[Skunkabilly]

Would it be better to have a one liner: 'Please vote no on continuing the assault weapons ban' or write how bla bla bla is unamerican, unpatriotic, apple pie, etc.?

[Art Eatman]

Keep letters to one subject and one page. I always put "RE: ......." after the salutation (HB # or SB # or general subject).

Keep it very polite. No emotion, if possible.

State your opinion, and give some pertinent reasons. Avoid any emotionally loaded words.

Be formal:

"Honorable So and so
United States (Representative or Senator)
House (or Senate) Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515 (for House) or 20510 for Senate

Dear Congressman (or Senator) So and so:"

"Very truly yours," is a good close.

Your name
Address
City/State/Zip

You'll get an opposite reaction to what you intend if you get into the "Dear Sir: You Cur!" sort of nonsense. And they're not impressed by passion.

Hope this helps,

Art

[Skunkabilly]

So sending a letter to Senator Feinstein that says, "You know, people used to say it's a free country, why doesn't anyone say that any more? Sincerely, Skunky" wouldn't be a good idea? :p

Thanks Art!

[labgrade]

Art gives good advice & I would use the "editorial rule of thumb" in keeping letters to 200-300 words (or less).

It's not like we are dealing with whiz-kids, after all. ;(

Consider too, that you are writing to staffers, & not with the congresscritter itself, as well. Your input will be sifted by a hireling well before any input gets to the critter itself - merely a tally, if that.

Too, if & when, not always a bad enough thing to just hash it out & tell 'em where you stand, while attempting an education campaign.

Never hurts to use multiples & various "attempts" to sway their minds

If you're gonna write, why not use the same tactics they use to deprive you of your liberties? = use duplicities, lie & persuade, use the bait 'n switch, treaten the stick while holding out the carrot .....

Very much different than using a letter to the editor, where you're attempting to sway thinking persons.

A letter to an elected is, from my way of thinking is to first persuade to a level of conciltatory while threantening a loss of further employment - a very delicate balance.

[MonkeyMan]

One of the best things I've found is to hand write the letter. The response letters I get when I've handwritten my congresscritter are almost always different in substance than the ones I get when I "click here to email your congressman."

[Andrew Rothman]

The reality is that a junior staffer will read your letter just long enough to put a checkmark in the appropriate column: "for" or "against".

That said, it is important to have a complete letter, neatly typed and respectfully written, anyway. Imagine this:

"Senator, we have 100 letters for gun control, and 100 against -- but the against letters are mostly ignorant rantings scrawled in crayon on the back of Win-Dixie bags."

So pick a good, polite sample letter, personalize it a little, sign it and send it. Don't think that your unparalleled eloquence or brilliant logic will sway your congresscritter's views. They won't. But a few thousand simple letters will, by their sheer volume.

Just get counted without being discounted.

Matt

[Lone_Gunman]

I try to get across one and only one point, as briefly as possible:

If you vote for gun control, I will not vote for you.


I figure they get a lot of letters, so short and to the point is best.

Really I am not trying to appeal to anything more than the Congressman's desire to be re-elected.

[Mute]

Simple, to the point, polite. Even if the recipient is a hardcore anti, this let's them know that they are opposing a smart populace that will find a legitimate way to deal with their treachery.

Most politicians are like cockroaches. They scurry from the scrutiny of daylight. They should be reminded that we are always shining one on them.

[Quartus]

email is a waste of time. They get so many, most congresscritters have rules set which automatically delete almost everything.

[Waitone]

I suggest everyone pick up the freakin' telephone and call your congressional representatives and ask said rep about how they treat the various modes of communications. It is enlightening.

I just called my house representative and put the question to a staffer. I was told with respect to snail mail two things may happen. If snailed to DC it goes to the postal process facility where it is e-beamed to kill anthrax and delayed before delivery to the reps office. Alternatively, mailed sent to local offices are pouched everyday to DC bypassing the postal processing facility. (I'll ignore a series of obvious questions.)

Regarding email vs snail mail, both are treated the same way. Someone opens the letter determines the issue and is then routed to the appropriate staffer for consumption and tallying. No problem with email as long as it contains the same info as a snail letter. One of the verifications which has to be made is your return address. Reps want to be assured you are indeed a constitutent. I asked the staffer if an email contained everything contained in a paper letter, would it be treated any different than a paper letter once it made it to the rep's office. The answer is no!

My conclusion is make an email look just like a letter with all the courtesies and information and your same them and you labor.

Your rep may be different by I wouldn't be surprised if they all did the same.