?
Dana Johnson: Yeah. So there are a couple of things that have been coming up for me. I feel like, um, especially last year, just pockets of people everywhere. Um, thinking about how do you rebuild [00:20:00] an agency, for example, how do we restore the implementation of a particular policy? And what was always missing again, like that gap, I didn't see community-based constellations of, um, in those conversations.
And so the people who,
Peter: that?
Dana Johnson: I mean the people who are most close to the work that an EPA does, for example, where was the environmental justice? And maybe it happened and I don't know about it. That could be, but was there, or do we need to have the environmental justice constellation of folks
Peter: Got it.
Dana Johnson: thinking about a policy.
So, you know, and how did it work? Um, and how would we change the way it works? And that's probably kind of late work. But I do think making sure people are in a space, thinking about policies and thinking about agencies, um, [00:21:00] is really important. Um, wow. And you have me thinking about a campaign. Here's what I'm also gonna say, and I might be rambling a little bit, but, um, I have really been sitting with like our environmental laws.
And I remember when I first came into the work, Monique Harden was with the Deep South Center for Environmental Justice and called me and was like, are you sitting down somewhere? 'cause I need to talk to you. And I'm like, oh my God, what's going on? And she was like, I want you to really understand how the Clean Air Act works.
Like it's built on a premise of harm and these are the ways that it harms people. Um, this is what a lack of enforcement looks like and just gave me a breakdown. And so I think that kind of work to think about how do we rebuild, uh, would be the place that I would start. And [00:22:00] I think sort of visioning where, what does ideal society look like and how would you rebuild like federal infrastructure to meet that ideal society?
So not, maybe we don't even build the EPA the way it was before, and like, who do we need and what are the accountabilities that we can build into those processes? And then we, you know, start working with Congress to figure out how do we, um,
craft our laws. To meet, to meet, to meet the next 50 years. That's what I would start. And you know, that work could, could very well be being done already. I know there were the, um, I don't know if you were familiar with the work that the, um, former people who were a part of the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council have been doing, traveling around the country and [00:23:00] convening conversations with communities.
Um, and so I think some of that is that visioning work.
Peter: good.
Dana Johnson: Um, but uh, yeah, I've been thinking about how you take that vision and develop it for the next 50 years. Operationalize it, I think is what I'm getting to is where I would start and yeah, as I say it, yeah, but doesn't it feel like it's too late?
Like, we should be doing it already so that as soon as the
Peter: Well,
Dana Johnson: switch flips, we're like, here,
Peter: right?
Dana Johnson: what we want.
Peter: So I'm glad that you just said, um, the, uh, uh, the members of the advisory group have already started going around, uh, uh, just for a moment. Um, we were scheduled to go to three. We're at three. Do you have a hard stop? Do you have a couple
Dana Johnson:Yeah.
Peter:Because
Dana Johnson:I got time. Mm-hmm.
Peter: Um, you mentioned one of the challenges that I think is really, really interesting
Dana Johnson: Mm-hmm.
Peter: it it's a big It is.
Yeah. What comes after Trump? do we. I'm trying to think about how to phrase it. How do we get back [00:24:00] to a, uh, set of laws and, um, uh, entities that can enforce those laws that protect people's
Dana Johnson: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.
Peter: environmental threats and harms? And I think that's a big question. Can we rebuild what we had or do we need to build something new?
And, uh, uh, feeling, and I, I've talked to a lot of people who, e echo or have the same view is, you know, what we had was okay, but it was also part of what got us to this point because it failed, it still failed a lot of people in a lot of ways. And so should think more forward-looking about what's, yeah, what is next, what is the shape of things to come, which I, I think is a really. Fascinating It's, it's sort of like, how do you grow something from the ashes?
Dana Johnson: right.
Peter: and can you make it more powerful and more effective, um, and, and meet the [00:25:00] needs, uh, better than what was there before.
Dana Johnson: Yeah.
Peter: but I'm not aware of how much of is happening, so that's why I was encouraged by least the, the example you offered.
Dana Johnson: Yeah. I, I think people are. Thinking about it, but to your point, I do wonder how much of it is thinking about it in the previous context and how do we adopt or adapt, uh, ideas that people have to fit into the previous construct. And I think we probably as a nation, wow, the next set of leaders will be so important because we probably will have to have a both and strategy.
So we'll have to maybe leverage previous frameworks and rules while we also work to build and to create something new. [00:26:00] And I do think historically industry probably has been prioritized in. How we think about this, how we think about laws and their applications, and who we consider experts. And I think even how we think about the work, think about us in DC a lot right now about that.
We, you know, how would we,
Peter:You broke up a little bit there. Would
Dana Johnson: oh,
Peter:mind saying that again?
Dana Johnson:um, can you, you hear me okay now?
Peter:Yeah. It's back now.
Dana Johnson: So yeah, I'm thinking a lot about, um, us in Washington, DC and how we think about this work because I do think sometimes it is an intellectual exercise, right? Like, it's like theory that doesn't always have the benefit of practice in real life and community.
And I think that's part of the work too, to sort of like, how can we flip that? Um. That, that approach [00:27:00] to how we rebuild the country.
Peter: what gives you hope? Is it the future or how do you create hope
Dana Johnson: Mm-hmm.
Peter: it thinking about that opportunity to, you know, how do we rebuild, or, um, where does it come from for you?
Dana Johnson: Um, I think right now it's probably coming from people like really not being in isolation,
Peter: Mm-hmm.
Dana Johnson: like even this conversation has me like, I'm like, oh, how would I rebuild? Like it's, um, it's energizing me. And so I do think being in connection with people, um, really means a lot. And then seeing people like rally around one another and be in community with one another is really giving me a lot of hope right now.
Like we are all just. You know, buying a bunch of toilet paper and filling up our freezers and just waiting for the, [00:28:00] waiting for the, whatever the end is. Like, you know, we, we still trying to live and try moving back toward connection and, um, yeah, that's, that's driving me, I will say, I'm gonna go back to it.
I think for as painful as this past year and a half or so has been, um, I do think the benefit of it is it is pushing us all toward one another in some meaningful ways.
Peter: Yeah.
Dana Johnson: Yeah,
Peter: that's right.
Dana Johnson: yeah,
Peter: acts of love and humanity and compassion
Dana Johnson: yeah. Yes,
Peter: really stand out
Dana Johnson: Mm-hmm.
Peter: and, it gets us thinking more about those, the importance of that in these kinds of times.
Dana Johnson: Right. I agree.
Peter: so, um, what's some advice that you'd like to pass on to young people or people [00:29:00] early in their careers who are thinking about, Hey, what can I do to shape the world around me?
Dana Johnson: So I think that, um, you can come from a variety of backgrounds and interests and academic pursuits and contribute to something great. Um, I think. Again, I'm speaking through the lens of being in Washington, DC like right. We have a lot of environmental health and environmental science and, uh, legal experts.
But if you are an artist or you know, someone who is interested in finance, if you are a teacher, like they're so, so many ways to get at, um, the kind of society that we want to see. Um, I, I want people of [00:30:00] all kinds of backgrounds to be, uh, contributing their, their thinking and their expertise and their ideas, their creativity to whatever it is that we create next.
So that'd be my first piece of advice. The, the table is open and set and everybody come and, and have a seat. The second is around like, how do we care? For ourselves.
Peter: Mm-hmm.
Dana Johnson: I do think being in balance is important because this is the long haul. And, um, so taking those moments to breathe, I'm always gonna come back to the breath.
Taking those moments to go outside for a walk, um, feeding ourselves well, however you define that. I think those things are really important. And then the final thing we talked about a lot is being in community. So be sure that you don't do this in, in isolation.
Peter: It's great. [00:31:00] I love it.
Dana Johnson: Thanks.
Peter: Dana, thank you so much. This has been so, so fun. Lovely conversation to have with you.
Dana Johnson: I know. I was just thinking this was lovely. So thank you for inviting (MUSIC outro sting) me.