Saying No to the Slog: How Two Harvard Students Changed Lobbying

How two Harvard students changed lobbying

This illustration can only be used with the Nora Caplan-Bricker piece that originally ran in the 5/23/2015 issue of National Journal magazine.
National Journal
Nora Caplan-Bricker
Add to Briefcase
Nora Caplan-Bricker
May 22, 2015, 12:36 a.m.

When Alex Wirth was a fresh­man at Har­vard, he be­came smit­ten with the idea of cre­at­ing a pres­id­en­tial youth coun­cil to give young people a dir­ect say in gov­ern­ment. So, when sum­mer came, the then-18-year-old did what any preter­nat­ur­ally polit­ic­al col­lege stu­dent would: He went to Wash­ing­ton to make it hap­pen.

Wirth asked the White House for an ex­ec­ut­ive ac­tion, but he spent most of his sum­mer trudging around the Hill, seek­ing al­lies for his idea the old-fash­ioned way: via mod­er­ately edu­cated guess­work and con­tacts. (Wirth is the great-neph­ew of former Sen. Tim Wirth of Col­or­ado and the son of a state sen­at­or from New Mex­ico; he also was a Sen­ate page in high school.) It was, to say the least, a dis­heart­en­ing ex­per­i­ence—”this wild goose chase across Cap­it­ol Hill,” he re­calls now. When he was able to talk to law­makers at all, most told him they didn’t have time for him, or prom­ised to think about his res­ol­u­tion and then nev­er called back. He left in­cred­u­lous and frus­trated with Wash­ing­ton in a way that only a di­git­al nat­ive could be. Was this la­bor­i­ous, in­ef­fi­cient, un­scientif­ic pro­cess really how lob­by­ing worked?

Back at school, Wirth ven­ted to his room­mate, a com­puter-sci­ence type named Jonath­an Marks, with whom he had bon­ded on a fresh­man-ori­ent­a­tion back­pack­ing trip. Marks, who had no ex­per­i­ence with Wash­ing­ton, was even more ap­palled than Wirth. “The more I learned about the way Alex’s world worked, it was in­con­ceiv­able to me,” Marks tells me. Wirth con­tin­ued his cam­paign, un­suc­cess­fully, from Cam­bridge. Then, dur­ing their ju­ni­or year, he and Marks hit upon an idea. At the time, Marks was work­ing in a bio­chem­istry lab, where he mapped how pro­teins in­ter­act in the body. What if he could chart law­makers’ ac­tions in much the same way? “Though pro­teins and people are dif­fer­ent things, math doesn’t really care,” Marks says. He thought he could get a com­puter to identi­fy ideal le­gis­lat­ive al­lies—ex­actly what Wirth had spent a sum­mer try­ing to do by dint of shoe-leath­er and mox­ie.

That idea be­came Quor­um, a data-ana­lyt­ics pro­gram that, today, four months after its launch, is already draw­ing a sur­pris­ing level of in­terest from Wash­ing­ton in­siders. Among those pay­ing Quor­um’s $4,800-per-user an­nu­al sub­scrip­tion price are the Club for Growth, the Podesta Group, the law firm Hol­land & Knight, the Glover Park Group, the United Na­tions Found­a­tion’s Bet­ter World Cam­paign, four con­gres­sion­al of­fices, and four For­tune 100 com­pan­ies—one of which is Gen­er­al Mo­tors. (Though Wirth is a self-de­scribed Demo­crat, he’s selling his product to all comers.) Wirth and Marks won’t dis­close their rev­en­ue, but they say that the busi­ness is already prof­it­able; they haven’t raised any ven­ture cap­it­al and haven’t needed it.

So what did two col­lege kids in a dorm room far out­side the Belt­way en­vi­sion that in­siders couldn’t? Quor­um’s key fea­ture is its abil­ity to map re­la­tion­ships between mem­bers of Con­gress. Pull up any law­maker, and you see what looks like a dan­deli­on gone to seed: a ball of sil­ver lines with red or blue points on their tips, which rep­res­ent Re­pub­lic­ans and Demo­crats with whom that per­son has co­sponsored a bill. But Wirth and Marks are con­stantly adding new cap­ab­il­it­ies. All year, Wirth has been mak­ing trips to Wash­ing­ton to ask cli­ents and pro­spect­ive buy­ers what fea­tures they would use; he takes the sug­ges­tions to Marks and asks what it’s pos­sible to build. The res­ults have in­cluded dis­trict-by-dis­trict demo­graph­ic data and a search en­gine that can pull up every floor state­ment, press re­lease, or tweet from a law­maker on a par­tic­u­lar top­ic.

Was this la­bor­i­ous, in­ef­fi­cient, un­scientif­ic pro­cess really how lob­by­ing worked?

Not every swing con­nects. “I think it’s clear in how they’ve de­signed it that they’re not from the Hill,” says one con­gres­sion­al staffer whose of­fice is still test­ing Quor­um. For ex­ample, “there were some factors” the soft­ware uses to rate mem­bers of Con­gress that “we don’t think are par­tic­u­larly im­port­ant.” But the Quor­um team’s youth and chutzpah are for the most part serving them well: When I asked cli­ents wheth­er they felt strange do­ing busi­ness with col­lege stu­dents, they told me that, if any­thing, it gave the duo more cred­ib­il­ity. “It’s a mat­ter of be­ing able to crunch the data, be­ing able to move the data,” says Chris Cush­ing, a lob­by­ist at the firm Nel­son Mullins Ri­ley & Scar­bor­ough. “As a 52-year-old, I’m not on the cut­ting edge.”

This month, the room­mates are gradu­at­ing and re­lo­cat­ing to D.C. full time. In Wirth’s case, that’s no sur­prise. At Har­vard, he went on to study gov­ern­ment and eco­nom­ics, and since his fresh­man year, he has been a White House in­tern and the chair of a “youth work­ing group” at the U.S. Na­tion­al Com­mis­sion for the U.N. Edu­ca­tion­al, Sci­entif­ic and Cul­tur­al Or­gan­iz­a­tion. Wirth’s still-smooth face must get him carded in res­taur­ants, but his man­ner at 21 is as pol­ished as any mid­ca­reer op­er­at­or’s. (He and oth­er stu­dents on the Quor­um team “have done de­bate, Youth and Gov­ern­ment, Mod­el U.N.,” he says, and are “com­fort­able in very big rooms with lots of im­port­ant people.”) Marks’s ar­rival in Wash­ing­ton was some­what less pre­dict­able: Be­fore Wirth in­tro­duced him to polit­ics, Marks, 22, who stud­ied chem­ic­al and phys­ic­al bio­logy as well as com­puter sci­ence at Har­vard, had al­ways planned to go in­to the “bio­med­ic­al space,” he says. “But, for now, I’ve be­come very in­ter­ested in the prob­lems faced by this par­tic­u­lar mar­ket.”

When they ar­rive, their game plan will be to dif­fer­en­ti­ate Quor­um from oth­er in­flu­ence-in­dustry play­ers, such as Bloomberg and CQ Roll Call, by prom­ising to save their users as much time and hassle as pos­sible. Marks’s latest ad­di­tion, for in­stance, com­pares two ver­sions of a bill and iden­ti­fies every dif­fer­ence in word­ing—a task that, un­til now, Hill staffers and lob­by­ists did the ana­log way, com­par­ing large doc­u­ments line by line, with high­light­er in hand. Like­wise, many ad­vocacy groups have long sunk huge amounts of time in­to cre­at­ing le­gis­lat­ive “score­cards,” which rank mem­bers’ per­form­ances on par­tic­u­lar is­sues. The group First Fo­cus Cam­paign for Chil­dren “used to spend a week and a half with three mem­bers of their staff” to make score­cards once a year, Marks says. With Quor­um, the pro­cess “takes an hour, and they do it once a week.” Stor­ies like that still leave Marks flab­ber­gas­ted: “It’s stuff a com­puter can do! Sav­ing people from that tre­mend­ous amount of time is what the in­form­a­tion-tech­no­logy re­volu­tion of the last 40 years is all about.”

Yet ap­par­ently, be­fore Quor­um, no one in Wash­ing­ton had no­ticed that the fu­ture had ar­rived. Per­haps that’s be­cause, as Hol­land & Knight lob­by­ist and former law­maker Gerry Sikor­ski ob­serves, old hands had “jerry-rigged” their own ap­proaches to find­ing in­form­a­tion and no longer no­ticed Cap­it­ol Hill’s in­ef­fi­cien­cies. “I still will reach for the con­gres­sion­al dir­ect­ory that I have in my car,” says Sikor­ski, who re­cently star­ted us­ing Quor­um. “I have the apps on my iPhone, but we’re cap­tive to our own ways of do­ing things.” Wirth and Marks, on the oth­er hand, had the time, op­tim­ism, and lack of fa­mili­ar­ity with D.C. to con­sider a new ap­proach. As one cli­ent puts it, “These are just really, really smart young guys who came up with an idea and don’t know well enough not to do it.”

What We're Following See More »
HOPES A DEAL CAN GET DONE
Schumer Meeting with Trump for Last-Ditch Meeting
19 hours ago
THE LATEST
BY SCALISE
House Told to “Stay Flexible”
20 hours ago
THE DETAILS
ALREADY PASSED CR, MCCARTHY SAYS
House Is Heading Home
21 hours ago
THE LATEST
WHILE ROME BURNS?
Trump Hosting $100,000/Couple Fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago
22 hours ago
THE LATEST

Even while Congress works to avoid a government shutdown at 5 p.m. today, "President Donald Trump will mark the first anniversary of his inauguration on Saturday with a celebration at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, with tickets starting at $100,000 a pair. That amount, according to the invitation, will pay for dinner and a photograph with the president. For $250,000, a couple can also take part in a roundtable." The event will boost the Trump presidential campaign and the RNC.

Source:
DACA STILL A STICKING POINT
House Passes Spending Bill, but Senate May Balk
22 hours ago
THE LATEST

"The House approved a stopgap spending bill on Thursday night to keep the government open past Friday, but Senate Democrats — angered by President Trump’s vulgar aspersions and a lack of progress on a broader budget and immigration deal — appeared ready to block the measure. The House approved the measure 230 to 197, despite conflicting signals by President Trump sent throughout the day and a threatened rebellion from conservatives that ended up fizzling. But the bill, which would keep the government open through Feb. 16, provided only a faint glimmer of hope that a crisis could be averted before funding expires at midnight on Friday. In the Senate, at least about a dozen Democratic votes would be needed to approve the measure, and there was little chance that those would materialize."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login