How to Call a Congressman

I want to do my part for public land issues, and Randy makes constant references to phone calls being one of the best ways. What I haven’t found are instructions on what exactly to expect and what to say when calling a congressman.

While we are at it, are there posts or sites with the current issues and stances of Randy and the conservation community? It’s not always easy to interpret from his podcasts for this newbie. I feel like the podcast conversations are geared more towards those who already have an understanding of the issues/sides— Id love more explanation on his stances and reasoning behind them to become better informed and confident when engaging in those talks with others.

Thanks for any direction!

When I call I try to keep my comment to about a few sentences long. Someone is on the other line copying what you say and I don't imagine it can be too productive if you start telling your life story. If my comment needs to be longer, I will send an email. I usually call their local offices rather than D.C. I've always thought that if some secretary sitting at a desk in an Eastern Montanan town gets a few calls it will have more weight when she is relaying those messages on up the ladder.

Thanks for your advocacy. I'll take your good feedback and try to give more background to position I discuss.

Find your Congressman at this link - www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

Find your Senator at this link - www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/How_to_correspond_senators.htm

When in doubt, use the Capitol switchboard. (202) 224-3121

What Schaaf said. Be articulate and polite, and get right to the point. Describe yourself in a few words, i.e. family man, small business owner, hunter, angler, etc. Tell them your stance on the issue(s) and a very brief statement why.

Often after calling or otherwise messenging, you will receive a response which describes the congress person's position. Sometimes it seems "canned"; other times it is specific to some of your points. I have found that if I respond with facts and logical conclusions (some of which you may gleen from HT discussions or Randy's podcasts) then I may receive a more pointed response, not necessarily agreeing with me but expressing that my points were read and understood.

My speculation is that if this dynamic is repeated often and by many constituents, then a "wrong" position may be revised.

Straight Arrow said:

Often after calling or otherwise messenging, you will receive a response which describes the congress person's position. Sometimes it seems "canned"; other times it is specific to some of your points. I have found that if I respond with facts and logical conclusions (some of which you may gleen from HT discussions or Randy's podcasts) then I may receive a more pointed response, not necessarily agreeing with me but expressing that my points were read and understood.

My speculation is that if this dynamic is repeated often and by many constituents, then a "wrong" position may be revised.

Click to expand...

^^^Spot-on advice.

What I'm personally noodling is how to solidify in State law, defined and prescribed access/easements to all our land-locked public lands. Public lands belong to the public in the same way private lands belong to an individual. Yet, the gaining of easements to those land-locked parcels is like asking for nuclear launch codes from el presidente. If an individual needs access to his private land, land-locked by public lands - BAM - easement granted. If the Joe Public needs access to his public, land-locked parcels - Nope - move on. You can't get there now - go away.

Not sure the courts are the best way to go about this. Wouldn't it make the most sense to have our elected State Representatives legislate this seemingly obvious oversight? Or am I thinking in an obtuse way?

Treat it like calling business for information about a product. The person on the other side will be an aide so be polite (they are just doing their job). It actually gets easier as you do it.

Some basic reminders that seem simple, but in fact many callers don't follow. DO: in your own words, politely tell them very briefly what you are calling in regards to, in a sentence or two tell them why you care and why it is relevant to others like you, in an additional sentence or two, what you want them to do about it, and finally tell them how they can get back to you if they have any questions (email is good for this). DON'T DO: read scripts distributed by special interest groups, name calling, idle threats, raise your voice or ramble on.

Regarding the "scripted" point, a real life HT example comes to mind -- on a WY issue BuzzH asked folks to write in. I wrote a simple little note and sent it to the relevant legislators. A few folks on HT who were new to this ask for some guidance. I posted my text as an example and asked that it not be used in that form. A day later 3 different WY legislators sent me notes saying they don't appreciate being spammed with cut and paste emails from advocacy groups. I was a little surprised as I wrote it from scratch, then I remembered the HT post - some must have just cut-n-paste. The good news is that there must have been enough HT users engaging the issue to irritate them with the numbers, the bad news is form advocacy letters are worth 2% of a personal communication.