Archaeologists in the United States live in increasingly turbulent times for archaeology, cultural resource management (CRM), and historic preservation in general. As our society becomes more polarized, so does support for or against federal actions, such as those pertaining to the Dakota Access Pipeline, Keystone Pipeline, Resolution Mine, Surry–Skiffes Creek Transmission Line, and Bears Ears National Monument. These undertakings were authorized through federal permits or legislation or, in the case of Bears Ears, presidential proclamation. All, in one way or another, involved preservation issues, and they have been contested in federal court. The archaeological community—most often through professional societies such as the Society for American Archaeology (SAA), the Society for Historic Archaeology (SHA), the American Cultural Resource Association (ACRA), and the American Anthropological Association (AAA)—airs its concerns about these and other issues through editorials, letters, phone calls, visits to members of Congress or federal agencies, and formal testimony at congressional committee hearings.
Ensuring survival of historic preservation laws and regulations in the United States necessitates the participation of archaeologists, CRM professionals, and other preservation groups in monitoring and—when needed—advocating for or against federal actions that directly or even indirectly affect preservation. It is they who can best talk about the whys and hows of archaeology and historic preservation along with their importance and value. Members of the public also share an interest in and see the value of both archaeology and preservation in supporting and maintaining a community's social and cultural identity through its connection to its past (Atalay Reference Atalay2012; Little Reference Little2002; Little and Shackel Reference Little and Shackel2016; Moshenska and Dhanjal Reference Moshenska and Dhanjal2011). The public and avocational archaeologists can be enlisted to lend support through editorials, letters, and calls.
Successfully advocating for archaeology is especially significant for tribes because much of archaeology in the United States constitutes their heritage. Tribes have a history of effectively lobbying to address issues of concern, such as passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), designation and preservation of monuments such as Bears Ears, and preservation and protection of Oak Flats in Arizona from mining. The SAA and other professional organizations have partnered with tribes in lobbying for actions of mutual interest and concern.
Professional preservationists and tribal representatives with direct experience working with preservation laws and regulations can best articulate potential impacts, both positive and negative, from proposed changes to laws and regulations or from new legislation. Professionals are also positioned to address the economic and social value and importance of archaeology, historic preservation, and heritage tourism.
Congress takes the temperature of constituents concerning proposed legislation, appropriations, and federal actions, including presidential and judicial nominees, through public opinion polls and lobbying. Aside from reelection, uppermost in the minds of elected officials are jobs and the economy because, other than special interest groups, these drive votes. Most recently, the SAA and other professional organizations successfully lobbied for confirmation of Representative Deb Haaland as secretary of the interior. Haaland is the first Native American to hold that position.
Archaeology and historic preservation are low on the list of priorities of most legislators. Consequently, lobbying is probably the most effective and direct way to catch their attention.
Unfortunately, lobbying is not an activity in the wheelhouse of most archaeologists or CRM professionals. This situation is not limited to archaeologists in the United States; increasingly, European archaeologists are getting engaged in lobbying their respective governments (Aitchison Reference Aitchison2019; Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2021).
This article attempts to change that situation by discussing what lobbying involves and by providing useful tips and tools for lobbying. It is based on years of experience of advocacy, not as professional lobbyists but as CRM professionals deeply concerned about the effects of federal actions on archaeology and historic preservation. We believe that how we value the past defines who we are as a society. The senior author has been a volunteer lobbyist over the past several years at the national level for ACRA—and more recently, SAA—and at the state level. The junior author has been involved in advocacy at the state level. Along the way, we have learned a few “tricks of the trade,” which we want to pass on along with resources to use in making your pitch and becoming an influencer.
LOBBYING VERSUS ADVOCACY
Lobbying
There may be some confusion about the distinction between lobbying and advocacy. For Congress and the executive branch, lobbying is defined legally. According to the Lobbying Disclosure Act, lobbying activities are defined as “lobbying contacts and efforts in support of such contacts, including preparation and planning activities, research and other background work that is intended, at the time it is performed, for use in contacts, and coordination with the lobbying activities of others” (2 U.S.C. § 1602[7]). For the purposes of this article, “contacts” refers to oral or written communication on behalf of a client to an executive or legislative branch member regarding the formulation, modification, or adoption of federal legislation or a federal rule, regulation or an Executive Order, or the administration or execution of a federal program or policy (2 U.S.C. § 1602[8][A]). A lobbyist is “any individual who is employed or retained by a client for financial or other compensation for services that include more than one lobbying contact, other than an individual whose lobbying activities constitute less than 20 percent of the time engaged in the services provided by such individual to that client over a 3-month period” (2 U.S.C. 1602[10]).
Nonprofit 501(c)3 organizations can lobby without losing their tax-exempt status under certain circumstances. No substantial part of the activities can involve propaganda or otherwise attempt to influence legislation, or participate in or intervene in a political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) a candidate for public office. For more information, see 26 U.S. Code § 501 - Exemption from tax on corporations, certain trusts, etc. (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/501).
Federal archaeologists are prohibited from lobbying while on duty. This prohibition is specified in 18 USC § 1913, which prohibits the direct or indirect use of appropriated funds, including the salaries of federal employees,
to pay for any personal service, advertisement, telegram, telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or other device, intended or designed to influence in any manner a member of Congress, a jurisdiction, or an official of any government, to favor, adopt, or oppose, by vote or otherwise, any legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriation, whether before or after the introduction of any bill, measure, or resolution proposing such legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriation, unless authorized by Congress [18 U.S. Code § 1913 - Lobbying with appropriated moneys].
There are instances in which an employee can lobby if it is clear that the employee is doing so as a private citizen and not representing a federal agency. State archaeologists face similar restrictions, and it is assumed that similar restrictions apply to most government employees. Archaeologists employed by state colleges or universities may face similar restrictions. To be safe, check with your ethics official to know what you can and cannot do.
Advocacy
Meetings to advocate for archaeology and historic preservation; to educate congressional members and staff about archaeology, historic preservation, and associated laws and regulations; and to respond to requests for public comments on new/changes to rules and regulations published in the Federal Register are examples of advocacy. This type of lobbying means to “advocate” for a position. Advocates are not professional lobbyists. They are not being paid to promote a position but instead are volunteering because they care about an issue and want their voices heard. Given that archaeologists generally are not paid to lobby, they are more correctly called “advocates.” So, when we use “lobbying” here, we are discussing “advocacy.”
Advocacy takes two forms. One is indirectly through grassroots campaigns, in which large numbers of citizens send coordinated messages to their representatives via phone calls, petitions, letters, e-mails, or social media. The other is directly through individual meetings or phone calls with an official or representatives of that official, through which smaller groups of constituents can discuss issues in greater detail. The former is more impersonal, and the latter is more personal. The value and use of each usually depends on the issue under consideration. Regardless, lobbying is the process whereby one attempts to influence an official or officials in the executive or legislative branch of government to support or oppose an administrative or legislative action.
Lobbying is the art of influencing. Although one may not always be successful in convincing the official(s) one is trying to influence, one will never know unless one tries. Even though officials may not agree with a particular position, at least they know that individuals and/or groups have concerns, and these individuals or groups carefully monitor whether the official(s) supports or opposes the action.
ARCHAEOLOGISTS AND ADVOCACY
Although they fly under the radar, archaeologists and cultural resource managers have made and continue to make use of lobbying, primarily through professional societies. The SAA, ACRA, SHA, AAA, and the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) have committees—such as the SAA's Government Affairs Committee—to monitor legislative, executive, and judicial actions, mostly at the federal level but also at the state level if an action has national import. These societies monitor and actively advocate for or against federal actions and activities, whether positive or negative, that affect archaeology and historic preservation. Monitoring can be either direct or indirect through third-party organizations such as the Coalition for American Heritage or Preservation Action. Some state organizations, such as the Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists, also have government affairs committees monitoring state and federal actions and lobbying either directly or through the national professional societies. These state organizations have the greatest impact at the local level.
An early example of the ability of archaeologists to advocate and lobby successfully was formation of the River Basin Surveys, one of the most extensive and enduring federal archaeological programs in the United States (Banks and Czaplicki Reference Banks and Czaplicki2014). The River Basin Surveys formed in response to the Flood Control Act of 1944, which constituted the largest civil works program in US history. The act authorized and funded construction of dams, reservoirs, hydroelectric plants, flood control structures, and irrigation projects throughout the nation but especially in the West—particularly the upper Missouri River Basin. Because of potential impacts to archaeological sites, a group of prominent archaeologists formed the Committee for the Recovery of Archaeological Remains (CRAR). Through its organizational and lobbying efforts, CRAR secured congressional authorization and appropriations to organize the River Basin Surveys. The efforts and activities of CRAR probably represent one of the most effective examples of lobbying by archaeologists (Wendorf and Thompson Reference Wendorf and Thompson2002).
More recent examples of successful lobbying by the professional community for legislative actions include the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), especially Sections 106 and 110 and the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF), and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA). The NHPA, passed some 50 years ago, is the most significant and far-reaching piece of historic preservation legislation in the United States. Most recently, the SAA and other organizations have lent support for passage of the African American Burial Grounds Network Act, which the SHA has spearheaded, and the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony (STOP) Act, for which tribes have been advocating.
Lobbying can also be used to address departmental actions. A recent example is the SAA's opposition of the last administration's relocation of Bureau of Land Management's Washington headquarters and staffers to Grand Junction, Colorado, as well as hundreds of other DC-based positions to state offices across the West. The move motivated many of BLM's professional staff, including its cultural resource staff, to retire or transfer to other agencies or state offices, which resulted in a bureau-wide loss of institutional knowledge. Although the SAA's efforts were not successful, one of Colorado's senators contacted the SAA for information on the impacts of the move to BLM's cultural resource staff and program. The SAA is monitoring the potential reversal of this relocation and will likely offer recommendations.
Another example is the response of the SAA, SHA, and ACRA to the secretary of the interior's Secretarial Order 3389, Coordinating and Clarifying National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Reviews, issued by the last administration. Fortunately, Secretary Haaland recently rescinded that Secretarial Order.
Aside from legislation, departmental actions, and nominees, the SAA and allied societies and organizations pay close attention to funding. Lobbying for appropriations is increasingly important as competition grows to fund projects and programs, such as collections management. Appropriations are critical for archaeology and historic preservation because these reflect federal commitment to and support for historic preservation. For academics, the SAA tracks funding and provides letters of support to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for research dollars. For the CRM community, it is the HPF that matters.
Authorized under NHPA and administered by the National Park Service, the HPF provides states and tribes with matching funds to implement the act. Consequently, the HPF bankrolls federal involvement in preservation of the nation's culture and heritage—historical and archaeological. The HPF supports State Historic Preservation and Tribal Historic Preservation programs, and it awards historic preservation grants through states and other organizations, such as Certified Local Governments. Communities use these grants for preservation activities to enhance economic development, create jobs, and promote heritage tourism. For a list of the programs financed through the HPF, see the National Park Service's State, Tribal, Local, Plans, and Grants website.
HPF funds originate from offshore oil lease revenue, not taxes. Congress funds the HPF and, by law, authorized an annual appropriation ceiling of $150 million through fiscal year 2023. However, actual appropriations vary, and Congress has yet to appropriate the full $150 million in any year. Congress, though, can provide supplemental funding in the event of natural disasters—such as hurricanes—as it did in 2013, 2018, and 2019. Since 2013, Congress has increased funding levels for HPF, and we would argue that these increases are a direct result of lobbying activities of preservation and professional organizations such as the SAA. The overiew of the HPF by the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers includes a history of appropriation levels (https://ncshpo.org/issues/historic-preservation-fund/).
Agencies require funds for their historic preservation programs or projects, and these are financed separately. Adequate monetary support is also needed for museums, collection management, and curation. The SAA and allied organizations monitor appropriations for agencies, such as BLM, and for specific projects and programs, such as the US Corps of Engineers Veterans Curation Program—a program that we all should be promoting when visiting members of Congress who are involved in Department of Defense appropriations.
As is the case with all things political, though, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. Sometimes lobbying is effective, and sometimes it is not. It is imperative to monitor the three branches of government regarding archaeology and historic preservation issues to build support for preservation. To ensure that our voices are heard and our concerns addressed, archaeologists and cultural resource managers must be effective advocates.
WHAT GOES INTO ADVOCACY
There is nothing magical or mystical about advocacy, nor are there hard-and-fast rules, because it involves connecting with people with differing viewpoints, some of which may clash with yours. Be passionate for, committed to, and knowledgeable about your issue(s). Whether lobbying indirectly or directly, be prepared and do your homework. Research not only your issue(s) but—perhaps more importantly—those of the official you have targeted. This includes the caucuses, issues, and viewpoints with which the official is involved and the concerns of that official's constituents. Elected officials and their staff sense when a person is just mouthing banalities.
There are two approaches to advocacy: indirect and direct. Some issues, such as major legislation or support for appropriations, may need to involve both: a “letter-writing” campaign and in-person meetings with officials. As is the case with some other organizations, the SAA maintains a “Take Action” page on its website where members can track federal legislation of concern as well as key state legislation and the SAA's position on that legislation. It includes names of senators or representatives along with legislation of interest and congressional leaders and committees. For an activity needing a quick response, the “Take Action” page includes a form e-letter that can be signed or modified and sent to their elected officials. At the local level, letters and editorials in newspapers are also useful tools.
Editorials can rally the public to your cause. Generally, the more public support you have, the more likely members of Congress will pay attention. Public support is definitely needed given that the public pays for much of the archaeology in the United States (Klein et al Reference Klein, Goldstein, Gangloff, Lees, Ryzewski, Styles and Wright2018; Little and Amdur-Clark Reference Little and Amdur-Clark2008; Nassaney Reference Nassaney2021).
The most effective approach is the direct method: in-person meetings with elected officials and/or their representatives. In this time of a pandemic, such meetings are most often through video or teleconferencing. What follows are tips on how to proceed with in-person meetings with elected officials. The focus is on meetings with members of Congress, but the information also applies to meetings with state and local officials. Much is common sense.
Always remember, these officials work for you. This means that you can be an influencer if you act civilly and are persuasive. The best and most effective approach is to meet with the representative and senators from your—or for those of you in the CRM and preservation industries, your company's—district and state. You and/or your company are their constituent, and they focus on their voters. If you are lobbying a representative or senator from outside your district or state, try to enlist someone from that district or state to accompany you.
LOBBYING TIPS
The following tips are for meetings, either in person or by videoconferencing or phone.
(1) Gain Experience. For your first attempts, choose someone to go with you who is experienced and meet with representatives or senators who are preservation friendly. Reach out to SAA, SHA, and ACRA government relations committees to find someone who can act as a mentor. ACRA sponsors a “Hill Day,” when members visit the Hill to meet with members of Congress or their staffers. Usually, there is a short orientation to brief inexperienced ACRA members on what and what not to do during these meetings.
(2) Pick a Good Time to Lobby. Although it never hurts to keep archaeology and historic preservation in front of members of Congress and their staffers, much lobbying is reactive—addressing proposed or draft laws, regulations, rules, appropriations, et cetera. The best time to address pending actions is when you find out about them. Write letters, e-mails, and tweets and call early and often. However, if you want to visit in person, there are two times/locations to consider: when Congress is in session in DC, or when members are back home having town hall meetings. Schedules for both houses of Congress are posted on their calendars (https://www.congress.gov/calendars-and-schedules). Schedules of individual members are on their websites.
(3) Make an Appointment. Members of Congress and their staff are busy, whether in Washington or in their state/district. Making an appointment is common courtesy. You will get a cold reception if you walk in unexpectedly.
(4) Do Your Homework: Members of Congress. Research the congressperson with whom you are meeting. Know of which committees and caucuses that person is a member and what that individual's rank is. Every member, whether a representative or senator, has a web page, which is the best place to start. Use the internet to track how a member voted on a bill or issue about which you are concerned. Websites such as https://clerk.house.gov/Votes, https://www.senate.gov/legislative/votesnew.htm , or https://www.causes.com/ are good sources. State legislatures post similar information.
(5) Do Your Homework: Targeted Legislation, Regulation, Rules. Research the issue or action about which you are lobbying and how it specifically affects archaeology and historic preservation. Know the nuances of the issue, along with facts, statistics, and the way it affects the congressperson's voters.
(6) Keep Track of Time. You will have a limited amount of time—generally, between 15 and 20 minutes—to get your point across. Organize your talking points beforehand. If you have handouts, make them one or two pages with simple, well-articulated points. If possible, identify one or two examples of projects in the congressperson's district or state.
(7) Be Prepared for Staffers. Most of the time you will meet with a staffer. Staffers tend to be young, but they are very knowledgeable. Most often, staffers are assigned to cover specific issues or Congressional committees. Find out what those are. Hopefully, you will meet with a staffer who covers preservation issues and has some knowledge of the NHPA and Section 106. If not, be prepared to explain the NHPA and Section 106 in simple terms.
(8) Speak Plainly. Do not use jargon or acronyms; otherwise, you will lose your audience. Ask the people with whom you are meeting if they are familiar with the NHPA and Section 106 and, more generally, CRM. If not, explain succinctly and in general terms. Stick to the highlights, and do not get into the weeds unless they take the lead and want more information.
(9) Be Specific. Know your “ask,” and be succinct when explaining it. With respect to meetings with members of Congress, two issues are always talking points: HPF and appropriations. Be ready to explain what the HPF is.
(10) Know How to End the Meeting. Close the meeting by asking if they have any questions, and give them your business card with an e-mail address and a cell number they can text for rapid response. Let them know that you are a knowledgeable resource on archaeology and historic preservation issues and that you are available and glad to help if they require further information, have additional questions, or are dealing with a specific preservation project or issue.
(11) Follow Up. After the meeting, send an individualized e-mail thank-you note with your contact information. It will help keep preservation issues on their radar. Remind them that you are available should they have further questions or require more information. Do not delay or forget this common courtesy.
MORE GENERAL TIPS
(1) Always dress professionally. Do not go to an in-person meeting dressed as if you just got out of the field or wearing a T-shirt, Hawaiian shirt, and flip-flops. Like a staffer or official, wear formal business attire. For video conferences, you may dress a bit more casually.
(2) Do not be afraid to meet with a member of Congress from the opposing party who holds views with which you do not agree. Avoid hot-button issues. Obviously, you need to meet with supportive elected officials to keep them engaged, but its more urgent to influence those who oppose your position and/or lack accurate information. We need to expand preservation support by having conversions with members of the opposition and winning them over.
(3) If you do not know the answer to a question, admit it. But promise to get an answer, and follow up quickly.
(4) When meeting with representatives, ask if they are either a member of or know of the Congressional Historic Preservation Caucus. If not, urge them to consider joining it, and send them the link in a follow-up e-mail (https://blumenauer.house.gov/historic-preservation-caucus). Unfortunately, the Senate does not have a similar caucus.
(5) If the issue is urgent and you cannot meet face-to-face, write, e-mail, or tweet either the sponsor(s) of the bill or the committee chair considering the bill. Do the same with your representatives or senators. Individually written communications are more effective than form tweets or e-mails.
(6) Although it is an indirect method, social media—especially Twitter—is an effective, quick, and easy way to contact your representatives, senators, or other members of Congress. Aside from a website, most members of Congress have a Facebook page and Twitter account, as well as an e-mail address. Finally, if you can, go to your representative's town hall meeting. This is a good way to discover their issues of concern. Social media, along with newspapers, is also an effective way to cyberstalk your representative and/or senators. Elected officials like to be in the news—whether on social media or in newsprint. It keeps them in the public eye and electable.
(7) Do not underestimate the value of just getting to know senators and representatives and their staff outside of specific lobbying efforts. Developing personal relationships with them is invaluable. Once you do, they are more likely to be responsive to you when you approach them about a specific piece of legislation or federal action. After all, you may be the first archaeologist with whom they have interacted.
THE PITCH
If you are not meeting over specific legislation, remember that all legislators are interested in the economy and jobs. These are driving issues in any election, and elected officials want to be reelected. Focus on the economic and employment aspects of archaeology and CRM. The following are examples of talking points.
(1) The CRM industry is composed of companies focusing on CRM and compliance with the NHPA Section 106.
(2) Most CRM firms are small, minority- or woman-owned businesses.
(3) CRM professionals include archaeologists, historians, architectural historians, and specialists in related fields.
(4) CRM companies interface between clients and federal and state agencies, helping clients navigate Section 106 and giving communities a voice in preservation.
(5) CRM companies provide advice and guidance on effectively and efficiently complying with Section 106 and often come up with ways to avoid potential project conflicts and delays through early planning.
(6) Historic preservation laws and regulations, especially Section 106, are not there to impede projects but to ensure that project effects on historic preservation are considered in the planning process.
(7) ACRA, the organization representing the CRM industry, has 200 member firms across the country. There are more than 1,300 firms in all.
(8) ACRA firms employ about 3,000 CRM professionals, but more than 10,000 professionals work in the industry.
(9) Unfortunately, data are sparse on how much CRM contributes to the economy. ACRA estimates that in 2016, the CRM industry generated over $1 billion in revenue nationwide. The SRI Foundation projected that in fiscal year 2020, the total amount expended on CRM in the United States would be $1.4 billion and the total available for academic research would be around $43.4 million. For more detail, see the “SRI Foundation Estimation of the US Spending for Cultural Resource Management and Archaeology for Fiscal Year 2020” (http://srifoundation.org/SRIFFY2020CRMEstimate.pdf).
(10) Heritage tourism is a great selling point. Increasingly, communities and states value historic preservation and heritage tourism as an economic driver, especially for local or smaller communities. Examples:
(a) In 2013, preservation activities in Texas contributed more than $4.6 billion to the state gross domestic product and supported more than 79,000 jobs statewide. Furthermore, these activities produced net tax revenues equaling over $290 million annually for both local and state governments (University of Texas at Austin and Rutgers 2015).
(b) A 2017 report on the economic benefits of historic preservation in Colorado found that as of 2015, every $1 million spent on historic preservation in Colorado led to $1.03 million in additional spending, 14 new jobs, and $636,700 in increased household incomes across the state. Furthermore, tourism generated $14.1 billion, with heritage tourism accounting for $7.2 billion of that (Colorado Preservation and History Colorado 2017).
Other states have done similar studies. No matter with whom you are meeting, Google that person's state beforehand for economic data on historic preservation, including jobs and tax revenues generated and contribution to gross domestic product. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has compiled a list of local, state, and regional economic benefit studies, although some of the studies may be out of date.
Several nonprofit organizations actively lobby for historic preservation. The following are the most prominent:
• Preservation Action
• Coalition for American Heritage
• National Trust for Historic Preservation
Two other organizations that track actions are the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers. Regional and local organizations are involved in historic preservation. A useful source for identifying these organization is PreservationDirectory.com.
TRACKING FEDERAL ACTIONS
There are various ways to track federal actions of all three branches: legislative, judicial, and executive. The Government Publishing Office publishes the Federal Register daily, except for federal holidays. This is the government's official publication for announcing proposed/draft and final government-agency rules and regulations for public comment; public notices, such as the intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS); and special documents. Responding to requests for public comment does not constitute formal lobbying. The final rules/regulations that a federal agency has promulgated and published in the Federal Register are ultimately reorganized by topic or subject matter and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is updated annually.
If you are interested in specific legislation, the SAA's “Take Action” page posts links to specific bills of interest to archaeologists along with the SAA's position on those bills. More generally, you can track federal legislation through https://www.govtrack.us/start. This website follows congressional bills from introduction to enactment. It posts bill text and amendments. In addition to tracking bills by subject or keyword, you can sign up for alerts on legislation of interest. The Library of Congress operates https://www.congress.gov/ , which posts bills on the floor of the House and Senate on a daily basis.
Perhaps the easiest way to track federal legislation is through newspapers and news publications, especially newsmagazines. For newspapers, probably the most comprehensive and up-to-date are the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal, all of which can be accessed online. There are many newsmagazines reporting on federal actions. Arguably, three of the more comprehensive are The Hill, Roll Call, and Politico. Both The Hill and Roll Call started out as newspapers. Roll Call, the oldest, was founded in 1955.
SUMMARY
This brief overview of advocational lobbying and methods for lobbying for archaeology and historic preservation is not comprehensive. It is based on the experiences of the authors for the purpose of encouraging others to engage in influencing change. This is a reference and starting point for preservationists who want to make a difference. Over the years, advocating for archaeology has become increasingly important. Legislation and judicial actions affect how we practice the discipline, especially CRM. Appropriations govern the level of federal funding available for the NSF, the HPF and agency historic preservation, CRM programs, and projects. Lobbying for annual appropriations is especially critical every year, and the effectiveness of preservation at the federal levels depends on funding, whether for preservation grants, SHPO/THPO programs, or individual projects or programs. Because of increasing competition for federal funds, it is more imperative than ever that archaeologists get involved in advocacy. It is an educational opportunity to share your passion and make a difference in archaeology and historic preservation.
Acknowledgments
We express gratitude to David Lindsay, staff liaison of the SAA's Government Affairs Committee; Joe E. Watkins, outgoing SAA board liaison (and outgoing SAA president); and Deborah L. Nichols, incoming SAA board liaison (and incoming SAA president). Jeannie Vanderburg of the Capstone Group coached us in effective lobbying through workshops and Colorado legislative hill visits. Finally, we recognize Andrew Goldberg, cofounder of Agora and lobbyist for ACRA. We appreciate everyone's comments and edits, which strengthened the article.
Data Availability Statement
No original data were used in this article.
