http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/70355-liberals-warn-obama
QuoteLiberals warn Obama that base may skip midterm elections
By Alexander Bolton - 12/03/09 06:00 AM ET
Prominent liberal activists are warning Democratic leaders that they face a problem with the party's base heading into an election year.
The latest issue to roil relations between President Barack Obama and the liberal wing of the party is his decision to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, which liberals fear could become a debacle like Vietnam.
The left is also concerned the administration and party leaders have drifted too far to the center or are caving in to non-liberal interest groups in key policy battles, including healthcare reform, climate change and energy reform and financial regulatory reform. In some cases, liberals fear the White House is backing away entirely from core issues, such as the closing of the Guantánamo Bay detention camp and ending the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy that prevents gays and lesbians form serving openly in the military.
"I think there's a growing concern that Washington is losing battles to entrenched lobbying interests and the administration is not effectively in charge and a sense that things aren't going well," said Robert Borosage, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future, a liberal advocacy group
"I think the Democratic base is getting a little nervous out there about where we're headed," said Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa), a leading liberal within the Senate Democratic Conference who shares concerns over Obama's commitment of troops to the Afghan war
Senior officials at the White House and in Congress say liberals will rally to their side once healthcare reform and other major initiatives are passed. And some Democratic pollsters say their research shows Democratic voters are solidly behind Obama, even though he has slipped among Republican and independent voters.
A senior Democrat familiar with discussions at the White House said there will be plenty of time to energize liberals next year.
"This is not a time to worry about the base; we'll have all of the election year to do that," said the Democratic source. "We'll have a long list of accomplishments to present for them to rally around."
Congress passed a $787 billion stimulus at the start of the year, as well as the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that makes it easier for women to sue employers for pay discrimination. Democratic leaders hope in early 2010 to pass a landmark healthcare bill that would extend medical coverage to 30 million Americans without insurance.
The administration is also counting on Congress to pass education reform and financial reform next year and to close Guantánamo or make substantial progress toward that goal by Election Day.
Nevertheless, many liberals are angry the administration doled out tens of billions of dollars to banks and institutions that fueled last year's financial collapse, yet those same organizations have resisted efforts to reorganize or accept new regulations.
Liberals have also watched with dismay as Republicans and centrist Democrats have shaped healthcare reform legislation to reduce the affordability of mandatory insurance, limit abortion coverage to women who accept federal subsidies and levy an excise tax on high-cost health insurance plans that many union members negotiate for — often in lieu of pay increases.
As a result, they have little patience and have greeted Obama's decision on Afghanistan with strong skepticism.
Sen. Russ Feingold (Wis.), among the most outspoken anti-war Democrats in the Senate, said Obama's plan to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan in July 2011 is not adequate because it leaves open the possibility of only a few returning home and a substantial force remaining for years.
"It's not exactly a timeline that's meaningful to me," said Feingold. "The White House was just trying to check a box on this and failed. I'm pleased the concept of trying to start bringing the troops home is there, but it needs far more fleshing-out to be credible."
MoveOn.org, a liberal advocacy organization, sent an e-mail alert Tuesday to 5 million members around the country asking them to "Call the White House and tell the president that we want him to focus on bringing our troops home, not escalating our involvement in Afghanistan."
"There is no doubt Washington has to worry about how the base is reacting and feeling," said Nita Chaudhary, national campaign and organizing director at MoveOn.org. "It's incredibly important heading into next year, because the base knocks on doors, makes phone calls and gives money.
"Whether they want to be involved depends on how the fight in Washington has been waged," she said.
White House officials could not excite liberal voters merely by waving a long list of accomplishments, Chaudhary warned, saying the details of healthcare reform and other legislation would determine the response.
"It's a dangerous assumption that substance doesn't matter," she said.
A new poll commissioned by Daily Kos, a prominent liberal blog, found that the Democratic base has lost a lot of enthusiasm since the 2008 election.
The survey by Research 2000 found that only 56 percent of Democratic respondents said they would definitely or probably vote in the 2010 congressional elections, compared to 40 percent who said they would definitely or likely not vote. Republican voters were much more enthusiastic by comparison, posting an 81 percent to 14 percent split.
Those numbers are alarming for Democrats as various polls show anti-incumbent sentiment growing among voters. A new survey by Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville shows that independent voters are losing faith in Obama's handling of the economy.
"This is about the economy, and it is not pretty," the strategists concluded. "The Democrats' biggest loss has come on who would do a better job handling the economy."
Democrats facing difficult reelections next year agree with the assessment of their leaders that the voters will rally behind Democrats if they can add to their list of accomplishments.
"What you do is get things done," said Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) when asked how his party could energize its base.
And some Democrats argue their party is doing just fine with its base and should worry more about independent voters.
John Anzalone, a Democratic pollster, said that Obama has an approval rating in the "high 80s" among voters who identify themselves as Democrats.
"There's a big difference between some complaining in the vacuum that is Washington, D.C., versus the base of Democrats nationally," said Anzalone. "The notion that liberals are unhappy is a non-truth."
So, what do you guys think? Have the Democrats disillusioned their base by setting standards too high, with promises of the Earth beginning to heal? Or is this sound and fury, signifying nothing?
I expect gay activists in particular will do a lot of blubbering and moaning but I think passed health care and 18 months in Afghanistan are enough to shut up most of the fringe.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 03, 2009, 02:23:06 PM
I expect gay activists in particular will do a lot of blubbering and moaning but I think passed health care and 18 months in Afghanistan are enough to shut up most of the fringe.
I dunno. Pro-Choice groups are furious with the Stupak Amendment; Immigration activists are angry they've gotten jack; the ACLU and civil libertarians hate this administration.
The real problem with health care is that it's not a single payer system, and it won't have a viable public option. (Whether or it should or not, I won't comment on. But I do think a lot of liberals expected it). And since the health care bill doesn't go into effect for years, it'll be issue.
I would not be surprised one way or another. But I can't help but think of Florida in 2000.
Meh, midterm elections aren't capable of becoming Florida 2000. There was a tie in the last Minnesota Senate race that took 6 months to clear up and nobody cared(besides Caliga).
Quote from: Faeelin on December 03, 2009, 02:26:54 PM
I dunno. Pro-Choice groups are furious with the Stupak Amendment; Immigration activists are angry they've gotten jack; the ACLU and civil libertarians hate this administration.
They should at least be thankful it isn't the Bush admin, or something like it that to have succeeded the Bushies! They were about turned inside out with angst, annoyance, hatred and frustration during the Bush=Hitler years. :cool:
Quote from: Faeelin on December 03, 2009, 02:26:54 PM
I dunno. Pro-Choice groups are furious with the Stupak Amendment; Immigration activists are angry they've gotten jack; the ACLU and civil libertarians hate this administration.
The real problem with health care is that it's not a single payer system, and it won't have a viable public option. (Whether or it should or not, I won't comment on. But I do think a lot of liberals expected it). And since the health care bill doesn't go into effect for years, it'll be issue.
I would not be surprised one way or another. But I can't help but think of Florida in 2000.
When does the Democratic base ever *not* whine?
I suppose it's not impossible tat we see some Blue Dogs getting attacked by NARAL or whoever in the primaries, with the result that the seat flips Republican. But a real challenge to Obama in 2012 (as opposed to a Cynthia McKinney style lunatic challenge)? I don't see it.
If we did see the Democrats lose their anti filibuster majority because of ideological purity it would be a delicious object lesson.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 03, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
I suppose it's not impossible tat we see some Blue Dogs getting attacked by NARAL or whoever in the primaries, with the result that the seat flips Republican. But a real challenge to Obama in 2012 (as opposed to a Cynthia McKinney style lunatic challenge)? I don't see it.
If we did see the Democrats lose their anti filibuster majority because of ideological purity it would be a delicious object lesson.
I don't think the big issue is people primarying. I think the issue is not donating or staying home. How much of the Democratic gain in 2008 was because of the surge in turnout for Obama?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 03, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
When does the base ever *not* whine?
FIFY. Political bases are filled with all the busy bodies and shrill freaks that make most people loath politics in general.
Quote from: Valmy on December 03, 2009, 03:44:29 PM
FIFY. Political bases are filled with all the busy bodies and shrill freaks that make most people loath politics in general.
Only two single issue blocs on the right that I can think of, vs. a billion on the left. Plus billions of identity politics groups on the left, vs. none on the right.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 03, 2009, 03:47:49 PM
Quote from: Valmy on December 03, 2009, 03:44:29 PM
FIFY. Political bases are filled with all the busy bodies and shrill freaks that make most people loath politics in general.
Only two single issue blocs on the right that I can think of, vs. a billion on the left. Plus billions of identity politics groups on the left, vs. none on the right.
Awhile ago I would have agreed but the right seems very interested in copying the most annoying qualities of the left as much as possible for the past few decades. The shrill sensitivity and conspiratory nonsense never ends. The bases are rapidly becoming indistinguishable to me.
Quote from: Valmy on December 03, 2009, 03:55:36 PM
Awhile ago I would have agreed but the right seems very interested in copying the most annoying qualities of the left as much as possible for the past few decades. The shrill sensitivity and conspiratory nonsense never ends. The bases are rapidly becoming indistinguishable to me.
No, you've just been Languishized. Right-wing lunacy gets over-reported here.
If you are having trouble with your bases, don't piss Earl Weaver off. He'll steal them.
Quote from: derspiess on December 03, 2009, 04:01:07 PM
No, you've just been Languishized. Right-wing lunacy gets over-reported here.
Not just over-reported, but also overly-self-parodied by most right wingers here.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 03, 2009, 03:47:49 PM
Only two single issue blocs on the right that I can think of, vs. a billion on the left.
More like there are some on the left who have a handful or even dozens of dealbreaker issues. They aren't truly "single-issue" so they don't have the same power multiplier pro-lifers, seniors and farmers do.
Given how staunchly Republicans are defending Medicare in the Senate these days, I'd say seniors are part of their interest group block. :lol:
Quote from: derspiess on December 03, 2009, 04:01:07 PM
No, you've just been Languishized. Right-wing lunacy gets over-reported here.
It is called living in Texas. I am surrounded by it here. If I lived in San Francisco I concede my perspective might be different.
Well, I don't know, really.
We are having a similar situation in Poland, with the centre-right Civic Platform government. I voted for them 2 years ago and even though they have pretty much gone back on every single liberal promise they made and are flirting a lot with the catholic church and right wing social policies, they have still a very strong support because "at least they are not the Twins*". I won't be voting for them again but my vote for the leftists will be pretty much a vote of conscience, and one the Civic Platform can sadly live without.
*The Polish Bush equivalent.
Edit: Besides, this kind of "move to the middle" strategy is imo much more effective from a leftist candidate. This is for two reasons: (1) leftists are more likely to support a compromise/moderate candidate because refusing to do so would compromise their "consensus-seeking" approach, and (2) a lot of leftist support groups (such as gays, for example), suffer from a battered wife syndrome, meaning they are much more likely to rationalize away supporting a "lesser evil", "he is not so bad, in the end" candidate than groups on the right, such as the religious reich.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 03, 2009, 04:10:45 PM
More like there are some on the left who have a handful or even dozens of dealbreaker issues. They aren't truly "single-issue" so they don't have the same power multiplier pro-lifers, seniors and farmers do.
Pro-life single-issuers are the bane of my party <_<
Quote from: Valmy on December 03, 2009, 03:55:36 PM
Awhile ago I would have agreed but the right seems very interested in copying the most annoying qualities of the left as much as possible for the past few decades. The shrill sensitivity and conspiratory nonsense never ends. The bases are rapidly becoming indistinguishable to me.
I'd argue the Democrats are an old-school American party. A coalition of a number of different groups: unions (and white ethnics), minority groups and so on. The Republicans seem to me far closer to a European party in that they have a relatively cohesive ideology and are an ideologically motivated party.
I think it's why the Democrats don't seem very good at government whereas through the Bush years and right now the Republicans seem far better at maintaining party unity. I think because the Democrats are a coalition while the Republicans are ideological.
These are generalisations of course and so inevitably not entirely accurate :lol:
Quote from: Faeelin on December 03, 2009, 03:43:26 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 03, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
I suppose it's not impossible tat we see some Blue Dogs getting attacked by NARAL or whoever in the primaries, with the result that the seat flips Republican. But a real challenge to Obama in 2012 (as opposed to a Cynthia McKinney style lunatic challenge)? I don't see it.
If we did see the Democrats lose their anti filibuster majority because of ideological purity it would be a delicious object lesson.
I don't think the big issue is people primarying. I think the issue is not donating or staying home. How much of the Democratic gain in 2008 was because of the surge in turnout for Obama?
I guess it depends on the candidate the Republicans will be running. I can't see disillusioned Dems staying home if it means a victory for the Palin/Beck ticket.
Quote from: Martinus on December 03, 2009, 05:18:13 PM
I guess it depends on the candidate the Republicans will be running. I can't see disillusioned Dems staying home if it means a victory for the Palin/Beck ticket.
I can't see the disillusioned sane community staying at home with the prospect of President Palin with Glenn Beck a heartbeat away from the Presidency :lol:
But you're right.
Quote from: derspiess on December 03, 2009, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Valmy on December 03, 2009, 03:55:36 PM
Awhile ago I would have agreed but the right seems very interested in copying the most annoying qualities of the left as much as possible for the past few decades. The shrill sensitivity and conspiratory nonsense never ends. The bases are rapidly becoming indistinguishable to me.
No, you've just been Languishized. Right-wing lunacy gets over-reported here.
i don't think this is very true
as someone who works in a republican senate office, i can tell you that there is considerable lunacy in the republican party. every day i hear from people writing or calling into the office, and it is pretty unnerving the amount of people who rave on about this or that. people who think global warming is all a hoax and how scientists have been lying to everyone; how much of a communist obama and his czars are; how good sarah palin is for the country and that glenn beck preaches truth, and etc. granted, i have read a number of ridiculous letters from democrats, and i'm sure if i worked in a blue office i would hear more much craziness from that side. however, i hear from far more people who just rant and rave than i do from well informed individuals. roughly about 60% of all letters that come into the office are thrown straight into the recycling bin
Quote from: Lacroix on December 03, 2009, 05:28:01 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 03, 2009, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Valmy on December 03, 2009, 03:55:36 PM
Awhile ago I would have agreed but the right seems very interested in copying the most annoying qualities of the left as much as possible for the past few decades. The shrill sensitivity and conspiratory nonsense never ends. The bases are rapidly becoming indistinguishable to me.
No, you've just been Languishized. Right-wing lunacy gets over-reported here.
i don't think this is very true
as someone who works in a republican senate office, i can tell you that there is considerable lunacy in the republican party. every day i hear from people writing or calling into the office, and it is pretty unnerving the amount of people who rave on about this or that. people who think global warming is all a hoax and how scientists have been lying to everyone; how much of a communist obama and his czars are; how good sarah palin is for the country and that glenn beck preaches truth, and etc. granted, i have read a number of ridiculous letters from democrats, and i'm sure if i worked in a blue office i would hear more much craziness from that side. however, i hear from far more people who just rant and rave than i do from well informed individuals. roughly about 60% of all letters that come into the office are thrown straight into the recycling bin
I always thought that people who "write to their congressmen" are by far and large lunatics and extremists. No sane people would consider that a sensible and efficient way of dealing with an issue.
Quote from: Martinus on December 03, 2009, 05:30:08 PM
Quote from: Lacroix on December 03, 2009, 05:28:01 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 03, 2009, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Valmy on December 03, 2009, 03:55:36 PM
Awhile ago I would have agreed but the right seems very interested in copying the most annoying qualities of the left as much as possible for the past few decades. The shrill sensitivity and conspiratory nonsense never ends. The bases are rapidly becoming indistinguishable to me.
No, you've just been Languishized. Right-wing lunacy gets over-reported here.
i don't think this is very true
as someone who works in a republican senate office, i can tell you that there is considerable lunacy in the republican party. every day i hear from people writing or calling into the office, and it is pretty unnerving the amount of people who rave on about this or that. people who think global warming is all a hoax and how scientists have been lying to everyone; how much of a communist obama and his czars are; how good sarah palin is for the country and that glenn beck preaches truth, and etc. granted, i have read a number of ridiculous letters from democrats, and i'm sure if i worked in a blue office i would hear more much craziness from that side. however, i hear from far more people who just rant and rave than i do from well informed individuals. roughly about 60% of all letters that come into the office are thrown straight into the recycling bin
I always thought that people who "write to their congressmen" are by far and large lunatics and extremists. No sane people would consider that a sensible and efficient way of dealing with an issue.
this could be true. doesn't glenn beck tell people to write to their politicians to get their voice heard? anyway, it rarely has any impact. sure, i mark on a tally sheet whenever someone calls in and says "NO OBAMACARE," and that sheet is supposedly passed on to the legislative staff, but i doubt it holds much influence
Quote from: Martinus on December 03, 2009, 05:30:08 PM
I always thought that people who "write to their congressmen" are by far and large lunatics and extremists. No sane people would consider that a sensible and efficient way of dealing with an issue.
Yes, you know, the base.
Democrats have always had problems with their base. And each other. And people not in their base. It's just part of being a democrat.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgraphjam.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F05%2Ffunny-graphs-ownership-of-base.gif&hash=c66495d3a8e9967164b30207ab378d992742a32c)
Ah, ain't it cute how the MoveOn types think that they're the Democratic base?
The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base.
Quote from: Lacroix on December 03, 2009, 05:34:53 PM
Quote from: Martinus on December 03, 2009, 05:30:08 PM
Quote from: Lacroix on December 03, 2009, 05:28:01 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 03, 2009, 04:01:07 PM
Quote from: Valmy on December 03, 2009, 03:55:36 PM
Awhile ago I would have agreed but the right seems very interested in copying the most annoying qualities of the left as much as possible for the past few decades. The shrill sensitivity and conspiratory nonsense never ends. The bases are rapidly becoming indistinguishable to me.
No, you've just been Languishized. Right-wing lunacy gets over-reported here.
i don't think this is very true
as someone who works in a republican senate office, i can tell you that there is considerable lunacy in the republican party. every day i hear from people writing or calling into the office, and it is pretty unnerving the amount of people who rave on about this or that. people who think global warming is all a hoax and how scientists have been lying to everyone; how much of a communist obama and his czars are; how good sarah palin is for the country and that glenn beck preaches truth, and etc. granted, i have read a number of ridiculous letters from democrats, and i'm sure if i worked in a blue office i would hear more much craziness from that side. however, i hear from far more people who just rant and rave than i do from well informed individuals. roughly about 60% of all letters that come into the office are thrown straight into the recycling bin
I always thought that people who "write to their congressmen" are by far and large lunatics and extremists. No sane people would consider that a sensible and efficient way of dealing with an issue.
this could be true. doesn't glenn beck tell people to write to their politicians to get their voice heard? anyway, it rarely has any impact. sure, i mark on a tally sheet whenever someone calls in and says "NO OBAMACARE," and that sheet is supposedly passed on to the legislative staff, but i doubt it holds much influence
Which senator do you work for?
By the way are you new? An old Languishite with a new tag due to the forum update?
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 12:45:18 AM
Ah, ain't it cute how the MoveOn types think that they're the Democratic base?
The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base.
Republicans also seem to think that MoveOn.org is the base. Or the leadership. Or something. Cause you hear them bitching about them on a regular basis.
Quote from: Martinus on December 03, 2009, 05:30:08 PM
I always thought that people who "write to their congressmen" are by far and large lunatics and extremists. No sane people would consider that a sensible and efficient way of dealing with an issue.
From my political experience, "writing/calling your MP" is tremendously effective. People who are motivated enough to call are motivated enough to tell all their friends, to donate, and to volunteer.
Now certainly while getting a whole series of identical pre-printed letters doesn't do much, but 100 heartfelt letters from constituents is just about the most powerful message you can send a politician.
:yes:
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2009, 01:17:42 AM
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 12:45:18 AM
Ah, ain't it cute how the MoveOn types think that they're the Democratic base?
The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base.
Republicans also seem to think that MoveOn.org is the base. Or the leadership. Or something. Cause you hear them bitching about them on a regular basis.
Of course they bitch about it. What part of, "The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base" did you not understand?
Quote from: Barrister on December 04, 2009, 01:32:47 AM
Quote from: Martinus on December 03, 2009, 05:30:08 PM
I always thought that people who "write to their congressmen" are by far and large lunatics and extremists. No sane people would consider that a sensible and efficient way of dealing with an issue.
From my political experience, "writing/calling your MP" is tremendously effective. People who are motivated enough to call are motivated enough to tell all their friends, to donate, and to volunteer.
Now certainly while getting a whole series of identical pre-printed letters doesn't do much, but 100 heartfelt letters from constituents is just about the most powerful message you can send a politician.
This is my take on it as well, and I've heard politicians say pretty much the same thing. The people who take the time to contact a legislator are listening and watching the issue(s). As long as the writer/emailer presents their issue rationally and respectfully.
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 03:48:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2009, 01:17:42 AM
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 12:45:18 AM
Ah, ain't it cute how the MoveOn types think that they're the Democratic base?
The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base.
Republicans also seem to think that MoveOn.org is the base. Or the leadership. Or something. Cause you hear them bitching about them on a regular basis.
Of course they bitch about it. What part of, "The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base" did you not understand?
Much of it.
The party in power always has trouble with the base, because once the party gets power its base loses delude themselves into thinking that the party is going to enact their agenda. Also, nothing fires up a base like outrage of what the other side is doing or may be able to do.
Extremes on both sides have a problem with the base.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwakaaustingmot.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F07%2Ffreebasing-cookie-monster.jpg&hash=7dafc726a899f7c2f6855695b3754396cd8e921e)
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2009, 01:17:42 AM
Republicans also seem to think that MoveOn.org is the base. Or the leadership. Or something. Cause you hear them bitching about them on a regular basis.
MoveOn is a decent proxy for the peacenik portion of the Democratic base.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2009, 01:17:42 AM
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 12:45:18 AM
Ah, ain't it cute how the MoveOn types think that they're the Democratic base?
The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base.
Republicans also seem to think that MoveOn.org is the base. Or the leadership. Or something. Cause you hear them bitching about them on a regular basis.
certainly. that's what languish told me.
now I am confused what "languishizing" means. I bet it means something like "vietnamization."
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 04, 2009, 12:49:48 AMWhich senator do you work for?
By the way are you new? An old Languishite with a new tag due to the forum update?
i've been interning for a few months now in d.c. with mccain. i'm not exactly new, i had an account on the old forum, but i was not very active
Quote from: BarristerFrom my political experience, "writing/calling your MP" is tremendously effective. People who are motivated enough to call are motivated enough to tell all their friends, to donate, and to volunteer.
Now certainly while getting a whole series of identical pre-printed letters doesn't do much, but 100 heartfelt letters from constituents is just about the most powerful message you can send a politician.
i'm not sure how it works in canada, or with the more local political bodies in the united states, or even with other senate offices (though i would imagine that they are not too radically different).. but in the office i work in, the constituent has very little influence. naturally, form letters, petitions, and just plain crazy letters (keywords for craziness = czar, communist/socialist, ranting, calling people idiots or worse, etc) are just thrown out before they reach anyone important. well thought out/informed letters are kept, placed in a pile, given a code (health care: HEGE, for example), and then scanned and distributed among the legislative assistants based on the code. those assistants then respond to the letter by sending out a letter template they have already constructed. with voice mail, there is a tally sheet to mark down people's views on issues, but nobody really pays much attention to it. the impression i have is that letters are only given a response so that they don't get angry that their senator is not paying attention to their demands. even then, the senator
never directly hears from the constituents. whether a staff member ever tells the senator something along the lines of, "okay, sounds like people want YES on hr.4821," i don't know
Kind of sad actually then. I guess things are even worse with those who represent us in government policy! They don't really even pay attention when people take time to give their views! It's like they have their own little fiefdom, their own Oligarchy! Oh, wait.... ;)
Or the signal to noise ratio is so low that you're worse off from listening to constituent mail. You can't really expect an honest politician to legislate based on the whim of Beckers and Truthers, can you?
My state representative responds pretty well. He will sometimes send out an email response outlining his ideas, why he feels that way, and such. I realize it's a form letter but he or his staff do seem to take the time to put together a well versed letter on a political position and explain it.
My Senator, Kerry, never responds. Go figure! What a surprise. "Oh Buffy.... the plebs are hounding me again, meddlesome creatures." :D
Senator Kennedy was good about dealing with us little people, even if I didn't agree with many of his political views.
Johnny H.'s seat is ultra safe. He's going to pay less attention to mail and calls than most elected officials.
But the conventional wisdom is that they do pay attention to whining.
I wrote my congressman in Delaware three times.
Once for a firearms bill that did not end up coming to a floor vote-- he (or his staffer anyway) replied to respectfully disagree-- he got bonus points for at least having the courage to tell me his position & not just ignoring me.
Once during the Clinton impeachment. I received no response but wasn't really expecting one-- he voted the way I wanted him to even though he was one of the GOP 'moderates' whose votes were in question.
And then once when I was having problems getting the INS to keep moving forward on my wife's green card. One of his staffers responded & offered to help in any way they could, but shortly thereafter we got things moving again.
I haven't felt compelled to write to ol' Jean Schmidt or Rob Portman before her, since I moved to Ohio.
I'm in Massachusetts. I have one flavor of politician, hard left wing. So as a centrist/Independent voter I basically have no representation. The closest I have is Rep Steve Lynch who is more of a centrist Democrat, at least sometimes. I actually like him as a rep, to a point anyway. Otherwise I have an assortment of big govt types, socialists, communists, gypsies, tramps and thieves who represent the state. Barney Frank, Ed Markey, Jim McGovern. Others, and reps who visit Castro and Chavez and have wonderful things to say about them.
Currently going through the process of electing a Senator to replace Ted Kennedy. The Dems are a fun assortment - most of them fighting with each other to see who can get to the political left of the other. :D
Quote from: KRonn on December 04, 2009, 01:36:50 PM
I'm in Massachusetts. I have one flavor of politician, hard left wing. So as a centrist/Independent voter I basically have no representation. The closest I have is Rep Steve Lynch who is more of a centrist Democrat, at least sometimes. I actually like him as a rep, to a point anyway. Otherwise I have an assortment of big govt types, socialists, communists, gypsies, tramps and thieves who represent the state. Barney Frank, Ed Markey, Jim McGovern. Others, and reps who visit Castro and Chavez and have wonderful things to say about them.
Currently going through the process of electing a Senator to replace Ted Kennedy. The Dems are a fun assortment - most of them fighting with each other to see who can get to the political left of the other. :D
West Virginia was almost as bad when I lived there. At least now they have a centrist (if not slightly conservative) Dem as governor, and one GOP congresswoman. But there's still Byrd :bleeding:
Delaware was interestingly split more or less evenly (with a slight GOP advantage) when I moved there, but by the time I left the Dems had taken over everything but the one House seat.
My part of Ohio is a conservative bastion & looks to remain that way :)
Until they lose jobs, then they're all for the government tit. :lol:
Quote from: Lacroix on December 04, 2009, 12:50:13 PM
i've been interning for a few months now in d.c. with mccain. i'm not exactly new,
You know what would be hilarious? If Lacroix is Count. ^_^
Quote from: Fate on December 04, 2009, 01:03:53 PM
Or the signal to noise ratio is so low that you're worse off from listening to constituent mail. You can't really expect an honest politician to legislate based on the whim of Beckers and Truthers, can you?
most of that garbage never makes it into the hands of anyone with even a semblance of importance. at least with this office, interns handle most everything that deals with the constituents--to some degree. we open the mail when it comes in, we listen to voice mail, and etc. the first day of my internship, we had to go through two huge boxes full of mail because there had been a month's lapse where there were no interns in the office; the staff just let it pile up. there are exceptions: staff assistants (lowest rung on the totem pole, but higher than interns because they are permanent staffers), who sit in the front and greet people who come in and answer direct calls. even when people call in to speak with someone in the office about an issue, generally it's just used to let people vent. if it's just a constituent calling in, then at the end of the call the staffer will say something like, "thank you, sir/ma'am, i have written down your comments and will certainly pass them along to the senator. you have a
great day," then hangs up without marking anything down. only when it is someone important do they make note of it
Quote from: KRonnMy state representative responds pretty well. He will sometimes send out an email response outlining his ideas, why he feels that way, and such. I realize it's a form letter but he or his staff do seem to take the time to put together a well versed letter on a political position and explain it.
though obviously i do not know the inner-workings of your state representative office, i would think it was likely the staffer in charge of whatever subject you made an inquiry of. about a month ago i was given, by the health legislative staffer, a stack of letters and a code--HEGE3002. it became my job to enter the person and their address into capcorr (a program which has a database of everyone who writes in and that notes everything that is sent out), type in the code and print out the response, and then send it out. every letter was the same, and each had the senator's signature thanks to the auto-pen.
Quote from: Admiral YiJohnny H.'s seat is ultra safe. He's going to pay less attention to mail and calls than most elected officials.
i've thought about that, but i don't know. every day we receive at least 50+ letters, over 300 voice messages, and around 800 faxes (though 80% of those are
always form letters which are deleted). few politicians are going to spend the time specifically answering each letter, or even a few, especially given the amount that arrives every. single. day. i would think that the temptation to just dump it on the staff would be fairly high.
Quote from: derspiessAnd then once when I was having problems getting the INS to keep moving forward on my wife's green card. One of his staffers responded & offered to help in any way they could, but shortly thereafter we got things moving again.
that's one area our office does a pretty good job with. i think. when it is an arizona constituent with a personal problem that they are requesting help with, the letters are kept and passed along either to the office general counsel (if it's case work) or to the phoenix/tempe offices to get the issue dealt with.
Quote from: Lacroix on December 04, 2009, 02:44:33 PM
i've thought about that, but i don't know. every day we receive at least 50+ letters, over 300 voice messages, and around 800 faxes (though 80% of those are always form letters which are deleted). few politicians are going to spend the time specifically answering each letter, or even a few, especially given the amount that arrives every. single. day. i would think that the temptation to just dump it on the staff would be fairly high.
I meant pay attention as in use it to track constituent sentiment, not as in handcraft a personal response to each one.
Quote from: Lacroix on December 04, 2009, 12:50:13 PM
Quote from: BarristerFrom my political experience, "writing/calling your MP" is tremendously effective. People who are motivated enough to call are motivated enough to tell all their friends, to donate, and to volunteer.
Now certainly while getting a whole series of identical pre-printed letters doesn't do much, but 100 heartfelt letters from constituents is just about the most powerful message you can send a politician.
i'm not sure how it works in canada, or with the more local political bodies in the united states, or even with other senate offices (though i would imagine that they are not too radically different).. but in the office i work in, the constituent has very little influence. naturally, form letters, petitions, and just plain crazy letters (keywords for craziness = czar, communist/socialist, ranting, calling people idiots or worse, etc) are just thrown out before they reach anyone important. well thought out/informed letters are kept, placed in a pile, given a code (health care: HEGE, for example), and then scanned and distributed among the legislative assistants based on the code. those assistants then respond to the letter by sending out a letter template they have already constructed. with voice mail, there is a tally sheet to mark down people's views on issues, but nobody really pays much attention to it. the impression i have is that letters are only given a response so that they don't get angry that their senator is not paying attention to their demands. even then, the senator never directly hears from the constituents. whether a staff member ever tells the senator something along the lines of, "okay, sounds like people want YES on hr.4821," i don't know
Well I never meant to imply that the politician would personally read and respond to every piece of correspondence. But if you're an individual and want to get your message through to your politician, a letter is the most effective way to do it - and I think you've demonstrated how that is.
And don't tell me that if there is a large number of letters on a topic, all or mostly all on one side, that a politician doesn't take very strong note of that.
It is probably a bit different up here in Canada as MPs cover far fewer constituents. We have 301 MPs for a population of 30 million, so very roughly 100,000 per MP. And in the north it's even smaller - the local Liberal MP was 30,000 constituents, and works damn hard to attend every damn dog and pony show going. That's why he constinues to be re-elected with decent margins, when the Liberals are largely disappearing from both the west and the north.
We really are going to take over the world, you know. A couple centuries from now the word 'languish" will be conjured up in context with the other greats like Opus Dei and Skull and Bones.
:pirate
I called my representatives on the issues of funding for public transit (support), a statewide indoor smoking ban (oppose), a gay rights measure (support), maybe a couple other things? I got a nice embossed letter back recently just for having a signed a petition to keep the city libraries open. :)
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 04, 2009, 03:14:08 PM
We really are going to take over the world, you know. A couple centuries from now the word 'languish" will be conjured up in context with the other greats like Opus Dei and Skull and Bones.
:pirate
:rolleyes:
We can't even manage to run a small WoW guild, never mind taking over the world.
:lol:
He didn't say it would be you and Jaron doing it.
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 03:48:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2009, 01:17:42 AM
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 12:45:18 AM
Ah, ain't it cute how the MoveOn types think that they're the Democratic base?
The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base.
Republicans also seem to think that MoveOn.org is the base. Or the leadership. Or something. Cause you hear them bitching about them on a regular basis.
Of course they bitch about it. What part of, "The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base" did you not understand?
My guess is: Love. He is empty and sad, because there is no love in him.
I thought that your point was excellent. The Republicans attack MoveOn in order to increase the publicity around them, which then causes Democratic moderates to recoil in revulsion and vote Republican. This is known as the Nixon Maneuver.
Oh, another Republican failure.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 04, 2009, 02:52:26 PM
I meant pay attention as in use it to track constituent sentiment, not as in handcraft a personal response to each one.
Quote from: BarristerWell I never meant to imply that the politician would personally read and respond to every piece of correspondence. But if you're an individual and want to get your message through to your politician, a letter is the most effective way to do it - and I think you've demonstrated how that is.
And don't tell me that if there is a large number of letters on a topic, all or mostly all on one side, that a politician doesn't take very strong note of that.
It is probably a bit different up here in Canada as MPs cover far fewer constituents. We have 301 MPs for a population of 30 million, so very roughly 100,000 per MP. And in the north it's even smaller - the local Liberal MP was 30,000 constituents, and works damn hard to attend every damn dog and pony show going. That's why he constinues to be re-elected with decent margins, when the Liberals are largely disappearing from both the west and the north.
apologies for mistaking your points
i wasn't entirely sure how to answer you, so i brought it up with a legislative assistant. to answer your question, yi, at least with the mccain office, there is no tracker. a letter is received and a reply is sent off, and that's where the buck stops. barrister, on larger issues, where there are people writing in every day in bulk about, let's say health care reform, there's little influence in how the senator acts. mccain gathers his information about what the constituents want from townhalls, so mail is not placed as a high priority in his office. however, on minor, or less widely known issues, there might be more of an impact. let's say a nomination for a judge, if there are a lot of people writing in favor of it, then a staff member might just think, "well, let's look into this," and then they could inform the legislative director who relays the information to the senator. the senator may then decide to run with it, or they could ignore it.
it all depends on the person, and the senate offices vary. senator kyl apparently reads every single form letter that his staff creates and sends out, and senator brown occasionally reads constituent letters on the floor--provided by his staff, i'm sure. i asked the staffer if he thought other offices held mail in a higher regard, and though he said he didn't know for sure, he mentioned it was likely that they don't.
Quote from: Neil on December 04, 2009, 03:52:28 PM
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 03:48:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 04, 2009, 01:17:42 AM
Quote from: dps on December 04, 2009, 12:45:18 AM
Ah, ain't it cute how the MoveOn types think that they're the Democratic base?
The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base.
Republicans also seem to think that MoveOn.org is the base. Or the leadership. Or something. Cause you hear them bitching about them on a regular basis.
Of course they bitch about it. What part of, "The Republicans would love to convince the Democratic rank-and-file that MoveOn and the like really are the Democratic base" did you not understand?
My guess is: Love. He is empty and sad, because there is no love in him.
I thought that your point was excellent. The Republicans attack MoveOn in order to increase the publicity around them, which then causes Democratic moderates to recoil in revulsion and vote Republican. This is known as the Nixon Maneuver.
It's true. I'm incapable of love. :(
I love lamp.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on December 04, 2009, 03:22:36 PM
I called my representatives on the issues of funding for public transit (support), a statewide indoor smoking ban (oppose), a gay rights measure (support), maybe a couple other things? I got a nice embossed letter back recently just for having a signed a petition to keep the city libraries open. :)
Apparently, that makes you a fringe person, CM. :console: