Congressman Mark Souder

[haldir]

Here is the response I got from my Congressman (obviously a right thinking American:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act. I appreciate hearing from you. Rest assured that I share your strong support for our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

As you know, Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy of New York introduced the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act (H.R. 1022) on February 13, 2007. This bill would reinstate for 10 years current criminal provisions regarding assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices (the assault weapons ban), and would revise the definition of semiautomatic assault weapon to include conversion kits (for converting a firearm to such a weapon) and any semiautomatic rifle or pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and that has specified characteristics, including a telescoping stock. H.R. 1022 has been sent to the Judiciary Committee for further review.

I do not believe that guns are responsible for violent crime problems or that more gun control would reduce violence and criminal activity. Most of the weapons used in criminal activities are purchased illegally on the street. Furthermore, the folly of gun control is shown time and again in cities that have strict gun control laws. For example, Washington, D.C., has the most restrictive gun control laws in the country, yet it is known foremost for its violent criminal activity. I am a strong supporter of our Second Amendment right to bear arms. Many Americans choose to own firearms for sport, hunting, collecting, and protection. In my opinion, all of these reasons justify the ownership of firearms. Should H.R. 1022 come to the House floor for a vote, I will oppose it.


Thank you for keeping in touch with me. I will continue to fight to protect America's First Freedom. If I may be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me again. I also encourage you to visit my Web site, which may be found on-line at United States Congressman Mark Souder :: Welcome.

 

[USMC_0311]

Now if we can just clone him a couple of hundred times.

 

[kludge]

This bill would reinstate for 10 years current criminal provisions regarding assault weapons

... until they take that stupid "10 years" thing out in a closed door meeting in the middle of the night, like they snuck in 922 (o).

 

[JetGirl]

ARGH!!! I emailed a completely different question and got mostly THAT same email word for word!! And he never did answer my question!

 

[rhino]

On another bright side, it's refreshing to see an elected official's staff commit to either supporting or opposing a specific issue or bill unequivocally. Usually they say, "I'll keep your comments in mind when I make my decision" or something similarly weasely.

 

[cubby]

just don't ask him about education of students with learning disablities.

 

[Blue Tile Spook]

Or medical care for the disabled...

 

[CarmelHP]

ARGH!!! I emailed a completely different question and got mostly THAT same email word for word!! And he never did answer my question!

In his defense, when I was in DC, we had over 150,000 pieces of mail and e-mail in a single year (nearly 40,000 on Social Security reform, 10,000 when gas prices hit $3/gal). This was spread over 4 people on the DC legislative staff. It is not physically possible to read, thoughtfully consider, and answer precisely each individual piece of correspondence. Handwritten letters that were not part of a letter writing campaign (10,000 people copying the same text) were the most likely to get an individualized response from the MC.

 

[JetGirl]

In his defense, when I was in DC, we had over 150,000 pieces of mail and e-mail in a single year (nearly 40,000 on Social Security reform, 10,000 when gas prices hit $3/gal). This was spread over 4 people on the DC legislative staff. It is not physically possible to read, thoughtfully consider, and answer precisely each individual piece of correspondence. Handwritten letters that were not part of a letter writing campaign (10,000 people copying the same text) were the most likely to get an individualized response from the MC.

Not that it matters much at this point, but it was a simple "yes or no" type question.
I got four unrelated paragraphs with nary a "yes" or "no" in sight. I'm really sorry that there's so much mail from constituents to deal with...but guess what? That's his job!

 

[CarmelHP]

Not that it matters much at this point, but it was a simple "yes or no" type question.
I got four unrelated paragraphs with nary a "yes" or "no" in sight. I'm really sorry that there's so much mail from constituents to deal with...but guess what? That's his job!

Guess what? The public does not want to pay what it would cost to get the staff necessary to do the job. How do you suggest it be done? I didn't work for Mr. Souder but I know his staff was about the same size as ours.

 

[JetGirl]

Gripe about the mail however much you want, but the bottom line is that he (and all elected representatives) are the servants of the people. How do they know what we desire unless we tell them? How do they know what that is unless they listen?

 

[CarmelHP]

Gripe about the mail however much you want, but the bottom line is that he (and all elected representatives) are the servants of the people. How do they know what we desire unless we tell them? How do they know what that is unless they listen?

Gripe about the mail however much you want, but the bottom line is the staffs do the best they can with what you give them. The issues and positions of writers are distilled and tallied and answered as best as humanly possible. Elected representatives and staffs are human, perhaps your expectations of them answering every jot and tittle is unrealistic.

On topic, Mr. Souder is very good on gun owner bills having introduced bills for nationwide carry and to restore DC gun rights. I appreciate having him there even if not in his district.

 

[Scutter01]

If he can't send an appropriate response to a yes or no question, then his office is not actually reading the message. In other words, the letter got the most cursory skim for keywords (Oh, it said "gun". Let me put it in this "gun" pile), and then thrown out. That makes it a waste of time to contact him via mail. It's laughably easy to implement automated systems to take the bulk of the work off the staff.

In most cases, a form letter is perfectly acceptable and appropriate (10,000 people copying the same text). If his office can't be bothered to respond to me HIS BOSS, then I'll find someone who can.

 

[CarmelHP]

If he can't send an appropriate response to a yes or no question, then his office is not actually reading the message. In other words, the letter got the most cursory skim for keywords (Oh, it said "gun". Let me put it in this "gun" pile), and then thrown out. That makes it a waste of time to contact him via mail. It's laughably easy to implement automated systems to take the bulk of the work off the staff.

In most cases, a form letter is perfectly acceptable and appropriate (10,000 people copying the same text). If his office can't be bothered to respond to me HIS BOSS, then I'll find someone who can.

I glad that everyone else is more of an expert than anyone who has actually done it. Have it your way. Toss the bum out.

[Edit] By the way, if you think " It's laughably easy to implement automated systems to take the bulk of the work off the staff" there is a ton of money to be made from contracts on the Hill. Member offices spend untold hours and funds on answering mail, and, if you've ever tried this (there are MANY companies claiming they can do it, but really can't) maybe you would have a different opinion. For a cut of the profits, I'd bankroll anyone who could do it reliably and satisfactorily. Lots have tried and failed to cut out the human element and you still get kvetchers. Again, I welcome anyone who can do it to try. Hell, run for the seat, and see what people say about you for doing your best. Mr. Souder is doing his best for gun owners.

 

[Scutter01]

You don't have to thoughtfully consider and answer every single letter. That would be insane and no one suggested he should. But if I ask him a specific question on a specific topic, I expect an answer that at least shows SOMEONE read the message and didn't just look at the return address. Otherwise I've just wasted my time and he's wasted staff and money on the return reply.

 

[JetGirl]

Gripe about the mail however much you want, but the bottom line is the staffs do the best they can with what you give them. The issues and positions of writers are distilled and tallied and answered as best as humanly possible. Elected representatives and staffs are human, perhaps your expectations of them answering every jot and tittle is unrealistic.

On topic, Mr. Souder is very good on gun owner bills having introduced bills for nationwide carry and to restore DC gun rights. I appreciate having him there even if not in his district.

I never said he wasn't a good representative for gun owners and their rights. I never said he wasn't appreciated for his stance on the Second Amendment.
What I am saying is that I filled out the required form to contact him and used the space allotted to ask a simple question that should have resulted in a simple "yes" or "no".
My "expectation" is that if he is opening his website up to questions and comments, he should actually pay a little attention to the content. It's not like I wrote a thesis and expected him to translate it into Swahili and do an interpretive dance.

 

[CarmelHP]

My "expectation" is that if he is opening his website up to questions and comments, he should actually pay a little attention to the content. It's not like I wrote a thesis and expected him to translate it into Swahili and do an interpretive dance.

Fine. Offer to intern for a few weeks and see if, in that time, you can read all the e-mail that comes in in just two days. Then tell me how easy it is. On e-mail, especially, people find it easy to add their own questions and comments. If anyone can design an affordable system to sort and answer it intelligently and fully, they are welcome to do it, I want to be their partner. It's the greatest challenge and focus of any member office.

 

[haldir]

I have written to others before (Bayh and Lugar) and in one case got no response at all and the other the generic (as someone above mentioned), I will keep that in mind note. So I found his response better than others I have gotten. I know he also periodically has local town meetings where you can go to ask questions.

 

[CarmelHP]

You don't have to thoughtfully consider and answer every single letter. That would be insane and no one suggested he should. But if I ask him a specific question on a specific topic, I expect an answer that at least shows SOMEONE read the message and didn't just look at the return address. Otherwise I've just wasted my time and he's wasted staff and money on the return reply.

Well, apparently, you believe no one else in the history of Congress has given any thought to it. You have to examine EVERY piece of e-mail to see if comments or questions are added to form letters, this doesn't begin to count the tens of thousands of entirely unique pieces of mail that have to be sorted individually or the letter writing campaigns which each have to be hand examined to see what was added in the margins. If you think it's easy or even technically possible, I will personally take you around to sell it to every member office. It would sell like hotcakes and not for cheap either.

 

[JetGirl]

Fine. Other to intern for a few weeks and see if, in that time, you can read all the e-mail that comes in in just two days. Then tell me how easy it is.

I certainly don't recall saying that I think it's easy. If something was easy, everyone would be doing it.
I'm not a stranger to volunteering time to campaign or to stuff envelopes and answer phones after an election win. What I do know is that if you don't take the time to listen to the people you're supposed to represent, you might find yourself without those people voting for you in the next go-around.