Is Your Elected Official Really Listening? 468
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?
"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?
Are you really surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
Number of letters received (Score:3, Informative)
Example of elected representitives (Score:3, Funny)
Start locally (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:Start locally - get nowhere (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
This was the way the system was designed. (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
Re:This was the way the system was designed. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This was the way the system was designed. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This was the way the system was designed. (Score:2, Insightful)
Instead, all the normal voter will know about the SSSCA is when Hollings runs his campaign ads he can say "he worked to protect the rights of performers and artists"
So get out there, you are in the state, it's up to you guys to quit voting for people like Hollings and Helms, and convince all the other SC people to stop it also!
Re:This was the way the system was designed. (Score:2)
Hand-written letters (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Re:Hand-written letters (Score:2)
Perhaps the powers-that-be at Slashdot could put post a story with this theme on the front page. There are a lot of things going on right now that will strongly affect the Net community for years to come. Like it or not, the only effective way to communicate with elected representatives is with a handwritten, stamped, postal-mailed letter.
sPh
What do I do with unsolicited mail? (Score:2)
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.
Re:Hand-written letters (Score:2, Insightful)
From my experience in the legislature, they don't read hand-written or typed letters, either. They get bags of letters every day, which are read by his office aides. Then the aides tell them what their constituencies think about particular matters.
When you elect someone, you're electing their whole staff, not just the point man.
They still don't read it (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Hand-written letters (Score:2)
They read just enough to get an idea of what you're writing about and which side you're on. Although, after a second letter to the local representative, I actually received a phone call from one of his staff. And he was the one who received only email from me.
Re:Hand-written letters (Score:2)
Senator John Warner's office replied to my letters, actually addressing the issues (though only to say that though he understands my concerns, he disagrees and Naval exercises on Vieques will continue as long as he can help it - doh!). I've actually physically lobbied (on behalf of National Coalition for the Homeless and Amnesty International) and as part of a group, gotten to speak to a PR person and have ZERO effect.
The bottom line is: Money talks, even if it's talking bullshit.
If voting could change anything, it would be illegal.
Re:Hand-written letters (Score:2)
I worked for a year at a small nonprofit that did a fair amount of lobbying. While some government agencies have systems in place for accepting feedback to things like rules proposals via email, congress basically does not. They have autoresponders, and aides often treat masses of email as if it were just a single email. That is, if the office receives a hundred messages on a particular topic, they record "one" -- It's obviously one way of dealing with mass, automatic email campaigns, but it also clearly leaves many emailing constituents out in the cold.
Event though they respond to most postal mail with the same form letter full of noncommital polital-speak, you can be pretty sure that somebody actually read it.
Finally, when something big was going on, we always resorted to phone calls. They really do listen to phone calls, especially when their switchboard is lit up with hundreds of calls from constituents.
-schussat
Re:Hand-written letters (Score:2, Interesting)
Lobbyists not only have money, but the ablility to leverage information in order to manage their contacts with Congress, and maximize their effectiveness. Can we put this information in tha hands of Joe Public? (And make it easier for us to be effective in communicating)
How about a client which gets updated with a small XML database of legislation, information about legislators (contact information, voting records etc...), and the ability to solicit lobbying from interested parties (I see this happening from a central server, so you as the user would have the ability to filter commentary from any unwanted source.) The client would allow you to compose letters and mail them off, track resopnses (in the unlikely event that there are any) and non-responses. You could also cross-post to forums like Slashdot.
Lobbyists and interested parties of all stripes could foot the costs of maintenance by buying the opportunity to interact and influence anyone who was running the client, and could even foot the bill for a bank of printers and postage machines, so you wouldn't even need to take a trip to the Post Office to mail a letter.
Uhhhh? (Score:2, Insightful)
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
US Congress Represents Entire Nation (Score:2)
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
Re:Uhhhh? (Score:2)
Do you think the PEOPLE of South Carolina and Alaska are the ones ASKING for the "Security Systems Standards and Certification Act"?
It would make marginally more sense if the legislation was brought forth by politicians from states in which companies exist that are most likely to benefit (such as California in this case). But since campain donations reach across state borders, so does loyalty and representation.
-S
E-mail is too impersonal (Score:5, Informative)
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?
Re:E-mail is too impersonal (Score:2, Funny)
Re:E-mail is too impersonal (Score:2)
E-mail Response from Representatives (Score:2)
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!
The Senators Aren't (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:The Senators Aren't (Score:2)
Try submitting your yahoo link, see if it goes anywhere
Re:The Senators Aren't (Score:2)
any other federal law be?
Could it be that lregislatures are being judged on how many laws they pass. Ignoring that it really should be a case of quality over quantity. Also reviewing/ammending/repealing pre existing statutes is just as important a function as creating new ones.
Re:The Senators Aren't (Score:5, Insightful)
A better argument would be the DMCA or SSSCA; a bill that really supports maybe on the order of 100's of "people" (given that corporations are considered 'persons' under the law) that would benefit compared to the thousands or millions of constituents that would recieve no benefit and most likely 'penalties' from higher costs, etc, when these bills may pass. At this point, I would question how representation is really supposed to work.
(And yes, I've tried submitting the passage story too, denied.)
Re:The Senators Aren't (Score:2, Insightful)
In this case, those elected officials should realise that knee-jerk proposals that don't actually address the real problem but do involve giving up certain freedoms should not make it into law, even if that's what people claim they want.
Unfortunately...
Tyranny of the Majority (Score:2, Informative)
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."
Re:The Senators Aren't (Score:2, Informative)
Wrong, as usual, but this being Slashdot I'm not surprised. The U.S. have a republican form of government. The Founders were quite clear that they thought democracy dangerous. A republic is governed by laws that (hopefully) say what is right, regardless of what people feel at a particular time. Laws are meant to protect us from the popular will.
Example. If 4 guys with baseball bats corner you in an alley and demand your money, how do you think a vote would turn out? That's democracy. The law says it's wrong.
The problem is that once you let your liberty be infringed upon, you seldom get back what you had before. There's a constant erosion to freedom unless you are always vigilant to stand against exactly this sort of thing. "Temporary" increases to the income tax and employer withholding started as WWII measures, but once government gets its hands on it, you know it doesn't want to let go.
Send them a BlockBuster free rent flyer (Score:5, Interesting)
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...]
They respond (Score:3, Informative)
it is sad but.. (Score:2)
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.
Do NOT send checks to the Rep's office!!! (Score:3, Informative)
sPh
Re:Do NOT send checks to the Rep's office!!! (Score:2)
Reps (Score:5, Interesting)
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
Re:Reps (Score:2)
Re:Reps Protests? (Score:2)
Re: They Do Care...Kind of..... (Score:5, Informative)
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
Don't bother with email (Score:2)
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.
Do they even check these? (Score:5, Interesting)
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*
QUIT USING EMAIL! (Score:2)
If you really want to get your opinions across, print out the letter and mail it to them
eMail your reps is worthless. Go buy a stamp (Score:2)
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.
The exception proofs the rule... (Score:2)
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...
personal experience (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Effort (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
They don't care about your opinion... (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
Re:They don't care about your opinion... (Score:2)
what has more impact, hundreds of pounds of paper, written by people who took the time to print the info out, buy a stamp and make an effort to mail it, or an electronic email that will probbaly get mixed in with the spam?
Re:If you REALLY REALLY want to be heard (Score:3)
Re:They don't care about your opinion... (Score:3, Informative)
Caller: I want to know what your position is on HR 9999.
Congressfolk: (Oh Shit! A Bot!) I'm sorry, but you'll have let me know specifically what bill that is because the numbers change all the time and I don't keep track of them.
Caller: Uhhhhh.
The problem is that there's too many people being paid or otherwise convinced to lobby congress and write form letters on particular issues. Politicians have to have a fairly good sense on how to filter these out. The big tip-off is when the person doesn't let on any details of the legislation. (Recall the Slashdot story on MS running a paid "I love MS Innovation" letter campaign. The only thing uncommon about this is that it was driven by a computer company.)
Furthermore, the "send an e-mail" idea is worthless. Do you have any idea how many e-mail lobby campaigns that congresspeople get flooded with. It's usually one step above spam (chainmail or web forms), but it's not like your suggestion is any more sophisticated than something Joe AOL could dream up. Write a letter and make sure it looks like you wrote it.
Make Money Fast! (Score:3, Funny)
(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!
The art of writing your rep (Score:2, Redundant)
What if you don't have a rep on the committee? (Score:5, Informative)
*starts rummaging for civics book*
Re:What if you don't have a rep on the committee? (Score:2, Insightful)
Your best bet is to contact your representatives and make it clear an issue is important, and ask for them to contact members of the committee on your behalf.
There is also still some value in writing to members of the committee, but making it clear you're addressing them as such, and not as your local representative.
Reps not listening to you... (Score:2)
If you want to influence the government, write, call, etc *your* representative.
The impact of a warm body (Score:2)
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.
You letter was read by an intern (Score:2, Redundant)
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 (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
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?"
Re:Thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
US citizens of Japanese descent had their lives and livelihoods destroyed when their property and businesses were confiscated during WWII, and they were imprisoned for 3-4 years in concentration camps. Most of these people never regained anything like the lives they have prior to the confiscation (IHMO the 2nd worst thing, after slavery, that the people of the US have done to themselves).
The people who had the misfortune to disagree with the ultra-right during the Cold War in many cases had their lives destroyed, whether by Senator McCarthy or other more subtle "anti-communists".
Any more questions?
sPh
Re:Thoughts (Score:2, Informative)
This is a discussion/opinion forum, not a Master's program in history. You asked for examples and I provided them. You now reply that these examples were not quantified and therefore invalid. Can you please provide in advance your criteria for an acceptable example? Otherwise, no matter what is provided you will find a reason why it doesn't meet some test that you haven't previously defined.
The Smithsonian had an excellent exhibit last year on what happened to the US citizens of Japanese descent in 1942. It described in quite a bit of detail what happened to families who had grocery stores, dry cleaners, construction companies, homes, etc. confiscated without reimbursement. If you have ever built a family business, you know that it usually doesn't recover from a loss of that magnitude.
Next time you are in DC why don't you stop by the Smithsonian library and ask for some of the backup detail. I am sure that is quantified.
sPh
Re:Thoughts (Score:2)
in a world that is becoming more and more digital, the large corperations and the government realize that the digital rights of people have not been set by presidence. these laws make it more difficult to move the constitution into the digital age and one day, if these laws are not struck down, we will be living in a totalitarian state since all communication will become digital. we need to stake a claim on our rights in the digital/information/cyber age if not we may not ever get them. these next ten years are going to be rittled with strife while we sort through all the crap that the 90's gave us, lets make sure that it turns out for the better and not for the worse when dealing with our rights.
Ping? (Score:5, Funny)
Politicians are (mostly) low-tech (Score:2)
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
Too many people to listen to (Score:2)
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.
Some listen / poor timing (Score:3, Informative)
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.
MN Senators (Score:2)
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.
E-mail is ignored, but fast (Score:2, Flamebait)
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?
Are you properly identified? (Score:3, Informative)
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 be too cynical (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Depends on the State (Score:2)
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 With Him, But He Answers His Mail... (Score:2)
My experience... (Score:5, Informative)
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/ [halley.cc]. 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.
Quotes for those who want to write (Score:3, Informative)
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? (Score:2)
No, but the Feds are [wired.com].
Thank you dear Slashdot poster (Score:5, Funny)
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
A little info about how the hill works (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Isn't that the point of democracy? (Score:3, Insightful)
I at least get letters (Score:3, Informative)
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.
Re:I at least get letters (Score:2)
Um, then why is Fritz Hollings working on the Son of DMCA bill? South Carolina is neither a high-tech nor "content" hotbed (sorry guys!).
sPh
Is your elected official listening ? (Score:2)
This is normal. (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
From personal experience... (Score:3, Interesting)
Back in my days as a radical right-wing leftist [coyotegulch.com], 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.
"Early to bed, early to rise ... (Score:2)
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 [eff.org], the American Civil Liberties Union [aclu.org], or the Open Source Lobby [opensourcelobby.org].
They don't even read real mail (Score:2)
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.
How to communicate with government (Score:2, Informative)
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.
what they do (Score:3, Informative)
Democracy 101 (Score:3)
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.
How Mail to Your Representative is Dealt With (Score:3, Informative)
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/ [senate.gov], http://www.house.gov/ [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
We could use a good database (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Use Mail, Write Letters (Score:3, Informative)
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.
Effective Lobbying (Score:3, Informative)
There's a longish section on our site about this subject, here [neoteric.nu].
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.
They should care. (Score:2)
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.
Re:heres a suggestion:don't use email (Score:2, Insightful)
In October 2000 I started getting e-mails from the Idaho Democratic Party [idaho-democrats.org] 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.
Advice from a former Senate intern. (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Re:handwritten letters = bullshit (Score:2)
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
Re:you want attention? (Score:2)
"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."