Political Calling

By Peter L DeHaan

September 10 2008

With the US Presidential conventions of the major parties behind us, the Presidential race is moving forward at full speed.  This means a salvo of television ads, direct mail, and telephone calls will be forthcoming.  Already, I’ve received two mail pieces and my first phone call – that is, my first phone call for the second round- and it will only intensify in the weeks to come.  All this is good news for call centers that provide automated calling services. 

In this regard, there are two issues worth consideration when it comes to political calling:

Getting Paid: It’s been reported that John Glenn’s 1984 Presidential campaign ended with 3 millions dollars of debt and took 20 years to pay down; others claim that some of that debt has not – and will never will – be paid.  This demonstrates a clear risk for call centers working for political campaigns.  More recently, it was reported that Hillary Clinton had roughly 20 million in campaign debt.  How many call centers that made calls on her behalf are still waiting to be paid?

Given this, it’s practical to put into place safeguards – such as advance payments, daily payments, or escrow payments – to protect your call center from doing work and not being paid or waiting for a long delayed payment.  Yet, in the midst of the frenzy of a campaign – especially if that candidate has established a trustworthy payment history – it’s too easy to bend the guidelines to close the sale or avoid losing the account.  But remember that it’s hard for a struggling candidate to raise money and nearly impossible to do for a suspended campaign or once the election is over.  The status of political candidates can change quickly – and catch people, including their vendors, unaware. 

Taking the High Road: In my article “The Politics of Calling,” published in the November 22, 2006 issue of eConnections, I wrote: “Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it right.  Check numbers against the DNC list when making political calls.  Those who signed up did so for a reason.  Calling them will only make them mad, causing them to assume you or your client are breaking the law.”  I also advised against over-calling people – especially multiple calls on the same day.

In response to this one call center manager agreed with my overall sentiment but correctly pointed out that if they tried to implement such a stance, candidates would merely go to another call center willing to make the calls.  The result would be that the calls would still be made and they would have lost business. 

From a pragmatic standpoint, my suggestion seems to be unreasonable.  But before I abandon my idealism, consider a prospect who asks you to make prohibited calls to people on the DNC list.  Certainly, you would pass on that project, but it is likely that someone, somewhere, could be found who would make these calls – be it out of ignorance or in disregard of the law.  Again, the calls would still be made and you would have lost business – but you would know you did the right thing.

I can safely pontificate all this from my non-call center vantage, but maybe the DNC legislation should be viewed as the minimal standard, with premier call centers taking the high road by exceeding those expectations.