1996-03-11 - Re: Lawz to be.

Header Data

From: Alex Strasheim <cp@proust.suba.com>
To: mab@crypto.com (Matt Blaze)
Message Hash: cffddaa1165e790bbdda26ef2dab424a6bc9c6baf790fedd4a9d9f5132e85bbc
Message ID: <199603110105.TAA05652@proust.suba.com>
Reply To: <199603110020.TAA22441@crypto.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-11 01:55:17 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 09:55:17 +0800

Raw message

From: Alex Strasheim <cp@proust.suba.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 09:55:17 +0800
To: mab@crypto.com (Matt Blaze)
Subject: Re: Lawz to be.
In-Reply-To: <199603110020.TAA22441@crypto.com>
Message-ID: <199603110105.TAA05652@proust.suba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


Matt Blaze said,

> ...but based on discussions I've had with various Senate staffers,
> I'm not optimistic that it will be.

> If you feel strongly about this, I urge you to lobby your Senators
> (and representatives, since there's also a House version of the bill) and
> tell them exactly what you like and don't like about this legislation, as
> I am doing with mine.

It sounds like you're making much better contact with your representatives
than I've ever been able to make with mine.  Whenever I call or write I
have the impression that I'm just talking with a receptionist who either
does nothing with my comment or just puts it on a tally sheet of some
kind.

Do you know something about lobbying that I don't?  Or do your Senators' 
staffers know about your reputation as an expert who ought to be listened 
to?  When you call up a Senator's office, who do you ask to speak to?  
How do you find out which staffer would carry the ball on a particular 
issue?

I'm sure we'd all make the effort to lobby if we felt it was making a 
difference.







Thread