[myblake]

How effective is calling local congress members if you live in an area with a strong progressive majority such as the Bay Area. Not that we shouldn't voice our option to our represented officials but I suspect in some ways it's redundant whereas things like raising money for national organizations may be more impactful.

[bratsche]

It feels like it's not very effective, but that may be because there needs more weight of numbers behind it. If you're in a progressive area like the Bay area I can see how it would just add extra load to officials who may not need further persuading.

I'm in Texas though. A very red state. I've been calling my representative and senators to voice my opinion on all this stuff, but it's hard to tell how effective it is. I either get someone on the phone who sounds like, "oh geez, another angry liberal" or I have someone who just sounds like they'll add my name to a tally or something and says "I'll pass it along" and it's hard to know if they will or if that will help. And then I call my state senator to oppose the bathroom bill going through the Texas senate and the person who I'm talking to on the phone gets borderline combative with me.

I found a group of local people who are trying to do this in a more organized way. I found this[1] the other day and it makes me feel hopeful that our efforts are helping somewhat. We just need to not lose steam. It's easy to get fatigued by this kind of stuff, and we're only a week in.

[1] http://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2017/01/26/cruz-...

[protomyth]

> I have someone who just sounds like they'll add my name to a tally or something and says "I'll pass it along" and it's hard to know if they will or if that will help.

That is exactly what you are going for. They keep a tally on a lot of issues. Unless you are a big employer or influential player in your district, you are not going to get to speak to the Rep or even his/her senior staff.

Unions and some Orgs know that you have thousands of people call your Rep and voice an opinion. Call, fax, or send a letter. Show up to the district office and be nice, deliver your opinion, and hand them a letter.

[myblake]

Yeah it's interesting how it can go the other way if you're in a solidly conservative district too (I used to live in austin ehich thanks to some ridiculous gerrymandering has very conservative congressional representation). Thanks for calling even if you aren't convinced they'all listen though, I think it's important to try and change minds and that's the place to start.

[cderwin]

I wonder how much calling actually matters, because I feel like whether they receive 10 calls or 10,000, it's always going to be one-sided. Conservatives aren't going to call their reps and they don't have the propensity to engage in the same activism as progressives, so I would think representatives would take calls with a relative grain of salt. If a very conservative congressperson starts getting a bunch of calls saying how much the dislike [standard conservative proposal], they've got to think that as much as the people who voted against them don't want [standard conservative proposal], the conservatives who voted them in do.

[astrange]

> Conservatives aren't going to call their reps and they don't have the propensity to engage in the same activism as progressives

The last 8 years were driven by the Tea Party doing exactly this. They show up to vote more and practice local politics like everyone should be doing.

[whyileft]

It only really works if you are showing them that they are going against what they thought their base wanted. Free trade right now would probably be one where a lot of Republican members of congress would have likely been surprised to learn a year ago that there was a large percentage of their Republican voting constituency that was against free trade.

So yes, if you are a Republican with a Republican representative then calling them to voice your displeasure about Donald Trump's behavior may be beneficial. Otherwise it probably won't do much unless there really is massive numbers.

[cmurf]

What is completely consistent with Republican policies for decades, however, is tax cuts that overwhelmingly favor the wealthy, while supporting a regressive tax (which is what a tariff is) that will disproportionately impact the poor and working middle class.

[tptacek]

It's extremely important. The Republican coalition has had outreach programs for years set up to generate floods of calls; my senator, Dick Durbin, had to shut his phones off because of one such effort to push through pro-Israel legislation.

A large number of Democrats have voted to confirm John Kelly, the anti-immigration former general who will now run DHS and enforce Trump's Muslim ban. Almost all of the Democrats supported Mattis for DOJ, because he appears to be the sanest member of the administration's team. A decent sized number even supported Pompeo, a Muslim-alarmist, for CIA.

Coming up soon is Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III for Attorney General. Sessions is by many accounts an unreconstructed white supremacist. But Democrats will support him, because he's also a member of the Senate, and collegiality goes a very long way in the Senate.

Unless the Democratic coalition makes it clear to their representatives that we are holding them accountable for their votes to give consent for confirmation votes, and for their actual confirmation votes, the Democrats will act "strategically", holding back resistance until they're absolutely required to offer it. It doesn't help that the Republican party is almost uniformly conservative and extremely white, while the Democratic party is a coalition of interests that leans but is not firmly planted in liberal tradition.

Even if you're in a liberal state. You have to call. Social media doesn't count. It's very easy to do and if enough people do it, it does make a difference. It's like voting, except that your calls have more influence than your votes.

I cannot recommend highly enough the Indivisible Guide, which is the outcome of a bunch of legislative staffers attempting to reverse-engineer the Tea Party's process from the last 8 years and apply them to Democratic objectives:

https://www.indivisibleguide.com/

It's all actionable stuff.

[baytrailcat]

I disagree that this will not be helpful. The old-guard of Democratic Party hails from these hyper liberal areas (Fienstein, Schumer, Pelosi), and based on what we have seen so far, they aren't even showing a slightest hint of resistance to Trump. See the senate democrat's response to Trump nominees for example. Put enough pressure on them, they will at least form a semblance of resistance which can inspire and have real effects.

For a practical example, if people of San Francisco jointly decide that they want Nancy Pelosi to do X, Y and Z (otherwise she will get primaried in 2018), she will have no option but to do that. This is exactly what the Tea Party did (with tremendous help from Koch brothers) in last eight years. They unseated the old leaders and took over the party.

[anarazel]

> The old-guard of Democratic Party hails from these hyper liberal areas (Fienstein, Schumer, Pelosi), and based on what we have seen so far, they aren't even showing a slightest hint of resistance to Trump.

What exactly do you want them to do (serious, not provocative question)? All three have spoken up (in varying volume) about the nastier executive orders / memoranda / proclamations, all three argued against several of the more controversial senate approved cabinet posts.

Nearly all the senate confirmable posts can't be filibustered under the current rules. I'd even call it surprising how many of them haven't yet made it out of the respective committees due to the republican majorities. All that's holding them back seems to be those arcane "collegiality" rules that the senate has, and the reticence of some republican MoC.

Except for filibusterable stuff, the democrats are largely powerless for the moment.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not particularly happy with how Democratic "leadership" is working, but it's far from clear to me what should be done.

[cmurf]

Wide latitude has been given on cabinet appointments by the senate, historically. And also with a supreme court nominee looming, there's every reason for Democrats to not use their outrage on cabinet nominees where it won't matter anyway.

[baytrailcat]

Lol.. history and norms. Norms like releasing your tax returns before running for office? You think we are going to a centrist judge because dems kept their powder dry? Outrage is the only thing left.

[setpatchaddress]

You second sentence was the excuse given by Democrats throughout George W. Bush's presidency for every single failure to contain the damage. And they did it every single time, every single violation of the constitution, every single movement-conservative (old-speak for alt-right) Supreme Court pick. The outcome was that newspapers got used to publishing the words "Democrats Capitulate" in headlines. That was great for building the party's brand, as you might imagine.

[pcardh0]

>This is exactly what the Tea Party did (with tremendous >help from Koch brothers) in last eight years. They >unseated the old leaders and took over the party.

Do you have a link showing where, "they took over the party"? My understanding is that the Tea Party is a minority faction within the GOP.

[baytrailcat]

Check this out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_history_of_the_Tea_P...

Pay attention to the 2010 primary races that happened within GOP. There were also some high profile races where the Tea-party/Traditional-GOP split even caused Dems to win some seats (like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware)

After that cycle, mainstream republicans mostly co-opted the movement and the rift wasn't that evident in successive elections.

[burkaman]

First, it helps put actual weight behind their words, so they can say "I received 2000 calls about this issue in the past week" or something. Second, members of congress have limited time and limited political capital, so if for example you want them to prioritize stopping the Muslim ban over stopping the border wall, you should let them know. It helps them choose what to focus on, and can also help them recruit other members to help them if they can say "look at the numbers, people really care about this one".

[corysama]

Keep in mind, when politicians measure how much people care, the numbers are weighted by how much effort went in to making the statement. So, a unique, hand-typed letter takes a lot of effort and therefore is given a lot of weight. A phone call, less so. A copy-paste letter much less. And, a online petition signature, zero.

[myblake]

Fair enough, I do think the quantification argument is sound. I certainly don't mean to discourage anyone from contacting their elected officials, I just want to highlight the fact a lot of us live in areas that are both solidly more progressive and solidly more wealthy than the median county in the us.

[sidlls]

There is a "strong progressive majority" in the bay area? I guess if one's calculus is "Democrat == liberal == progressive" that might be true. From my perspective I see a large majority of folks who pay lip service to the social tolerance issue with the most media coverage around election time every two years and who otherwise act like conservatives (especially on economic matters) in most other respects.

Either way calling Congress members is a feel-good thing that takes almost no effort. It's worthless in terms of getting political power and making changes.

[panic]

They need to know they have the support to fight in the strongest way possible. Dianne Feinstein, for example, has voted in favor of every Trump appointee so far.

[cmurf]

I think it's short sighted; the administration is throwing a bunch of grenades up in the air counting on distraction and wearing people out. The reality is the easiest way to have flicked off this booger was the election, and that's over. Dealing with it is much harder, much more expensive. So you have to triage which battles you're going to fight, and how. Don't count on the replacement appointees being any better, and don't count on multiple rejections in a row (it never happens, and not because they become more politically agreeable), because literally there's another important item that will be on the agenda and getting sucked into a cabinet nominee black hole is not a hill worth dying on.

[panic]

It's not like there's some sort of fuel that is exhausted by voting "no" on Trump's appointees. We will only get worn out if we let ourselves.

[huac]

Your congressional representatives voted for Trump's nominees. Remind them who they work for.

Edit: misread 'local congress' vs 'US congress' but I think the point still stands.

[falcolas]

Only a little sarcastically:

> Remind them who they work for.

The lobbyists who pay for their luxuries today, and secure their employment tomorrow?

[a3n]

This is true, but they still have to jump through the election hoop.

[jacquesm]

They just did. The only thing that will worry them is if those that did elect them are abandoning them.

[cadlin]

I live in Virginia. Both of my senators are Democrats, as is my representative. One of them (Mark Warner) has released a statement condemning the executive order, while Tim Kaine and Don Beyer are not. I left voice mail for the latter and wrote an email to the former, as AFAICT he doesn't take phone messages over the weekend.

Trump signed this on Friday because the response against it will be slower. Sure, a public statement by Democrats won't stop this, but it won't hurt and what the hell else are they doing? I work on the weekends, and they can too when core American values are under assault.

And of course, giving or raising money for other organizations is a great thing to do as well.

[derrickdirge]

It's still helpful if your representatives can say 'I've received n calls from outraged constituents!' There's little reason you couldn't raise money and make a phone call.

[smacktoward]

Even if your Representatives (whose focus is entirely on your local community) are already on board, you still have two Senators who have to get elected by the entire state, not just the Bay Area. There are parts of California that are very, very conservative. Call them and remind them that there are parts that aren't too.

[zitterbewegung]

Just because you voted in someone doesn't mean that they necessarily know what you want them to legislate. Writing them letters and calling them is one of the most effective ways to do this and this was effective for SOPA.

[a3n]

You want to give progressive incumbents the confidence that they are advocating for what their voters want. Positive and negative feedback are equally important. If you like what they're doing, tell them.

[davidw]

It's a hell of a lot more likely to have some effect than not calling at all!