What you'll find is a form: You put in your name, address, nine-digit ZIP code and type in your message. You don't actually see an e-mail address. I found this to be the case for the several N.C. representatives and senators I checked and also for some members of Congress from other states, too. Each member of Congress has his/her own Web site, but none of them I checked had an e-mail listing or staff directory. It seems to be SOP — Standard Operating Procedure. This process not only hides the e-mail address of the congressional office, it also eliminates constituents who might live outside a particular congressman's district (hence the 9-digit ZIP code). I suspect this has more to do with not wanting to be bothered by someone else's voter than with professional courtesy toward a colleague.
It's my assumption that this opaqueness is an attempt to avoid letting individual e-mail addresses fall into the hands of terrorists — or lobbyists capable of deploying millions of e-mail messages on any given issue. Whatever the reason, these e-mail addresses are a closely guarded state secret. I had hoped to contact a congressional aide I had met during my newspaper career, but congressional Web sites do not list individual staff members, much less their e-mail addresses. I know — we all know — that these people have e-mail addresses. I've received e-mail from them in the past; I've had some back-and-forth with them via e-mail. But just finding an address now involves more barricades than I care to attack.
Things at the state level are a bit simpler, at least for now. Go to the N.C. General Assembly Web site, and you'll be able to find the e-mail address for your representative in the House and Senate, as well as your Aunt Martha from Taylorsville's representatives. State legislators make no effort to hide their e-mail addresses, despite frequent lobbying announcements that list the e-mail addresses for every member of a committee or for all 170 members of the General Assembly. State officials no doubt face less lobbying pressure than members of Congress, but they also set a better example of transparency.
I understand why G.K. Butterfield or Walter Jones doesn't want to list his personal e-mail address, but why not post the addresses for the constituent services representative or the staff member in charge of specific issues? Many Americans (including me) prefer e-mail to a telephone call or a formal letter. Congress should open the door to e-mail correspondence just a bit wider.
Posts
3 comments:
.....politicians suck!
I ahve little or no faith in anyone who is an elected official. I hate I feel this way but to many special interest groups and too many whinig for entittlements.
The USA needs to go back to individualism and self-direction. This is a moronic society. For a very healthy young male to be crying that he needs health care provided to him over the profits a business make is ludicrous. Why should others provide him health care. Dumba$$.
You eluded to the reasons in your post. I can see why some politicians do not want their email addresses published. How could they or their staff possibly handle, address or sift through the thousands of emails and spam they might get in one week alone?
In reality, we've had a much more open government under the Obama administration. At least we're headed in that direction. That last crew (Rove, Bush, Cheney etc.) was like one big covert operation, disguised as a democracy.
First, about words. Newsy meant to say I alluded to the reasons, but actually I didn't. An allusion is an unspoken reference, something implied but overt. I made direct reference to some reasons, so I referred to the reasons.
Regarding the contrast between Obama's and the previous administration, I had been disgusted with some of the covert actions and behind-the-scenes scheming of the Bush administration (isn't Cheney's memoir going to be interesting?), but the changes I've seen in the Obama White House regarding public records and public access have not been all that dramatic. The contrast on public records is far greater between Gov. Perdue and her predecessor.
Post a Comment