However, due to the volume of mail received (typically spammed to all congressmen, often included on a mailing list), offices often don't respond to email that didn't come from constituents.
From the story at
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010318/pl/congre ss_e_mail_2.html
David Carle, spokesman for Sen. Patrick Leahy (news - bio - voting record), D-Vt., said his office responded to about 50,000 people who e-mailed during the week of hearings on Napster (news - web sites)'s free Internet song-swapping service. Napster and other groups have started encouraging people to barrage legislators with e-mail.
``From virtually every office we talked to, they kind of rolled their eyes and said that it's all that damn spam that comes in that causes us so much headache,'' Shapiro said. ``What it's doing is generating a lot of noise that's just clogging up the whole system.''
So, if Sen. Leahy is chairing hearings on a topic in which I have an interest, and I, as a non-Vermonter, send him an email stating my opinion on the topic, I have sent spam?
Working on a Congressman's staff, you undoubtedly know that most important decisions, which will lead to laws, are made in committee. And that final language is quite often realized in conference committee. If my Congressman is not a member of either of these committees, any email I may send to Congressmen who are on these committees but who do not represent my district is to be considered "spam", and an annoyance, and "a lot of noise"? Especially if I use a mailing list which includes all the Members on the committee in question?
Not even close. Hiss and the Rosenbergs weren't the focus of the HUAC. It was the "list of 44 Communists in government that I have here in my pocket (but won't let you see)" which was the downfall of that committee and that which it spend the majority of its time dealing with.
I don't believe that the majority of writers, artists, actors, and young House committee lawyers whose names were sullied and whose careers were ruined have their names appearing the in the documents recently released in Russia.
Slashdot Mirror
However, due to the volume of mail received (typically spammed to all congressmen, often included on a mailing list), offices often don't respond to email that didn't come from constituents.
e ss_e_mail_2.html
From the story at
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010318/pl/congr
David Carle, spokesman for Sen. Patrick Leahy (news - bio - voting record), D-Vt., said his office responded to about 50,000 people who e-mailed during the week of hearings on Napster (news - web sites)'s free Internet song-swapping service. Napster and other groups have started encouraging people to barrage legislators with e-mail.
``From virtually every office we talked to, they kind of rolled their eyes and said that it's all that damn spam that comes in that causes us so much headache,'' Shapiro said. ``What it's doing is generating a lot of noise that's just clogging up the whole system.''
So, if Sen. Leahy is chairing hearings on a topic in which I have an interest, and I, as a non-Vermonter, send him an email stating my opinion on the topic, I have sent spam?
Working on a Congressman's staff, you undoubtedly know that most important decisions, which will lead to laws, are made in committee. And that final language is quite often realized in conference committee. If my Congressman is not a member of either of these committees, any email I may send to Congressmen who are on these committees but who do not represent my district is to be considered "spam", and an annoyance, and "a lot of noise"? Especially if I use a mailing list which includes all the Members on the committee in question?
Help me out here.
Not even close. Hiss and the Rosenbergs weren't the focus of the HUAC. It was the "list of 44 Communists in government that I have here in my pocket (but won't let you see)" which was the downfall of that committee and that which it spend the majority of its time dealing with.
I don't believe that the majority of writers, artists, actors, and young House committee lawyers whose names were sullied and whose careers were ruined have their names appearing the in the documents recently released in Russia.
Better up the network support guys to 85 hours per week. 70 isn't enough for them to learn how to tune their own company's product.