Got a response from my Rep. on HR 2239

[MessiahRp]

I thought I would post what was sent to me here. Sounds like he is dodging the issue of the bill entirely... What do you guys think?

Dear Mr. Poole,
I was interested to learn of your support for H.R. 2239, the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003. H.R. 2239 was introduced by Rep. Rush Holt of New Jersey on May 22, 2003, and was referred to the Committee on House Administration. This committee has yet to hold any hearings or schedule any legislative action on the bill.

Following the chaos surrounding Florida's handling of its presidential election in 2000, Congress recognized the need to restore integrity and confidence to our electoral process and passed the Help America Vote Act. This law provides funds to help states and localities modernize their voting equiptment so that we can avoid future troubles with punch cards, hanging chads, and hand written butterfly ballots. Because the Help America Vote Act contains a date certain timeline for installing updated machines, some observers believe me may be courting another debacle through the use of untested equiptment

I certainly don't think we want to go through another experience like 2000 again anytime soon. It is important that we know without delay who has won or lost an election. However, I am somewhat concerned about the increasing federal role in elections. Yes, laws like the Help America Vote Act and proposals like the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act will provide money to help fund improvements, but there are no free rides. Along with federal money will be national standards and requirements that might be good or not so good. However, such a trend slowly federalizes the conduct of elections which has traditionally been a state responsibility.

As Congress continues to deliberate on the proper federal role in managing elections you can be sure I will keep your views in mind. Please continue to contact me on issues of concern.

Sincerely,
Thomas E. Petri
Member of Congress

----------------
Now here's the letter I sent him... it's like he didn't even read it (and probably didn't although there were at least two misspelled words or mistakes in this letter that I didn't replicate here which makes me think he didn't do his usual form letter on it, plus an actual signature rather than his usual rubber stamp).

November 6, 2003

Mr. Petri,

Even though Wisconsin's ballot system seems well structured there is a revolution in the voting world. That revolution is electronic voting machines. The problem with the revolution is that the makers of these machines are extremely partisan and their machines operating systems are extremely flawed.

If we follow the national trend and end up with these machines made by Diebold and Sequoia we are putting Democracy at risk especially when they offer no proof that the vote you just made was calculated that way.

ATM Machines offer receipts, Grocery Stores offer receipts, even Gas Pumps offer receipts. Considering that voting for public officials ends up affecting every aspect of your daily life, this would be the most important receipt of all.

Please support HR 2239 and help keep Democracy on track. Everyone deserves a right to have their vote counted and counted correctly. You can help preserve those rights for all Americans with your vote.

Sincerely,
Robert Poole, Jr.

[grannylib]

1. You may be right...seems he did not totally get your point...

I have received no responses from any of the folks to whom I wrote about this issue; I sent 3 letters and about 15 e-mails, and have not even received the little auto-response on the e-mails that I usually get when writing to representatives....hmmm...

[sybylla]

2. That's Petri for you.

I have yet to see him demonstrate the ability to grasp complex subjects.

on edit: Welcome to DU, fellow Wisconsinite.

[Goldmund]

3. I don't know if he read it or not...

...but wingnuts rarely actually adress the question they're answering. Their brains usually categorize the question in one of their predefined categories, and then summon the stock rhetoric for that category.

This is a case in point -- it isn't like you were arguing for the status quo as far as voting methods, you were saying that there is no technical reason that the new electronic voting machines cannot have a paper trail, just like gas pumps, ATMs, etc. And he replied to some imaginary question, his "Mr. Hand" or something, asking why can't we just keep everything as it is. As if the only two options were the status quo or Diebold paperless voting.

[ithacan]

4. call his office and demand (nicely) to talk to a staffer

and push these points and ask for specifics!

[madddog]

5. Sweet Jesus....

you can't really think he read your letter? It was most likely answered by an 18 year old staffer making $15k a year, or maybe even an intern...either way, someone who can't even run spellcheck. It was signed by an autopen...a sig duplicating machine.

Unless your letter is SO witty and inspiring, or threatening, to be culled from the pack and shown to the next highest form of Congressional life in the chain, it pretty much goes into the canned response bin; that canned response may not even fully address your question.

Congress 101, folks.

[MessiahRp]

6. Well no...

Usually I get about 10 letters a month in response to my letters from Petri's office (about 5 a month from Feingold and 2 a month from Mark Green) so I usually know the canned responses and all... this one is honestly the first I've gotten from Petri with spelling errors in them and the first time the signature looked like it didn't come from a rubber stamp.

It's not whether he read the letter or not that disturbs me, it's that he was ignorant of its content either way.

Rp

[lysergik]

7. Seems like he or his staff hasn't taken time to even view HR2239

Nor did the letter address the core of your message. It's far easier to dodge the issue than take a few minutes and address it.