In April 2025, the Center for Health and Science Communication at Becker Library hosted a #SciComm Seminar titled “Communicating Effectively with Policymakers.” Ross C. Brownson, Steven H. and Susan U. Lipstein Distinguished Professor of Public Health, presented a basic communication model and discussed its application to communicating evidence-based public health knowledge with local, state, and federal elected officials, agency leaders, and legislative staff. You can find a recording of this and other #SciComm Seminar presentations in Digital Commons (note: access limited to Washington University campus).
As Dr. Brownson shared, communication seeks to change the preferences or behaviors of information receivers, or audiences. At its best, communication is tailored to a specific audience, and different audiences require different communication strategies. Messages to policymakers can come from various sources—such as constituents, university-based researchers, or professional associations—and through multiple channels—from in-person meetings and congressional testimony to policy briefs and coverage in media outlets.
Connecting research with policy is not a new challenge. Here are just a few of the ways in which WashU faculty, staff, and students have historically communicated with policymakers on topics related to science, technology, health, and medicine.
In November 1956, 130 Washington University scientists and medical doctors sent a letter to Senator Clinton Anderson (NM), chair of the Joint Congressional Committee on Atomic Energy, and other committee members calling for public hearings on the dangers of atomic fallout from nuclear testing. The list of signatories was also published in a St. Louis Post-Dispatch article, bringing public attention to the issues conveyed in the letter. The list featured Nobel Prize winners Carl and Gerty Cori alongside other faculty members such as Hallowell Davis, Rita Levi-Montalcini, Evarts A. Graham, Helen Tredway Graham, and Jerome R. Cox Jr.
Clipping from “130 Here Urge Open Hearings on Dangers of Atomic Fallout,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, November 14, 1956.
In addition to such joint letters, some faculty members corresponded with elected officials on an individual basis. For example, Jerome Cox, director of the Biomedical Computer Laboratory (1964-1975), frequently wrote to policymakers about the importance of sustained funding for medical research. In the example below, Cox wrote to Missouri Senator Stuart Symington in 1969 to express concern that impending cuts to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget would reverse the gains made in medical research over the past decade. To convey his message, Cox drew on his personal experience as a recipient of NIH grants, while also highlighting the broader importance of ongoing medical research to the delivery of health care.
Exchange of letters between Jerome Cox and Senator Symington, 1969 (FC157-S06-B028-F02, Jerome R. Cox Jr. Papers).
Vigils, rallies, and protests have also historically played a role in conveying community views to policymakers. Near the end of 1969, faculty, staff, and students came together on the Medical Campus for a series of events sponsored by St. Louis Doctors for Peace. As many as 1,000 people attended a moratorium rally on October 15 to urge an end to U.S. military involvement in Vietnam. Speakers included Carl G. Harford, MD, ‘33, professor of medicine; Gerald Perkoff, MD, ‘48, professor of medicine and preventive medicine and head of the division of health care research; and Park J. White, MD, assistant professor emeritus of clinical pediatrics. A month later, on November 14, around 250 people gathered in the North Auditorium for a teach-in, “Peace in Vietnam, the Medical Community and the War,” led by Washington University faculty Theodore Von Laue, professor of history, and Dan Bolef, professor of physics, along with Moisy Shopper, MD, of Saint Louis University. The third event took place in December and included an interfaith service.
Speaker at Moratorium event. “1000 Rally at First of Three Moratoria.” Outlook Magazine 7, no. 1 (Winter 1970): 19-20.
Flyer for November 14 Moratorium Meeting, Peace in Vietnam, The Medical Community and War (FC011-B01-F02, David E. Kennell Papers).
Sometimes, elected officials themselves came to the Medical Campus to hear directly from constituents. Missouri Senator Thomas F. Eagleton visited in December 1969, when Congress was in recess for the winter holidays. Senator Eagleton met with department heads, toured medical facilities, and participated in a Q&A session with faculty following a lunchtime address.
“Vacation – A Time to Report to Voters.” Outlook Magazine 7, no. 1 (Winter 1970): 12-13.
Computer scientist Wesley Clark, director of WashU’s Computer Systems Laboratory (CSL) from 1967 to 1972, collaborated with the Committee on Scholarly Communication with the People’s Republic of China (CSCPRC) during much of his career, including a two-year term as a committee member beginning in 1975. This non-governmental organization was sponsored by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the American Council of Learned Societies, and the Social Sciences Research Council, and it arranged academic exchanges between the U.S. and China, including a delegation of computer specialists that visited CSL in 1973. In addition to coordinating exchanges, committee members frequently met with executive branch officials about the direction of U.S. relations with China. For example, following meetings with State Department and National Security Council staff in 1975, the organization prepared a paper for Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, titled “The Future of Academic Exchanges with the People’s Republic of China,” in the lead up to negotiations between the two governments.
Title page and Summary Recommendations from “The Future of Academic Exchanges with the Peoples Republic of China,” prepared by CSCPRC, June 1975 (FC186-S02-ss04-B11-F02, Wesley A. Clark Papers).
In 1981, a group of scholars came together to form the Association for Advanced Technology in Biomedical Sciences (ATTIBS), in part to advocate for adequate funding of the Biotechnology Resources Program (BRP) of the Division of Research Resources (DRR) of NIH. In April 1982, Jerome Cox was invited as a representative of AATIBS to offer testimony at a hearing of the House Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee on the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies. In his prepared remarks, Cox noted that “[t]he development of new biomedical instruments has been slowed over the past decade by the failure of funding for instrumentation to keep pace with funding for biomedical research. We need added support in the decade ahead to bring the instrumentation base back to a position of effective support for biomedical science.” During his trip to Washington, DC, Cox also met with the legislative assistants of several subcommittee members, including Reps. Carl Pursell (MI), Bernard Dwyer (NJ), Joseph Early (MA), and Neal Smith (IA).
Click the images to read Jerome Cox’s prepared statement (FC157-S10-B056-F02, Jerome R. Cox Jr. Papers).
These are just some examples of how members of the WashU community have communicated with policymakers about their work. Click here to learn more about the resources offered by the Center for Health and Science Communication.