A while back, I complained that ARRL's response to the FCC's NPRM regading the Ray Baum act was quite anemic, having actually read it, and that their efforts to engage the membership was almost nonexistent. It produced quite a controversial thread as you can imagine here on the zed: https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/my-letter-of-frustration-to-arrl.827166/ ARRL provided only a brief note in QST regarding this NPRM. They could have written an article explaining the Ray Baum act to the membership, explained to them how to effectively and politely advocate for their views on the matter, and coordinated expressing these views as a response to the NPRM. I think they did the very minimum needed to inform the membership, and their response to NPRM really didn't address the NPRM very much at all. After seeing how they handled this, I decided that their advocacy efforts were quite wanting.