Slashdot Mirror
Is Your Elected Official Really Listening?
Oliver Wendell Jones asks: "In the past few weeks, since the Sept. 11 incident, I have tried to become much more involved with what's going on politically. It started with my sending e-mails to the members of the senate committee discussing H.R. 2500 (secure encryption) and received very polite e-mails from almost eveyone stating one of two (or sometimes both) generic messages. Not one of their e-mail responses included anything stating their feelings for or against H.R. 2500, so I have no idea if my e-mails had any effect." While I'm all for automated responses to take off the pressure in terms of response time, I'd at least expect aides to take care of these things. Autoresponses aren't enough, and when someone takes the time to write a Representative, whether it be snail mail or email, someone should respond. Of course, if they don't respond to written messages, try calling them directly and make sure an aide knows why you are calling. How many of you have tried and failed when attempting to ping your Rep on government issues that were important to you?
I also sent e-mails (and one fax) to the Representatives and Senators of my state (Indiana) on this same topic and received responses similar to those I had received from the others (terrorists are bad, mmmkay?)
Last week, in response to another request from the EFF, I sent snail-mail letters to my Senators and Representative concerning the SSSCA. This time I received a two page, snail-mail form letter reiterating that terrorists are still bad, which doesn't seem to have anything to do with the SSSCA.
Has anyone had any luck actually getting their point across to an elected official, and if so, what's the secret?" I think we can all agree that terrorists are bad, but so are bad laws that interfere with our rights. Several of these are trying to progress their way through the House and the Senate and it would be nice to know how the Representatives stand, one way or the other. How can one cut thru the rhetoric and get concrete information out of those who are supposed to be your duly elected representatives in government?
"The two responses I was able to receive were:
- They agreed that terrorists are bad.
- If I was a constituent of their state (i.e., I could vote for them) to please respond with my mailing address in their state (I did include my snail-mail address and I do not live in their states) and they would get back to me.
I also sent e-mails (and one fax) to the Representatives and Senators of my state (Indiana) on this same topic and received responses similar to those I had received from the others (terrorists are bad, mmmkay?)
Last week, in response to another request from the EFF, I sent snail-mail letters to my Senators and Representative concerning the SSSCA. This time I received a two page, snail-mail form letter reiterating that terrorists are still bad, which doesn't seem to have anything to do with the SSSCA.
Has anyone had any luck actually getting their point across to an elected official, and if so, what's the secret?" I think we can all agree that terrorists are bad, but so are bad laws that interfere with our rights. Several of these are trying to progress their way through the House and the Senate and it would be nice to know how the Representatives stand, one way or the other. How can one cut thru the rhetoric and get concrete information out of those who are supposed to be your duly elected representatives in government?
When a huge event like Sept. 11th occurs, it's usually followed up by loads of mail (snail and electronic). A representative only has so much time to respond to mail. If you get a response, consider yourself extremely lucky you did, kind of like winning the lottery.
You can often call, write letters, or even stop by the offices of these local guys. At least, then you will have a feeling of having your message heard.
Of course these only effect state laws, not the national anti-terrorist or SSSSCA crap.
Of course, the impression I got after all of this, was that if I couldn't vote against them in an upcoming election, they didn't care about my opinion.
This is perfectly reasonable considering that the responsibily of all senators and representatives is to protect the interest of the people who live in their state/district. This is outdated considering we live in a much different country than we did 200 years ago, however his response is exactly what the founders of the country were aiming to have happen.
Hand-written or typed letters
Hand-written or typed letters
Hand-written or typed letters
Let's keep saying it a few more times, and maybe it will sink in.
Senators don't read Slashdot.
Representatives don't read Slashdot.
GWB doesn't read Slashdot.
Few of them read their email. What do you do with your un-solicited email? Guess what they do?
Hand-written or typed letters!
Get a pen.
Get some paper.
Get an envelope.
It's not that hard.
Hand-written or typed letters.Thank you.
Well, I hate to break it to you, but if you DON'T live in their states, then it isn't their job to listen to you. You are wasting their time.
They were voted into place to represent the people who could have voted for them. What is best for the people in their state has little to do with your opinion on any matter.
On the other hand, YOUR representatives shoud be listening to you. Keep after them.
--T
http://www.theMediaBunker.com
I have written my Congressman via snailmail numerous times and always been responded to, on topics ranging from video game violence to copyright law. The problem with E-mailing your congressman is that it's way too impersonal, IMO. I'm sure the Congressman is getting WAY more e-mail than snailmail and they get easily backlogged, especially in the days of SPAM. It's also easy to just setup an autoresponder and forget about it.
If you want to write your Congressman, take the time to write an ACTUAL letter, print it out on nice stationary, and use the good old United States Postal Service to deliver it. Words on paper carry more weight than words on a computer screen.
Do you really want your words to be heard?
Execute? [Y/N] _
The simple problem is this. Our public officials have lots of things to do and can not each handle every single question that is posed to them. In order to at least make one feel their message has been received (in one way or another) is to send out auto-responses or form letters.. blah blah.
Even if their Aids were to answer mail personally... there could be, at any one time, a few thousands letters from constituants alone (not to mention non-constituants) and that simply would involve so many man hours to pump out these personalized letters.
Hi, and yeah it *can* be done, but then you're going to complain about how much taxes are and how much of your paycheck you lose and blah blah blah.... if you want the "service" then pay for it... say to your representative "Hi, I am willing to give you an extra $250/yr if you can have someone in your office assist me with my concern"... and when the bill gets passed as state law and there are another 1,000 state employees working for your representatives and you're billed that extra $250/yr extra, I'm sure you'll be sending in letters "Hi, taxes are too high... you need to lower taxes!" and hopefully their response will be, "Aren't you the moron who requested higher taxes?"
Anyway, I think you get my point. There is no way to provide you with a personalized response to your concerns because there isn't enough hours in the day or money in the budget for the manpower to do it. Be lucky you received any response. If you want a personalized response, offer a half million for his/her next campaign.
In fact, that's not a bad idea... there are plenty of Washington lobbyists (tobacco, oil, etc)... maybe the EFF should raise money to be a Washington lobbyist too... and they can raise money to provide campaign contributions to certain representatives to get our views heard.
And I'm not being sarcastic... this may be a good idea!
Considering that the Senate Passed the Anti-Terrorism Bill with an overwhelming 96-1 vote. Reading through the quotes in the linked article, it is particularly disturbing how most of the senators see nothing wrong with the bill and are opposed to limiting the duration of the bill as the House wants to.
The house hasn't voted on their version of the bill yet so there is still time to inundiate your representatives with phone calls, faxes and letters.
It just takes time. Do you know how many letters, e-mails, and phone calls the Representatives and Senators get each day? When the peanut butter and jellly sandwich patent came to light I fired off an e-mail to my representative, Frank Wolf (R-VA). Six weeks later I got a reply from one of his staffers who had looked into the matter, decided that the pb&j that was patented was more like a pop-tart than a traditional pb&j, and was therefore novel enough to be patentable. I sent a note thanking him for looking into the matter.
Best Slashdot Co
Put in a check for $20 or so.
I'm serious makes all the difference between the auto-responce and a real letter, probably written by an aide but at least someone knows you care about the issue.
I worked for a Congressman for three months as an intern, and I can tell you this:
You're right - nobody cares.
I filled out, entered, filed, etc. etc. etc., hundreds upon thousands of constituant letters, non-constituant letters, return envelopes, return letters, etc, etc, etc. Do you honestly think that anyone has the time to respond to over 10,000 letters a month on an individual basis?
While everyone's thoughts matter, there's just no way to be fair about replies. I've read - quite literally - hundreds of letters that were actually handwritten or typewritten from people with scores of different concerns. To be fair, however, all I was ever allowed to do was send the standard reply letter and trace the Congressman's signature.
It sucks, I know. I've written George Bush, Bill Clinton, and Dubya tons of e-mail, snail mail, etc. on tons of different issues.
I've not once gotten a personal reply - not even from a secretary.
It sucks, but when you get like 100,000 correspondances a month, you can't really reply to them without tipping the scales towards a few select individuals who you deem 'worthy'.
But isn't everyone equally worthy?
Oh well...just keep writing, maybe it will happen!
SMasters
maleboja@ici.net
"Well, I hate to break it to you, but if you DON'T live in their states, then it isn't their job to listen to you. You are wasting their time."
I would disagree a bit here. All members of the US Congress are supposed to act in the best interest of the nation as a whole. In practice they will of course focus on the concerns of their electoral district, but that should not prevent them from taking a wider view - Senators in particular.
sPh
I never send email to my elected officials. I know it does not get the same consideration that snail mail does, so I don't waste my time with it. Every time I want to tell my representative something, I send a real letter, on paper, in an envelope, with a stamp.
How many times do you need to be told that before you understand?!?!!?!? Yes, some representatives do respond well to email, but so what?!?!?! How much more difficult is it to print out your letter and put it in an envelope?
Wake up and smell the coffee, buddy.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
I once wrote my state representative with my concerns about a recent commercial expansion in my area. The traffic was becoming more than a small problem, as people were becoming increasingly gridlocked and late for work and school buses couldn't get to their stops in time to get local children to school in time for their first class. The increasing number of people shopping in the area also brought more crime, as parking lot stick-ups became frighteningly more frequent and carjackings happened in the area for the first time.
A few days later I got a letter thanking me for my concern and assuring me that my representative was co-operating with other representatives to get new road projects going in the area and limit further large-scale commercialization (re: shopping centers) in the area. I was more or less pleased with this reply.
Imagine my surprise when a few days after that I got another letter thanking me for supporting my representative's co-operation with business leaders who wanted to expand to our area. The letter went on to promise that my representative would push for more commercial zoning, promising an influx of new jobs to my area.
*sigh*
My sigs always suck.
our representatives do not respond to emails like they do to good old fashiopned snail mail, there really is a difference in having a bunch of bytes on a computer hard drive and a mailbox filled with solid tangible letters.
If you really want to get your opinions across, print out the letter and mail it to them
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
I came to the conclusion years ago that emailing representatives (or just about anyone in government) seems to be pretty much worthless. You have to take into account how many emails they get on a daily basis. No one can read that much; thats why they have staffers. I would guess that only a small fraction actually GETS to your representative.
The best way to elicit a response is to drop your concerns in an actual piece of mail and send them. Send them priority if you're in a rush. Send them in a brightly color envelope to grab attention if they're in a pile with other mail. But you've got a better chance of your concerns being heard if you put your concerns in a letter and actually mail it.
Only once have I ever heard back heard back from a rep when it came to email. (that was senator Dodd from CT when I voiced my concerns about echelon. i got a nice reply back, in the mail. not a generic response, but a rather lengthy reply.) Ive sent mail to the gov't through the postal system a number of times, and usually have gotten a reply back.
Just go buy a stamp.
I regularly write Paul Wellstone and Mark Dayton in the Senate and Martin Sabo in the House. Wellstone ususally sends a fairly relevant form reply, Dayton has yet to get back to me (although he also gets less from me because he doesn't have e-mail (!) available). Sabo always sends me a letter in the mail that addresses the issue a raise, and explains how he voted on relevant legislation and why - even when he voted contrary to the position I state. I admire that a lot.
Vote in primaries. Vote in elections. If your representative dissapoints you and fails to respond to your concerns, make sure they know you will be voting against them in the next primary and why. Just you doing that won't change the world. But just a few thousand people in your state doing it could have a huge effect on the actions of congress. We all know the Religious Right is politically quite powerful compared to its absolute size. Why? Because they are active and unified. That's all. I don't like their issues or tactics but their political technique is rock solid and represents democracy in action.
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries
Generally, the more effort one puts in to contacting a politician (within the bounds of reason, of course) the more likely one of their staffers is to actually present your opinion to that politician.
Handwriten letters on good stationary (prefably with a company letterhead, if you have the right to present your companies' opinion) from an address in their district will attract a lot more notice than an email ever will.
If you're going to go down to their district office, then be sure to be well dressed and clean cut.
Given the current focus on terrorism, going somewhere in person and presenting your views on non-terrorist acitivities that way will get alot more attention than any form of mail.
Attending one of the $(lots of money)/plate dinners is also a very good way to actually *meet* the congress people, as well as to get in to the political loop.
Finally, make sure that your opinions are very well thought out. Simply saying that something is bad will get you nowhere. Explaining why something is bad while offering an idea for alternative legislation should be much more productive.
Elected officials, specifically Representatives and Senators, are still supposed to pass laws. And when they pass laws that restrict our freedoms, any of them, laws that we as citizens don't agree with, it is our duty to let them know we don't like it.
I care about these issues, these freedoms. Thinking, intelligent people care. So should you. So should our Reps and Senators.
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
...just your position.
When writing congress, it is best to send an email something like this:
===============
From: You
To: Your Senator or Rep
Sub: H.R. 2500 - OPPOSE (or SUPPORT)
I support H.R. 2500 because (make it short).
Your Name
Your Street
Your City, State ZIP
==================
I mean, come on... do you really think they have to time to read your email and respond to every point? Just let them know your POSITION and how you want them to vote.
You can voice your OPINION at the local watering hole.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
I have found that if I want to influence my elected representatives, that email is probably the least effective means possible. The best way to get noticed is to have something _physical_ in their hands, and the more personal it looks, the better. A snail-mail letter works great, and a fax is nearly as good. Furthermore, if I want them to respond, they need to know that I am in their district, so the letter gets a real name, with a physical address in their district. For really important issues, I do not even use the computer printer, but hand write the letter. Whether it is mailed or faxed, that virtually always gets a response. Remember that the person reading your correspondence sees tons of it each week, and so yours needs to stand out as being both important and genuine.
Soli Deo Gloria
I've seen that "tell me your address so I know you're one of my constituents" thing before. Makes sense to me, as long as you're contacting them about something that the entire House or Senate is considering. But what about issues that are currently in committee? I've read that this is where the real "action" happens on new bills, and is therefore the best place to get bad things changed. Even if I don't have a representative on the committee, shouldn't my opinion count just as much as anyone else's?
*starts rummaging for civics book*
-beme
1971
Of course a representative isn't going to listen to you if you're not from their state. Why would they? You're not one of their constituents. The job of a state representative is to listen to the people of their district. If they listen to you instead, it's worse than not responding at all, because then the rep is acting contrary to the interests of his people.
If you want to influence the government, write, call, etc *your* representative.
Visit the
First,br> Warm body with monetary contribution
Warm female body [joke?]
Warm body
Then
Hand written letter
Letter
Telephone call
Fax
finally,
email
The problem is similar to the problem you see in banner ads and spam on the net.
Banner ads used to work great because of the novelty, now everyone ignores them.
And Reps get masses of email and mail from professional lobbyists trying to influence a vote. You think you get spam? The reps are basically DDOS'd by the stuff.
So the warm body approach is best. and do not forget to use small words. Many of these guys are not used to reading books without pictures.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
The chances of your letter actually being read by your representative are very slim. I went to high school in Fairfax county, Virignia, which is very close to Washington, DC. My senior year, I was in a political science class, and second semester, we interned. I interned at the ACLU. Quite a few people in my class interned for Senators or Representatives.
My classmates were reading the mail, sending out form letters. I don't know what the criteria was for a letter actually getting passed on, but the chances of your letter actually being read by the person you sent it to are rather slim.
Here's how to get your letter through:
FAX - it gets read, you get snail mail back, and the snail mail may be relevant.
by this method,
Helms - wrote that he supported Ashcroft.
Edwards - sent a copied speech he made on the Senate floor, irrelevant to what I wrote him about.
Price - wrote back a letter stating that he was concerned about safe-guarding our civil liberties in the wake of the tragedy and that he shared my concerns.
I met Price briefly at a public appearance he made- he said if I wrote his office a letter and marked it PERSONAL, that he'd get it instead of an aide, and that we could schedule some time to discuss my concerns.
Email has seemed to leave a lesser impression that printing and mailing my letters, or faxing them.
Actually, I haven't tried for two reasons. One is the natural inclination of mine that since it's "wartime" most people really won't care (heck, most representatives only listen with one ear open during peacetime). But it goes beyond that.
Personally, I think "nerds" should step back and ask themselves whether it's really necessary to have what they consider "freedom". I'm all for freedom of speech, but in day-to-day life do with really need to encrypt everything? Further, given that people are dying, can there at least be a temporary moratorium on personal freedom to prevent further killings.
Nerds like conspiracies. They like the X-Files and love to think there's some higher "man" out there trying to dictate how they should act. Truth of the matter is: every wartime provision ever made negatively affecting personal freedom has either been mitigated or repealed over time. Find me one negatory personal freedom provision the US made in WWII or Vietnam that has stuck through to this day? If anything, these occasional provisions make us value our personal freedoms more.
I for one believe in logic, and my statement still stands to this day. People on these boards continually say "I'd rather be dead that lose my freedom of speech". I say, "What's the point of freedom of speech if you're already dead?"
What I've learned: the government doesn't have to listen to the citizens or acknowledge them. All they have to do is grease the right wheels to get into an election, then spend enough to get their name out. The less voters know about each candidate, the better for both sides, because then the race becomes about personality and party affilitation rather than having to deal with voters.
Even starting somewhat locally (in terms of the Federal Govt.), I've never gotten very far. In the 5 years I've lived where I do, I have snail-mailed my U.S. representative exactly 2xs (note: Before I moved here, I never mailed anyone at all). After the 1st, I got no response. After the 2nd, I got a form response 4 months after the fact which basically said that 'issues are important to this office'. The letter did not mention the bill I was protesting, and arrived months after votes had been cast.
I snail-mailed my State govt. rep. on one bill, too, and have since received occasional mailers from the state govt., but no response to the issue that concerned me.
"The girl makes Godot look punctual." -- Buffy
I would have thought finger was a more appropriate analogy in this case, since you're actually expecting the remote host to return information. Then again, "fingering your representative" could be misconstrued as something inappropriate...
-- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
You know the phrase "The way to a man's heart is through is stomach."? Well, the way to a politicians head is through his campain fund. That's the sad ugly truth.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
Have you ever run a web site? Even for a site on a niche topic, you can often get a dozen or more emails a day. Responding to those takes time. Now imaging you ran a site that was moderately popular with a regular following. You'd likely get a hundred or more emails a day. Can you really respond to those personally? You'd be spending hours a day responding to them. Now imagine you're in a public position where you, theoretically, represent millions or tens of millions of people. You get 500 letters a day. Can you _really_ deal with them personally?
Fanboy types, who send email to George Lucas, various game companies, and makers of TV shows don't understand this. They think they deserve personal attention. They don't realize they are one of the masses.
I know that my elected officials respond to email, because I have twice recieved personal, thought out responses from Virginia officials (Former Governor Jim Gilmore and Sen. John Warner.) after sending in email. I know from talking to others that Senator Allen also gives some serious weight to email. Of course, tech is extremely important to the economy in Virginia, I somehow doubt that officials in the midwest pay as much attention to email.
Right now people trying to get involved need to realize that the government does not have much time to talk with us. Both email, snailmail, and phone calls are flooding capitol hill faster than staffers can deal with the correspondence. Officials are extremely busy legislating, meeting with each other, with the president, foreign officals and diplomats, and other people who are generally more important than the guy back home who wants an audience of some sort to talk about things that any ACLU lobbyist knows more about.
That does not mean, however that the officials are not listening. Staffers keep track of every email, letter, and phone call, and keep the officials posted on what the voters want. If you want to get a point across, keep up the letters. Support groups that lobby your point of view. Just remember to cut your officials some slack for not getting back to you during these trying times.
sPh
Throw it away, regardless of whether it is electronic or paper. In fact, I'm less likely to throw away the electronic stuff; it creates less clutter. So your distinction between email and mail in this respect is false.
But there's a more important point to be made: to a political representative, there is no such thing as unsolicited mail. When they signed up as a candidate for my representation, that was a solicitation of both my vote and my opinion, and they had better not ignore the latter after they've received enough of the former.
Those of us currently hosting the DMCA lecture series in Minnesota first tried to arrange meetings with our senators a few months ago. We hand-delivered letters to their local offices outlining our thoughts on the DMCA, and requested some time to sit with either the senator or someone from his office to discuss matters further. This was roundabout August, I think.
We never heard a response from either one--not a "no," not a form letter, nothing--by phone, fax, letter or email. It seems even coming to their office doesn't make a big impression on anyone.
I don't need large brains to have a good time.
I read about the kind of bills that are being considered (from more noteworthy sites than just /.), and how strongly I disagree with them. However, between working overtime, commuting, and being with my family, the last thing I feel compelled to do when I have free time is write a letter.
On the one hand, I don't want to just mail out a boilerplate letter that states several things, some of which I may not agree with. On the other hand, if I put in the time to send a well-researched letter, by the time I find enough time to so it, the issue will not be relevant anymore!
So, I donate to the EFF occasionally, and wait for the time when I'll be motivated enough to put off other aspects of my life to write these letters. Oh well. I should exercise, too, but I don't.
I've always wondered: would a phone call to a congressman's local office do any good? Will talking to a staffer for five minutes get any results?
Often times, because email is a global thing and can easily be impersonated, elected officials are not super keen on acting on random emails they get since you may be from outside their district/state.
I've emailed my local reps a few times in Wisconsin, and I've always included my address to attest to my residency. I've even gotten responses (albeit by snail mail).
Yeah, maybe you might think they're old-timers for not adopting the internet, but they've got to make sure they're speaking for their constituents, not just others around the state/country/world.
Don't assume that because you receive an automated response or no response at all that no one took the time to read your letter. Sending out personal responses to constituents takes a tremendous amount of time and manpower in otherwise very busy congressional offices.
Also, I would not expect to receive a personal reply from someone who does not represent your state or district. They have a hard enough time keeping up with mail from their own constituents.
Finally, the medium does make a difference. E-mails and those pre-printed postcards that get sent to congress tend to get less attention than more formal printed letters. Make it look good and t will get noticed.
I'm a registered Democrat in the Great State of South Dakota. (No not the Dakota with your cousins that live in Bismarck.)
I've had great luck with emailing and writing my Senators (Johnson and Daschle), although since Daschle became Senate Majority Leader, his office has gotten worse, so I talk more to Johnson's Office.
I'd really suggest moving to a State with a smaller population, it makes getting listened to easier. (Wyoming, Alaska, one of the Dakotas, Montana, Nevada are good ones).
Form a Technology Board of some sort, start mailing the Senators and Reps, and travel to Washington. My Grandmother is active in Water Rights and Electrification and Education and before her lung cancer, she traveled to D.C. 3-4 times a year and met with the Senators.
I disagree in most regards with one of my Senators (Tom Harkin, D-Iowa), but I have to respect him for, as nearly as I can tell, individually responding to the mail I send him--even email. Admittedly, I have no way of knowing whether he or an aide actually wrote the letter, but it's definitely from a human who paid attention to what I wrote.
I wrote my first political opinion paper recently.
I found my specific three representatives' names, email addresses, and postal addresses. In case you were asleep in Civics classes, that's one Congressperson in the House of Representatives that hails from your district (area) of your home state, and two Senators who hail from your home state. I also found the same information for George Bush, the President.
I wrote my letter, which you can read at http://www.halley.cc/ed/politics/. A fair first letter; the only thing I would have changed would be to specifically reference the bill number . The features of the letter:
I got printed letters back which stated each representative's viewpoints on the exact matter (and that the issue had not yet been sent from the Congress to the Senate). The Congressperson stated how they voted and why. The Senators described their current rationale on the issue.
While the letters did not contain any quotes or specific references to my own letter, they were appropos to my opinions, very articulate, very on-point and organized. I imagine that these were cranked out form letters, but in that case, they must have a very well-tuned library of form letters on each subject that they were addressing in their representative works.
I have not heard from GWB's office on this matter.
[
Money
Money
Money
Maybe if we say that a few more times, it will sink in. I had a friend who was a senior foriegn policy advisor in the office of one of the Florida Senators, and we talked about constituent mail one day. She said they usually put the lowest/newest intern on the mail answering duty, and the contents of the mail never trickle up past that person.
I asked her, that person doesn't give a report or something at the end of the day? Nope. do you even keep a tally of where people stand? Nope. Does it matter if the writers are actually constituents or not? Nope.
She said most people who write in are nuts, and they just don't care about them at all.
They do write back to everyone, but wake up: Patrick Leahy is not writing back to you, an 18 year old that just moved to DC from Vermont is.
If you want to have any impact on legislation, there is only one thing they listen to: money. Unless you can get a big enough group, say 1 million people, to all go to the capital on the same day...
-Mike
PS I lost a lot of confidence in our government that day.
Go to your district office, or better yet, the DC office, IN PERSON. You'll get heard. VERY few people will bother, and the ones that do, count
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
In October 2000 I started getting e-mails from the Idaho Democratic Party about electing Craig Williams to the Idaho's 2nd district of U.S. House of Representatives.
I had no idea how they got my name or address so I sent them a fairly nasty e-mail about how that I felt like voting against them because they spammed me.
Later that day, Craig Williams e-mailed me back personally and explained that one of my friends (and gave me her name) had provided my information because I may be interested in their platform. He went on to explain how he felt that it is wrong to buy e-mail addresses for that purpose.
I replied and asked some questions about his platform and beliefs. He replied with a lengthy personally-typed e-mail that specifically answered my concerns.
Because of the personal and timely responses I received from Mr. Williams I chose to vote for him in the election. Some politicians seem to care more than others when it comes to their constituants.
Adversive
My cat's breath smells like cat food.
"The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty
decreases." (Thomas Jefferson)
"The word politics is derived from the words "poly" meaning many and
"ticks" meaning blood sucking parasites" (Anonymous)
"The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a government
of consent, is this --- that it is one to which everybody must
consent, or be shot." (Lysander Spooner)
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety,
deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Ben Franklin)
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force"
(George Washington)
"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves"
(Juvenal)
"The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered
by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which
blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves" (Dresden James)
"In free governments, the rulers are the servants, and the people
their superiors and sovereigns. For the former, therefore, to return
among the latter is not to degrade but to promote them"
(Ben Franklin)
"A congressman is a pig. The only way to get his snout from the trough
is to rap it sharply with a stick" (Henry Adams)
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe and
preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief
would ensue where the law abiding deprived the use of them."
(Thomas Paine)
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge
to rule" (Menken)
"The right to be left alone...the right most valued by civilized men"
(Louis Brandeis)
"Sooner or later all politicians die swallowing their own lies"
(Claire Luce)
"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to
stand by the president or any public official, save exactly to the
degree he himself stands by the country." (Theodore Roosevelt)
"Does the government fear us? Or do we fear the government?
When the people fear the government, tyranny has found victory.
The federal government is our servant, not our master!"
(Thomas Jefferson)
"Their nature...is to argue and procrastinate, yet we persist
in electing lawyers to Congress" (Ben Franklin)
"Liberals can understand everything but people who
don't understand them" (Lenny Bruce)
"Most stupid people are conservative, but not all conservatives
are stupid" (John Stuart Mill)
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing
to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and prepare for it.
(Patrick Henry)
"Our acts of liberty are our strongest propaganda"
(Paul Goodman)
"Americans are so enamoured of equality they would rather be equal
in slavery than unequal in freedom" (Alexis de Tocqueville)
"Education - compulsory schooling, compulsory learning - is a tyranny
and a crime against the human mind and spirit. Let all those escape
it who can, any way they can" (John Holt)
"To know what you prefer, instead of humbly saying Amen to what the
world tells you you ought to prefer, is to have kept your soul alive"
(Robert Louis Stevenson)
"There is no such thing as a majority right. Only those who understand
and act according to this principle can promote true freedom"
(Harry H. Hoiles)
"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax"
(Albert Einstein)
"Democracy is a form of religion, it is the worship of jackals by
jack asses" (H. L. Menken)
"Peace, commerce, and honest freindship with all nations - entangling
alliances with none" (Thomas Jefferson)
"Government at its best is a necessary evil, and at it's worst an
intolerant one" (Thomas Paine)
"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
(Thomas Jefferson, proposal Virginia Constitution, June 1776)
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize
Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of
conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are
peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..." (Samuel Adams)
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it" (Voltaire)
"You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
the very phrases which our founding fathers used in their struggle
for independence." (C. A. Beard)
Is Your Elected Official Really Listening?
No, but the Feds are.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
In college, I've always been heavily involved with my second love: politics. And, as a result, I had the fortunate experience last semester to be intern in a Senate office.
Here are my tips. Trust me on these.
1) As it has been widely stated: Do not e-mail. The Senate e-mail system is a mess and offices are ill-equipped to reply to them in any sort of organized fashion. Take the time to put it on paper.
2) Know that your letter will doubtfully ever be on your senator or representative's desk. There are federally funded offices whose only purpose is to handle constituent correspondence. Expect a form letter. These people are swamped and cannot hope to take the time to write a personally crafted paper in direct response to every letter they receive. In addition, these people are speaking for the congressperson, so you're very likely to get mushy and uncommitted policy stances as the writers have no desire to get their bosses into hot water.
3) Strength in numbers. My strongest advice is this: get a group together and schedule a meeting. This is your best chance to actually get a hold of the congressman's ear for any amount of time. Find locals with similar interests, form an organization, and ask to schedule a meeting. Then, discuss with the congressman your situation in the simplest terms possible. Don't expect them the be well versed in technology issues; they won't be.
Finally, avoid "astroturf organizing." Strength in numbers does not mean form letters. Politicians (and staffers) are rarely swayed by simulated constituent groundswells obviously crafted for the sole purpose of putting on the appearance of heavy support for an issue. Staffers do read the letters and know when five hundred of them have the same wording. No form letter can compete with the legitimacy of a personally written letter.
I hope this helps. Good luck.
Dear Oliver Wendell Jones,
We wish to thank you for your recent posting to Slashdot. As a loyal Slashdot reader, it goes without saying that without posts like yours, our community would not function. It is posters like you who make Slashdot the destination for thousands of thoughtful procrastinators from work and study every day.
Your topic, "Is Your Elected Official Really Listening" is something which requires our utmost attention. Do not for a moment think that loyal Slashdot readers such as myself are not giving grave consideration to your post, unless it is a humorous post. In that case, do not for a moment think that your post is not filling us heartily with frivolous glee.
As a loyal Slashdot reader, I wish to thank you again for your insightful post, and we will be considering your matter. Thank you for your thoughtful involvement in our community. It is that community spirit which makes this website the great website that it is. Just remember that there are many ways you can contribute to your community on this issue, and volunteer work should be the first one on your list.
Thank you again,
Loyal Slashdot Readers.
;-P
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
That's pretty much the equivalent of 1999's "you just don't get it". Of course, it turned out that those organizations which didn't ignore 100 years of experience and knowledge in favor of "e" really didn't get "it". The "it" they didn't get was a little different than the one the dotcoms expected in '99, though!
Effort filters exist for a reason. Plenty of the people who join the USMC are in great physical shape - they still have to go through boot camp. Why? It's a filter. Plenty of super-geniuses still have to take classes and write theses before they are granted a PhD. Why? It's a filter.
Expecting you to expend a modest amount of actual effort before your input is considered is a filter as well.
sPh
Here are some facts.
A congressman has about 7 staffers.
A congressman has about 700,000 people in his district.
If you want to get attention, send a standard letter. You are likely to get a good response.
The congressman himself isn't the person you want to talk to - you want to talk to his legislative aide who covers the area you are concerned about.
While a trip all the way to Washington is a good way to get your voice heard, you can also set an appointment up at your congressman's district office to make your message heard.
When contacting the office, always say FIRST that you are in his district.
The best way to make your voice heard is to join an organization with people of similar minds that has representation in Washington. Just like lawyers in a court of law, these organizations have experienced lobyists who know best how to make your case on your behalf to the representative.
If you're not registered to vote and/or don't vote often, the member of congress has access to that information. Be active.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Of course I send them to my representatives. In the state of Oregon, I am stuck with Sen. Wyden (D- Ore) and Sen. Smith (R- Ore)and am represented by Rep David Wu (D- Ore) in the house. I write one of them at least every month on topics ranging from the environment, SPAM, technology issues, and many others.
Every time I have gotten a response from one of them. Why would you expect a response from a representative of another area anyway ? It is not their job to represent your views in congress, but those of their constituents.
So, I stopped arguing with her. I drove my car to the nearest Blockbuster and rented the excellent "In the Name of the Father", a real story where innocent Irish people are abused by British officers under a brand new anti-terrorist act. I got my point.
[... Movie Spoiler: 4 innocent Irish people spent 15 years in British prisons before being able to defend themselves again in front of a tribunal and having their case dismissed. One of them had half of his family put in jail with him, with jail time up to 14 years. His dad actually died in jail...]
Sure he or she is, just not to us, unless you happen to be a corporate lobbyist or soft dollar distributor. Lets face it the PRIMARY goal of any elected official these days is fundraiser for the party.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
I have sent emails to my Governor before (incidentally about that video game bill in CT) and I, too, immediately received an automated response back, but then a couple of days later I received a personalized email from one of his aides, thanking me and telling me that they passed on my message to the Governor (because he asked to be informed about praise or slander from the younger generation).
Then several days later they even sent me a copy of the Governor's veto and ANOTHER personalized letter thanking me for my insight. Nothing too big, but it should at least show that politicians, or at least their aides, read their email.
Now I would bet (trying not to sound like a rant) that email from Joe Schmoe who's not from a politician's district was probably read, but not given the attention that you might have wanted.
Try this:
Since your representative is supposed to be REPRESENTING your interests, and you want to speak out against another politician. Why not send a letter to the Rep from YOUR district and urge them to speak out against and/or inform the other politician or perhaps even (what the heck) the whole house?
Who knows? It might just all come together and work the way you'd like it to?
Don't send a couple of emails to the wrong person, and then whine about it when they don't call you up personally.
After all, how does it go?
"Learn the system and THEN f**k the system?"
That's just my 2%
Lather, rinse, repeat.
"Whadda'ya watchin'?"
"Angry Monkey."
"That HORRIBLE monkey."
Back in my days as a radical right-wing leftist, I wrote dozens and dozens of letters to government officials, ranging from Bill Clinton to Bruce Babbitt (Sec. of the Interior) on a variety of social justice and environmental issues. Real letters, neatly presented, correct grammar, polite, all that stuff -- and what did I receive in response?
From Mr. Clinton's office, I received a very consistent set of form letters signed by a staffer, usually thanking me for expressing support for the President. Of course, they were replying to a letter wherein I'd strongly declared my lack of faith in his leadership. Clearly, they never actually read what I sent -- or if they read it, they didn't want to respond to my actual words.
Back then, I was in Colorado (damn, I miss it), and the best responders were Sen. Ben Campbell (who helped me with some DOI FOIAs), and US Rep. Scott McInnis. Other CongressCritters and the Executive Branch sent form letters that often had nothing to do with the subject of my letter! I'd write about nationalizing the workforce, and "Clinton" would thank me for support NAFTA (which, in its current form, I don't support!)
Ugh. Very disheartening. Which is one reason I stopped lobbying as an individual. Too much work writing a letter for no discernable affect.
All about me
I'd argue that in this particular case, they are listening to the majority of their constituents in that they (the people represented) want tougher measures as to prevent further terrorism acts in the future.
Ironic, isn't it, that in appeasing this majority, the Senate is undermining the very Constitution that is supposed to protect you and I from the Tocqueville's "Tyranny of the Majority?"
I think it may have been in the Federalist Papers that James Madison said, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."
We can and should individually contact our legislators about issues we feel are important. However, if we don't organize and address problems with the strength of numbers, we're wasting our efforts. Whatever you feel is the issue that must be addressed, join! Join the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union, or the Open Source Lobby.
Miko O'Sullivan
The exception is probably your local governments (city, county, school).
Certainly, I (a school board member) vastly prefer e-mail over snail-mail -- it is much easier to reply to.
And in my experience, this is true for just about everyone I've served with as well as the city officials I have corresponded with.
Of course, YMMV...
Shut up, be happy. The conveniences you demanded are now mandatory. -- Jello Biafra
How about protests? Did they shiver a little at a WTO sized protest? Perhaps a meatspace rally is in order?
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
Where I grew up, the mayor was also the Junior High librarian. That "representitive of the people" kept telling me to Shush! Bastard...
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
Like many other people here, I looked up the addresses of my three "representatives" in Congress and sent each of them a nice long letter printed on fancy paper and everything. Of those three, only one generated a response, and it was the typical "I'll vote for anything that says antiterrorism on it" form letter. It's so nice to know that my concerns about the danger of knee-jerk legislation passing without opposition, regardless of content, were so obviously unfounded...
On the bright side, the next big election is coming up in just over a year. If you don't like what's going on, start taking notes. Find out who is up for re-election next year (everyone in the House and roughly one-third of the Senate) and keep track of how they are voting and what they are saying. When the campaign is in full swing, send out a few letters to the editor, start discussions with your friends and co-workers, etc. The important thing is that you do something and not just sit back and complain when those who are elected to represent you fail to do their job.
This may already have been said but here are the rules as I have been told:
Always write letters or use the telephone. Email is not weighed heavily because of the low effort perceived to be put into it.
Always communicate through your own representatives first. They all receive so much mail that they pretty much ignore non-constituent communications unless there is some special circumstance.
Write your own letter. Petitions (and especially email petitions) are pretty much weighed evenly with individual letters. Don't use verbatim a sample letter given to you. Remember, they pay attention to how much effort it looks like you put into the communication.
Always (generally) stick to one point in a single communication. Try to present a very short but logical argument for what you are espousing. If you want to discuss two or more topics, send two or more letters.
The best way to communicate, and it takes time, is to volunteer on election campaigns and things like that. You get to meet the candidates (frequently one-on-one) face to face in a situation where they are trying to determine what their consituents concerns are. Donate money. Go to campaign events. Just because they ask for a $200 donation for something does not mean that they won't accept $50 or less; they want attendance at these events. Dress appropriately and behave appropriately; you are more likely to be listened to if you don't look or act like a lunatic or a homeless person.
I hope this helps you in the future.
Congresspersons typically autorespond to emails and send a letter response regarding the specific issue to those persons that have emailed them, given they are constituents. They do not typically personally respond to those living outside their district. I used to be a legislative correspondent in DC, and that's how we did it.
I think I'll stop here.
Or, even better, just start the letter with...
...,
"Dear Senator
I know where the money came from!
I think we should discuss this.
Sincerely,
A concern citizen with documents in three different secret locations."
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
The point was so the Senate would answer to the states. Once this changed, the states lost most of their power, making the 10th amendment a joke.
Yeah, right.
This is about the Canadian government system, not the US, but the same issues pretty much apply. A few years back, our Canadian government wanted to legislate gun control. Jean Chretien, and the Liberal party were for gun control, with two exceptions. The MP in my riding being one of the exceptions. He decided to go against the party and vote against gun control, that's what his riding wanted him to do. Chretien didn't like him going against the party's stance and ostracized him. He was demoted from his minister of (whatever it was, I forget now) position and the party didn't look too kindly upon him. The people however, commended him.
My point is that many officials feel the need to go with the flow and won't stand up for what thier people really want. Does this rate a bad official? Maybe, but they are looking out for thier own livelyhood. I'm sure many of them would be more than happy to bring up your points, but if it contradicts the party's views then they may be more hesitant.
The idea of influencing an elected official by writing a letter betrays a common naive notion about the way representative democracy works in general and the way it works in the United States in particular.
The factors that influence a Congressman's or Senator's vote are
what the majority of people in his district think about an issue
how strongly those people feel about an issue
his own informed or uninformed opinion on an issue
the need to co-operate and compromise with his colleagues in order to get his favorite legislation passed or some other bill defeated.
If you want your elected rep's attention, join some organization of like-minded people that can guarantee your rep some votes on election day or some money for his campaign. The president of that organization will have the ear of the representative on a regular basis. You will also find that this president will listen closely to your opinion because he wants your vote in the organization's next election and because he wants you to renew your membership and pay your dues.
If you want to talk directly to your elected representative, get elected president of that organization.
This system makes sense in a crude kind of way because by joining an organization you show you feel strongly enough about an issue to contribute money and attend meetings. It also allows the elected rep to talk to someone who speaks for more than just himself.
As an individual citizen, your influence is properly limited to the vote you cast on election day. If you want more influence, you have to get out from behind the keyboard and hustle a bit.
Members of Congress and their staff are extremely busy. On issues where they are not taking a leadership role, they probably won't decide how to vote on particular bills until VERY shortly before the vote.
Think about it. The anti-terrorism bill the Senate voted on yesterday was S.1510. That means that since January, there have been at least 1510 bills introduced in the Senate; there are probably more in the House.
Most of those will never be voted on, even in a subcommittee, much less by the entire body. It would be a waste of time for anyone to try to read and form an opinion about all of them. So they prioritize, with "do I need to decide this right now?" as the top issue to be considered.
(Also, lots of bills are extremely long. Maybe someone supports hiring hundreds of new Sky Marshalls and opposes the definition of a computer trespasser. How do they answer your question about whether or not they support a bill including both?)
Also remember that just because they listen to you doesn't mean you're right.
Liza
These opinions are my own. My employer is not aware of them, does not endorse them, and is not responsible for them.
I think it really depends on the Member you're working for. I've interned up on the Hill twice (once on the Senate side for the now-retired Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH), and once for a still-serving House Member (from my original home district in Ohio, also a Dem). Metzenbaum got a lot more mail than the Rep did, which only makes sense since he represented all of the State as opposed to a district of about 500,000 (a bit smaller then the average district size, I know).
Both treated issue mail the same way though. Mail was sorted and prioritized in the following order, from highest to lowest, in both offices (more or less).
1.) On-topic mail from constituents (for the Senator, from any Ohio resident, for the Rep, from district residents). "On-topic" mail translates to snail mail, either handwritten or typed, that clearly states the bill number (the official bill name is also helpful in routing the mail to the right staff member). "Constituents" also includes businesses and interest groups based in the district or State.
2.) On-topic e-mail from constituents (which was printed out) (though Metzenbaum retired before the full advent of e-mail contact with constituents, so this is based on the Rep's policy).
3.) On-topic mail from non-constituent interest groups (NRA, ACLU, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, etc.)
4.) "Non-specific" mail from constituents. "Non-specific" ranges from letters that refer to issues in general without a direct reference to a bill number or title, e.g., "current U.S. copyright law sucks", to general rants about issues or the Member, e.g., "you take away my right to carry a firearm and I'll bust your ass".
5.) Non-specific e-mail from constituents. We printed these out and made some attempt to categorize them. As with non-specific constituent snail mail, if it's too weird, e.g., "aliens are playing around with my cows at night", "immigrants are responsible for all ills in the country", it gets pitched.
6.) Non-Constituent on-topic mail re: a particular bill sponsored by the Member or being discussed in a committee that the Member belongs too. Forwarded directly on to the appropriate Member (i.e., to the Rep. or Senator that represents the writer - if you live in CA and write a letter to an OH Rep on the Appropriations Committee they don't see it).
7.) Non-Constituent on-topic e-mail - we printed it out and forwarded it to the appropriate Member. This was before e-mail really took off as a general communications medium for Congress (1997 in the Rep's office), so they may automatically forward it or discard it now, due to the sheer volume.
and a special category
8.) "Form" mail, from either constituents or non-constituents. "Form" mail consists of those little ripout cards you get sometimes in the mail from particular interest groups (NRA used to do a lot of these). Form mail from constituents would get logged (i.e., the number of cards on a particular issue would be recorded) and the constituent would get a form letter in response. Form mail from non-constituents is forwarded on to the appropriate member. There's a variation on this where people send in a letter on their own stationary or e-mail with the exact same text, obviously in response to an interest group call to do so. This type of mail, while accorded higher priority than the little cards, was still not taken as seriously as a letter from a constituent that doesn't spout back interest group boilerplate text. So if you get e-mail from EFF telling you to write in about a particular law it's probably a good idea to come up with your own way to phrase things - don't copy and paste.
Issue-related correspondence was never forwarded onto the Member without going through a staffer first. And by the way - even if a letter was marked "Personal" the interns still open it, at least in the offices I worked in. Usually the appointment secretary (equal in influence to the Legislative Director and the Chief of Staff, since they determine who gets facetime with the Member) will do a quick scan through the mail and pick out the really personal stuff (letters from family and close friends), though sometimes they would miss things and we'd get some interesting "background" on the Member.
Besides the interns, Staff eyes are always the first pairs of eyes to see any correspondence on issues. For most issues, the letters were logged (i.e., this many people want you to vote against a bill, this many for the bill; these local businesses for, these local businesses against; these interest groups for, these interest groups against), and each constituent receives the same letter re: each bill or issue (tweaked to make it more on point if necessary if there was anything uniquely personal or important about the original letter or sender - i.e. letters from Boeing's president get a more tailored response then do those from John Q. Public in Seattle). My Members would never see issue-related correspondence unless they specifically asked to see it. In that case, staff would usually give them copies of mail falling within categories 1, 2, and 3. Letters that had personal anecdotes in them, e.g., "my business has had to lay off 20 workers due to the effects of the DMCA", were more likely to be seen by the Member than those that just talked about the issues in general. They're just more interesting to read and they make great fodder for speeches and talking points.
Several things that really impressed me (I had come to Congress under the impression that individual citizens really had little influence on their Member's opinions and votes):
1.) Your opinion DOES matter to them (particularly if you write it yourself, include a personal story about how the law or issue has or would affect you, live in their District or State, and send it via snail mail), even if you're just writing on behalf of yourself. Business letters, particularly from those businesses that employed a LOT of people in the Member's state and district, did get attention (though small businesses were not ignored). Even though it seems unfair, this really makes sense (to me at least), because though businesses often represent only their own interests that are counter to those of the public in general, they employ the people who vote and live in the Member's district or state. And the people who vote and live in the district or State are the people that really matter the most to the Member. (And yes, I know that the Congress represents all of us, even those that don't vote - I'm just telling you what the reality was in the offices I worked in).
2.) Staffers are REALLY important. Members are so busy that unless they have a particular interest or need, they don't have time to research the issues they vote on. Staffers in Congress, like those in the Executive branch, usually determine what the Member sees and what they know. If you really want to talk to the people that are going to put together the position paper the Member reads, call the D.C. office of the Member in question and ask to talk to the staffer in charge of the particular topic or bill. Follow up the call with a snail mail letter.
3.) Effort matters. One of the reasons that snail mail, fairly or not, is given more credence then e-mail is because it's seen as taking more of an effort to write, print out, and send to the Member. Effort, in the Congressional staffer's mind, translates to how much a constituent cares about an issue. If they care enough to send a personally composed letter via snail mail, they REALLY care. E-mail is just too easy to write and send.
4.) If you don't live in the Member's district or State, your opinion will probably have more weight if it's delivered via an interest group - i.e., give money to the interest groups that you support so that they can afford to send or hire lobbyists to make their case to the Member in person. Even though non-constituent correspondence is forwarded onto the appropriate Member, usually that Member will not have much of an impact on the bill in question in the all-important committee process (though this varies according to the Chamber, it's a lot harder for a House Member to get the views of his constituents considered in the drafting process if he's not on the committee that's working on the bill - Senators have a easier time of it - it's just a smaller, more personal, setting). Lobbyists that represent large interest groups with lots of money are really important - it's well worth your while to make sure that the groups who advocate positions that you support can compete with big business.
In closing, I do want to say that I was also impressed with the fact that the Members I worked for (and their staff for that matter) really had a sense of serving and representing the people of their district or State. They really cared about the opinions of the people they represented and worked for. I think their sense of service and responsibility is probably shared among most members of Congress. They're not all cynical power-hungry moneygrubbers up on the Hill.
Tig
I'll bet you'd feel a lot better if you also convinced a bunch of your neighbors not to vote for him as well....
Virg
Donate money to a lobbying organization and have the pros work for you. If the EFF is fighting for your opinion, send them a check. THAT is how the system works. Take advantage of it.
If some clever hacker can figure out how to manipulate the system without spending money*, please post it. And don't just say "vote" because sometimes I'd like to affect the system more than once every 2 years.
(Hey, that gives me an idea...)
Hi, my name is Dave Rhodes. I was a congressman from a little-known state and wasn't allowed to vote myself a pay-raise one year. The bills were piling up, and the cocaine dealers and hookers stopped taking IOUs. My BMW was about to be repossessed and my house in Switzerland was badly in need of repairs before winter set in. I was in real trouble!
Then I got the idea: why not use the office of congressman to make money? So I sent out a mass-mailing to all my constituents, saying:
Soon I was inundated with checks! I was able to pay the hookers and coke dealers again. Then the MPAA lobbyists found out and they raised their payment and I sent out another mass-mailing and soon I had a full-fledged, drag-out, intense bidding war on my hands! My Swiss house's roof got repaired before the first snowfall, and my Beamer is completely paid off now!
I am telling you, this scheme works! Please forward this email about this Great Opportunity to 5 cronies in the House or Senate. Soon we'll all be rich!
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
When I wrote in opposition to the DMCA a few years back, my reply rate was about 50%. But in particular, my experience is similar to firewort 's: my home state's Sen. Edwards (or his staff, rather) wrote back a reply thanking me for advocating his position in support of it! I hate having that level of incompetence allegedly representing me!
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
My girlfriend is a Legislative Correspondent for her congressman. Here's how it all works.
Most every representative and senator has at least one "Legislative Correspondent". This staffer is responsible for dealing with mail and responding to it.
IF YOU ARE NOT A CONSTITUENT, DON'T EXPECT A RESPONSE. They're not going to waste time/money on you; it's S.O.P. for all congressional offices.
If you are a constituent, your letter/email will be assigned to an issues category and have basic information from it entered into a database (which keeps track of who you are, where you live, what other letters you've sent, basic stuff like that). If a letter exists which addresses your issue, it'll get printed out and sent back to you. If not, either the legislative correspondent will write a letter on it -- which can require a good deal of research -- or, especially if it's an important, popular issue, will have a "Legislative Assistant" write the letter, typically someone who knows more about the particular issue. The new response letter typically will be read by the "Legislative Director", the chief of staff, or even your congressperson.
Once the letter is revised and approved, it will be mailed to you. Some offices reply via email -- if you emailed them; other offices always issue snail mail. Always, always, always include your mailing address in your letter.
In my g/f's office, email has the same status as written letters. I don't know if this is a universal practice. I do know that their email system and database software is universal. It's best to submit your email via your congressperson's web site (http://www.senate.gov/, http://www.house.gov/), because it's easier to get info from it into their database.
Once your letter/email has been responded to, they will file a paper copy of it and that will be that. Whether it has an effect is entirely dependent upon your congressperson's politics, campaign financing interests, and staffers, and upon the political wind, and upon how reasonable and articulate your correspondence is. If you sound crazed at all -- and remember that congressional staffers majored in poly sci, not CS; their passions are not your's -- they'll think you're loony.
An important fact to keep in mind is that some congressional offices have months' worth of backlog. It will take TIME to get a response, especially as there's a lot of mail pouring into the Capitol these days. My g/f's office strives for two weeks turnaround, max, and that's a very good number.
---
Congressional correspondence is important, obviously, but you may be able to be more persuasive by talking with the right legislative assistant. Call up the office, explain to whoever answers the phone that you'd like to talk to the appropriate legislative assistant about your issue, and if the right LA isn't there, leave your phone number. If you take this tact, however, it's very important to know about the issue and to be prepared to talk about it in a reasonable and personable manner. Think soft sell. Be prepared to concede some points. Be prepared to prioritize sub-issues, what's non-negotiable for your vote, why you feel that way, and also what you could live with. Be prepared to demonstrate the ramifications of possible legislation, how it affects you, and how it affects others (especially other constituents). If you're a business leader, or work for a notable employer, or are an influential and/or notable and respected citizen, your voice will carry some impact. If you can be a source of reliable information and input for your congressperson, his/her staffers will be grateful.
Got it?
Good.
-- Jon
This question is being phrased as "Do representatives...?" This is as silly as "Do consumers...?" Given that we're individually experimenting here with our own contact attempts to individual reps, what we need is a tracking of results, by rep. Of X contacts by phone | fax | mail | email | Website | personal | other to representative R, Y were responded to personally | by form (appropriately | inappropriately) | not at all and the subsequent position taken by R was possibly influenced | contrary to the position urged in the constituent | non-constituent, contributor | non-contributor communication.
If we can collect the data, we've got folks hereabouts who can mine it, right? The solution is not generic, but respects the individual we're trying to influence | buy | coerce.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
I thought she did his thing, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding.
I really hope someone mods the parent post up. It's good to know that at least some of the people supposedly representing us really do care.
FWIW, I think expecting a personal reply to everything is impractical, but it's important to know that if you mail them on an issue, your view will count a little. I'm more worried about my representative listening to me than replying to me.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I've written and emailed my Missouri representatives about starting an anti-spam law similar to Washington has. I get little to no response and the response that I did get told me it was a good idea but they weren't sure if it would actuall work.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
I still get the same braindead responses back that prove to me that they never bothered to read my letter. (I live in Texas, btw)
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Woody Allen said it: "Seventy percent of success in life is showing up." In this case, more than 70%. Lobbying your representative in person makes much more of a difference than letters or calls to an assistant, who is invariably working his/her butt off to make sure said pol can make the 100s of public events per week. Our organization, along with several others with whom we allied for this purpose, was quite successful using this method (as well as an initiative campaign) to get our measure before the voters.
But, you may ask: "why would he/she listen to me?" If you're on your own, you're right, you may not get much in the way of face time (though you can usually talk to a policy aide). But if you have a few hundred members of your organization, you will get some attention, particularly if you can get some press too. Show that you have a significant number of people who vote with you, and the doors may open a bit more for you.
Relevant to the anti-liberty legislation: it's surely a greased pig that can't be stopped, but there are some lessons for grassroots organizing here. Does the EFF have local chapters? Can one be set up in each city or congressional district? Use this as a means of organizing people like you to write letters in concert, or show up to an office en masse, or hold a protest. The Free-Dmitry protests, while they haven't gotten the US Attorney to back down, were successful in getting Adobe to back down very quickly, and can be extended to future terrorism legislation, or (more importantly) abominations like the SSSCA.
Yes, money talks. But so also does grassroots organizing. If we don't have as much of the former as our opponents (MPAA et al., or Ashcroft) we can make up for it with the latter.
sulli
RTFJ.
Ok, first, don't bother with the email, unless you're an old friend of the elected official and they know your email address by heart.
..."
Second, get off your duff and write a handwritten letter or, if typed, write a hand P.S. Use legible printing or cursive.
Hand write the envelope. Sure you have that fancy form feed for your printer, but a hand written envelope means it will get opened and read.
Always give your address. If you don't live in their district, find a big town in it, pop up the street map, and make one up. Bingo, you're a constituent. If you appear to live elsewhere, noone will read your letter. Now, this works only if you mail it in their state - but if you are sending email, this will at least mean someone will read it.
Don't go on and on and on. Yes, you're bright, you're intelligent, you're well informed. Noone cares. Instead, keep it short and focussed. If there is a bill number and title, include it.
Personalize the letter. If you met them at the state fair, say so: "Dear Congressman Schitz-Alikhabar, It's been a couple of months since I met you at the state fair, but I wanted to
If you can meet them physically, you will make more of an impression. Coffee things in their district, drop by their house if a neighbor when they're out back gardening and chat over the fence.
Be polite. Yelling never works.
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
so that when I do they'll listen to me
Got friends?
I have read several (not all of the posts) under this issue and we have all had different experiences along with some good ideas. Here is my personal experience in dealing with my Wisconsin District 1 representative Paul Ryan over the past several years. Please note: I have not contributed in any way to Ryan's campaign.
Through a professional lobbying service (probably set up by my satellite provider) I sent off two bingo cards concerning HR 2921 & HR3261 to my state rep. Months later from the original sendings (I actually forgot about the issues) form letters came back to me with the standard - yeah, ah ha, OK reply. Nothing further to date on the bills from my rep. In March of 2001 I composed a lenghty email voicing my concerns on Paul's past voting record and what I as a constituent would prefer to see and why. To date no response. In August 2001, I personally met Paul on a summer road show. I was actually the only constituent that met with him. We chatted about the social security system (he's on the SS subcommittee), I mentioned the email sent back in March, which I got a friendly apology. Lastly I mentioned 2 or 3 bills by number that I either wanted him to consider cosponsoring/supporting or give me his position on. After a quick reference on my end to familiarize him with the bill names and issues we chatted on one briefly. He made promises to me to look into and read each bill. I felt kinda good at that point, but did notice neither he nor his local and DC interns took any notes during our conversation. Oh, forgot to mention that before our meeting began I filled in a constituent profile (2 pages, lots of questions - survey style) October 10, I received a thank you for stopping by to meet with me letter. No reference to anything we talked about or issues I filled in on my profile. Between June and September I sent additional emails either directly using Paul's website or through various committe's designed to petition your district representatives. Nothing received on any of them. On October 4th, Paul sent out his local "Road Warrior" intern, David Rossbach, to complete his mobile office project in my town. I met with David and quickly started questioning why I haven't gotten any responses from emails sent from March through now 2001. David very politely advised that they received about 1000 emails/week and that any out of district emails were passed over. I then sparked that I was in the district. Next David mentioned an email problem they were having and that they have fixed it now. Q: What would happen with all my old emails? A: Didn't know
Now Dave was taking notes, and I advised that if Paul is going to have email communications for his constituents he better take it a bit more seriously or eliminate it entirely. I challegned him to get web-enabled. I assured David I would give the new email service a final try. My latest email to Paul Ryan summarized some older issues with him, and challenged him to evolve into an eCongressman if he really wanted to stay in touch with his constituents. Response pending (I'll give him the normal 3 months)
Conclusion:
1) Individual constituents have zero say regardless of medium used
2) Professional lobbyists petitions get you return letters (3 to 6 months wait period)
3) Something is very wrong with my district's communications protocol for constituents
4) My district rep has much more important things on his agenda than my ideas and opinions
Suggestions:
1) Think local - city, village or town
2) Run for local office
3) Learn everything about who you are voting for to represent you (2002 is re-districting time)
Regards
Paul Rzonca
Sen. Barbra Mikulski (Dem, MD) does listen to E-mail, as long as you include your postal address. I've sent notes to her about bills on spam and China's constant relaying and insecurity on the digital front. She returns them via postal mail with general agreement towards the issue.
Unfortunately, my other senator and represenatives don't put in the extra effort. A local news station ran through state and federal represenatives, and found out that our federal represenatives are the worst at getting back to their consituents *NO MATTER WHAT METHOD YOU USE!*
I'm going to reelect Barbra. The remaining incumbants can get tossed.
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
My spouse frequently writes to Carper, Biden and Roth. They always respond, although they usually respond in a manner that reminds me of those audio-animatronic disney puppets.
Delaware is small enough that you can call up the governor on the phone and expect to be able to talk to him if a) it's important and b) you are a Delaware resident. The methods used probably wouldn't scale very well, though.
Come to think of it, a less populated state should work even better. Move to Montana, you can be a dental floss tycoon.
--Charlie
Just what I want, I country full of uninformed people spending 10 seconds to decide every important issue.
So create some suitable real time trust network or moderation system, where intelligent suggestions and domain 'experts' get more influence. And tune the dynamics so that it doesn't stagnate, and so that differing view points are represented.
Also make it localized, so that citizens can select what to take an interest in, for example local neighbourhood / city / state issues, or issues dealing with their work, free time activities, areas of interest or expertice, etc.
A feedback type process to improve on the voting system itself could also be developed, where the aim is to learn well from mistakes, and improve the system while maintaining some original goals or constitution.
It's not easy to design, and will not be 'just' (but nothing save a single person country could be that), but it might be better than current systems for some things.. At least it is an interesting thought experiment, and something that would be interesting to play around with in an online world or game.
pinkNoise
Example
I was at this fund-raising dinner for a Silicon Valley politician (Mike HOnda). Guys gathered were all tech-savvy people earning big bucks. So the 'donations' for campaign were from 100-1000 (max cap). So when an 'intern' came to collect the check I asked her about his stand on DMCA. She said she doesn't know and she can get back to me. I told her that I need to hear HIS opinions before writing the check and to my surprise HONDA himself came over to talk. He said he doesn't know that much about DMCA and will get back to me. The intern collected my business card (still no check). after about a week (to my surprise) I had this letter from him saying the fairness law is 'strectched' a bit DMCA and he will 'work with others' about this. I don't know if he'd ever do this but I mailed him a check b/c
THis taught me a thing. Here in America if you have money, you can be heard.
God Bless America :-)
What happens if the email is a "praise" email?
Example:
I sent an email yesterday to Feingold in WI. I live in Arizona. The email I sent him was a "good job" type email, and wishing he worked here, and thanking him for his work on behalf of American citizens everywhere.
I included my address, though I doubt I will get any response back (not that I am looking for one).
By your statements, my email got tossed - even though it wasn't a complaint!
Why are our representatives so backward about this stuff. This isn't the future we are talking about, this is the present! It would be like ignoring telephones or faxes (which they apparently still do on the latter).
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Many posters are stating that they either don't hear from their representatives, or they get back form letters - which basically is an acknowledgment of them receiving your letter, but not whether it was read or cared about.
Very few posters have stated they have gotten real non-form letters back. I know on occasion I have gotten ones back, but it has been a rare occasion.
If our representatives are not listening, then do we truely have representation? We are still being taxed, I see that every day. But we seem to have no representation.
I seem to recall something from my history books about a war being fought a while back over "taxation without representation" - or maybe I am mistaken...
That's got to be it - I must be mistaken...
Yeah...
*sob*
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
A representative democracy is part of a republic, but a republic is also bounded by laws in their governing.
The idea is to protect minorities from omnipotent majorities. Thus the Constitution & Amendments, to protect minorities and individuals from public weal, representatively determined or not.
Are the laws being passed by our representatives Constitutional?
Pet peeve: "Representative Democracy == Republic" evaluates to 0. == is a conditional, not an assignment. Even if it were assignment, it would not be mathematical equivelence...
I sent the following email to one of my senators, John Kyl:
Dear John,
Thank you for passing today an act (USA Act) that helps destroy our fourth amendment - an amendment to the very Constitution you swore to uphold when you took office.
Why must the rights of American citizens be violated for our so-called "safety"?
I am not a senator, something which I would like to think takes great logic and analytical skills, as well as strong morals. But this does not seem to be the case, as you apparently do not understand that SAFETY IS AN ILLUSION. Laws exist to help keep that illusion in place, but once
again, laws themselves are illusions.
The government can not protect me. I do not harbor such illusions. I, myself only, am the only one capable of providing for MY protection.
As a constituent, I look forward to your running for office again.
So I CAN VOTE YOU OUT.
Sincerely,
I sent it using the address "info@kyl.senate.gov", which I found in the FORM code in the page source at http://www.senate.gov/~kyl/con_form.htm
I sent it via normal email, because I also cc'ed the email to our other John, John McCain, so I didn't use the form.
Fat lot of good it would have done me anyway, because here is the form response I got back:
Thank you for writing to me at info@kyl.senate.gov. In an effort to respond as quickly and thoroughly as possible, I am no longer receiving e-mail at this address. I have chosen instead to use a new web-based system that allows me to quickly review the thousands of e-mails I receive and give priority to those from my constituents in Arizona.
There is more, but it is long - suffice to say that the reply went on to note that I should go to the site and the reply form that I had went to originally to get the address!
This is utter bull! I used the address used in the form, and it is an invalid address! So even if I used the reply form, it wouldn't go to him! Am I right on this, or wrong? This is the way it seems. I suppose the CGI could email it elsewhere, but why is the mailto var set to that email address?
ARGH!!!!
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Why do you think anyone outside of the high-tech-business-complex takes email seriously?
Write your congressman. Type your letter on good bond paper, in a high quality envelope, properly addressed. Make your case as well-reasoned and literate as you possibly can. Send them letters
worthy of a head of state or elected official.
Do not simply write your congressman "one and done." Develop a relationship with your representative's office over a period of years, by writing letters, participating in their campaign, or even joining the political party that they represent.
Don't send them an email during the busiest time they have ever had, and then act surprised that they didn't take the time to read your rant.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I haven't personally tried this, but I'm about to start:
These folks have CD and/or tape decks in their cars, right? They drive to work just like most of the rest of us. I'm going to formulate my thoughts on the issues, write them down notecard-style, and then dictate a brief spoken-word piece explaining a bit of background, then my view on each.
I figure, an hour or two to come up with good points on the issues, another 20 minutes to outline them, 1-2 hours to record and edit the voice files. They don't have to be perfect. 10 minutes to burn the sucker, during which time I hand-write the jewel case label on nice stationery. Lick a stamp, wham bam, a week later they're listening to my intelligent(?) explanations of the issues during what would otherwise be wasted time.
From The Home Front, Issue 1, track listing:
1: Don't hum that tune, it's protected!
2: Hackers, today's Salem Witches.
3: Only outlaws will have privacy.
4: Love your freedom? Thank a vet. NO on SSSCA!
5: Vivaldi, the four seasons, spring. (instr.)
6: Protect our parks and woods, please!
7: Potholes on Interstate 94. (instr.)
8: Guest artist: Larry's Shocks And Struts
7: Until next time...
I don't know if it'll work, but it's certainly worth a shot. Maybe the inside of the jewel case insert could be a quick-reference to the various bills and issues, and my positions on them, and a very brief set of memory-jogging keywords as to why.
This is something uniquely hackish. Most constituents don't have CD burners yet, we have a few months before the mainstream lobbyists catch on. Hackers tend to be intelligent and a lot are well-spoken, this just might work.
Connect the dots:
1) Alien & Sedition Act (1798)
The one that started it all. You clearly are unaware of even this one. Start here.
2) Harrison Act (1914)
The start of our "War On Drugs"
3) Anti-Communist Propaganda Law (1941, McCarthy Era)
The start of our "War On Communism"
All three of these have demonstrably unconstitutional provisions in them that still stand today. There was controversy when they were passed, but after all, it was "war" so it was determined that tearing up the Constitution was fine.
Two other current events you are also demonstrably ignorant of:
CDA - "The War on Pornography"
DMCA/SSSCA - the "War on Piracy"
This is a question I think everyone asks when they first get politically active. The answer is, "Mostly...kinda." There are ways that are effective for lobbying; but to a certain degree, if what you're asking for veers to far away from either 1) public perception or 2) their own personal beliefs, they will end up ignoring you. This is a major failure of our legal system, IMO, but there's a solution: vote people into office who more closely represent the views of American citizens.
There's a longish section on our site about this subject, here.
In a nutshell, though, email just isn't very effective. Fax and snail mail is good; phone calls are especially effective if you are articulate. Stating your opinion clearly and concisely is important; if you ramble on about civil liberties, they won't quite "get" it. If you say, "Vote no on this particular bill, and here's why" that is more likely to have an effect.
The final point is this: right now everyone's in a hubbub, and 10x as many people as usual are contacting their representatives. They are just going to be less responsive right now. On top of that, everyone is so concerned with _feeling_ that they don't have time for _thinking_. This is unfortunate, but I think that it will pass as time goes on.
I interned for a state representative in California a summer ago, and if there is one thing I learned there, it's that they don't pay much attention to emails. In terms of time, the representatives are all over the place and almost never around, but a real letter, or second to that, a phone call, go a longer way in getting some kind of serious response.
It sucks that email is not as respected as other methods of communication, but they get so many quacks writing them that something more tangible usually works better. Nevertheless, even if you send an actual letter I'm not saying you will necessarily get a satisfactory response, I'm just saying its more likely. The system sure ain't perfect.
"They are making decisions regarding their longstanding agendas and using the "war on terrorism" as a cover."
This seems exactly right. The evidence suggests that the real motivating factors for top political decisions are weapons and oil. The U.S. is the largest seller of weapons in the world. The U.S. gives billions of dollars in aid to Israel, part of which must be spent to buy weapons from U.S. manufacturers. U.S. weapons manufacturers also sell weapons to Arabs.
This is a quote from the official testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives of Unocal Vice President John J. Maresca, on February 12, 1998. He said, in part, "CentGas cannot begin construction [of a gas pipeline] until an internationally recognized Afghanistan government is in place."
For a link to this document on the House of Representatives government web site, and a document about the pipeline route, search on the word Unocal in: What should be the Response to Violence?
The Bush family has ties to Unocal. Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of of the U.S. Defense Deparment, made a trip to Burma (where Unocal has interests) that was paid for by Unocal.
It seems possible that the war in Afghanistan is being waged to allow the pipeline to go through.
It's like the "war on drugs" which has increased the amount of drugs available in the United States.
Bush's education improvements were
If the Slashdot community wants any recognition of their views, the most effective way would be to form a PAC, accept donations (to cover travel and administrative costs, and possibly to influence some elections via advertising), elect volunteers to coordinate for particular activities or areas of Federal law, tally people's opinions on various legislative proposals, and send physical representatives (lobbyists) knocking on Congresspersons' doors.
Or, if that seems like too much trouble, even though it is how most effective political expression occurs in the US, then at the very least join organizations that already reflect your views. For example, people who are for free trade in crypto and against software patents should become paying ACM members, since the ACM already lobbies on behalf of those views.
Yes, I think the fact that any of this is necessary to get our own government ("of the people") to respect our views is terribly sad and reeks of corruption. But we live in the real world, and this is how things are done. It is the rare, determined, charismatic person who can make any progress changing our government outside this corrupt system, and most of those people are (sadly) ultimately assimilated into it.
Java: the COBOL of the new millenium.
I contacted my rep last Friday about this issue, and she actually voted against the anti-terrorism bill.
It passed regardless, but it shows that you can have some influence on your rep's decisions.
I used to be someone else. Now I'm someone better.
Real life is underrated.