When Your Legislator Ignores You …

By Don Schellhardt

pioneerpath@hotmail.com

NEWS FLASHES ABOUT HOA ANTENNA REFORM LEGISLATION

1. Re efforts to add H.R. 1478 (the HOA antenna reform bill introduced by Representative Israel, D-NY) to the “fast tracked” bill on the 9/11 Commission's recommendations:

THE UNITED STATES SENATE IS EXPECTED TO VOTE ON THE 9/11 BILL “DURING THE WEEK OF [MONDAY] SEPTEMBER 27”. That's next week.

That prediction comes from SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS, R-ME, and SENATOR JOSEPH LIEBERMAN, D-CT -- both of whom are playing key roles in shaping and guiding the 9/11 bill. [Hams in Maine and Connecticut: Take Note!!]

2. Earlier this month, in the United States House of Representatives, H.R. 1478 gained its 36^th co-sponsor: REPRESENTATIVE RICK LARSEN, D-WA. Maybe some hams talked to him when he was home for the Summer Recess.

I've been posting on EHAM for several months now, trying to whip up additional “grassroots” support for action on HOA antenna reform (which means, at least in what is left of THIS Session of Congress, the enactment of H.R. 1478).

However, it is time -- actually, PAST time -- for me to address a question that has popped up on EHAM more than once: “What should you do when your legislator ignores you?”

Apparently, more than a few of you have been finding that your Congressional legislator's responses are vague at best -- if you get a response at all. I notice that some of you have figured out that the phrase “I will bear your views in mind” is a classical Congressional kissoff.

Frankly, if your Senator or Representative agreed with you, he would tell you so clearly. Why would he (or she) pass up an easy opportunity to please a voter? Further, if he (or she) were genuinely undecided, you would probably receive a brief explanation of the values being weighed -- and perhaps even an invitation to provide more information. Vagueness, especially if it is artful, usually reflects not indecision on the issue but a reluctance to tell you the truth because you won't like it.

As Abraham Lincoln once said: “Better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt.”

In Any Event …

Based on 3 years as a Capitol Hill staffer, and another 20+ years as a Government Relations advocate, I have 5 suggestions for you if your legislator is being vague (or just plain silent). I offer these suggestions as AN INDIVIDUAL, not as a spokesperson for any organization.

(A) TRY TO DEAL WITH THE LEGISLATOR DIRECTLY, OR AT LEAST WITH A HIGHER-RANKING STAFF MEMBER. As more than one ham has reported here, sometimes the problem is letter-answering staffers who are not as energetic and/or alert as the legislator himself (or herself) might be. (In fairness to SOME of the Capitol Hill staffers, many of them are routinely overworked and overwhelmed. Others among them, however, are intellectually and/or logistically lazy, or otherwise under-motivated.)

If this is the problem, direct contact with the Representative may be helpful. The easiest way to make direct contact is usually on weekends, or during Congressional Recesses, when the legislator is back home. (Local offices can usually be found on your Congressional legislator's Web Site, which is reachable via www.house.gov or www.senate.gov, or in your local phone book.) Other methods include a personal visit to Washington or, possibly, a phone call to Washington -- but constant, unforeseen interruptions when Congress is in Session make these other methods somewhat less dependable than a visit while the legislator is back home.

In the case of action on H.R. 1478 -- where the outcome for 2004 may well be decided in the next 2 weeks (or possibly 3 to 4 weeks, if Congress extends its targeted adjournment date) -- there is probably not enough time left to use ANY of these methods for direct contact.

Therefore, in THIS specific situation, I advise you to go to the legislator's Web Site … find the highest-ranking STAFFER you can identify … and then call or Fax that STAFFER instead of the legislator. You may very well discover that talking to the legislator's top staffer is functionally like talking to the legislator directly. After all, in most cases, no one gets to be the top staffer unless he or she: (a) independently thinks a lot like the legislator; and/or (b) understands how the legislator thinks so well that he or she can function as the legislator's “proxy”.

(B) GATHER STRENGTH IN NUMBERS. Prepare a Petition and see whether a document with 20 or 30 or 50 names on it “punches through the ground clutter” better than a letter sent by you alone. (Again, however: If you are pressing for action on H.R. 1478 during the next few weeks, time is running out. So you'd better gather those signatures fast, if you're going to gather them at all, and then FAX that Petition when it's ready.)

I have prepared a Sample Petition and placed it at the end of this article. Feel free to use it as a starting point for your own work IF you wish.

Also: I recommend you read the discussion of “Multi-Signature Letters” on the “grassroots Lobbying Web Site” of TOM COATES N3IJ of Maryland. Tom's excellent Web Site can be found at http://home.comcast.net/~n3ij/

(C) IF THE LEGISLATOR REMAINS UNRESPONSIVE, EMBARRASS HIM OR HER THROUGH A LETTER TO THE EDITOR. In the interests of fairness, and of maintaining good will if possible, I suggest you try a phone call to the legislator's top staffer BEFORE you send in a critical Letter To The Editor (or two, or ten). Should the legislator's office blow that “last chance” to pay attention to you, then I would “lower the boom” with one or more critical Letters To The Editor.

In this regard:

Remember what I said, in Item A, about a legislator's top staffer. Lower-ranking staffers may hold their jobs through patronage or random chance, but a top staffer is almost always selected by the legislator VERY carefully. In all likelihood, that top staffer either thinks like the legislator, or knows how the legislator thinks, or both.

The bottom line: If the top staffer blows you off, it's a good bet that the legislator would blow you off, too. So take an unreturned phone call, or a curt and/or evasive reply, as an accurate reflection of how YOUR LEGISLATOR really views you and your concerns.

I have prepared a Sample Letter To The Editor and placed it at the end of this article, directly below the Sample Petition.

(D) TAKE A LOOK AT THE LEGISLATOR'S OPPONENT(S), IF ANY. I have never really liked that old adage: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Sometimes: The enemy of your enemy is just another enemy.

Having said this:

IF your legislator isn't doing what you want, and ESPECIALLY if your legislator is also treating you disrespectfully in the process, it makes sense to take a look at what The Competition -- if there is any -- is offering. If the “cure” seems worse than the disease, and/or if your legislator's opponent agrees with you on H.R. 1478 but disagrees with you on almost everything else, then look at other options. But at least eyeball The Competition to see what is offered.

The odds are good, in THIS year's elections, that your legislator's opponent has never taken a position on HOA antenna reform in general or on H.R. 1478 in particular. If this is the case, it is probably because your legislator's opponent has never heard of HOA antenna reform or H.R. 1478. There's a lot of that going `round …

Do not despair. This means you have “a blank slate”. You and your friends can be the ones to educate this candidate about this issue!!

In this regard: Remember that an un-elected candidate is likely to have a lot more time to talk with you, read your materials and so on than a busy incumbent. Perhaps you can “make lemonade from lemons” by working with the politician “who's only No. 2 … and trying harder”.

(I'm taking my own advice, BTW, here in the 5^th Congressional District of Connecticut. My Congresswoman, Republican Representative Nancy Johnson, has been opposed to my views on any number of issues. So I have recently undertaken the initiative of opening a dialogue with her Democratic Party opponent, former State Representative Theresa B. Gerretana. The topics include HOA antenna reform, and I guess we'll see what happens.)

I am aware, of course, that many Congressional incumbents have only token opposition -- or even no opposition at all -- and that the percentage of unopposed incumbents has been increasing over the years. At least in most cases, I believe this is an unhealthy development for our representative democracy, but that's a topic for another day.

For now, I will just note the obvious practical implication: the fact that uncontested elections take from many of us the best leverage we have for influencing our legislators.

A clear example of this is Representative Adam Putnam, R-FL. To the best of my limited knowledge of the subject, Representative Putnam appears to have been the subject of more complaints from hams -- about unresponsiveness on HOA antenna reform -- than any other incumbent in Congress. It didn't surprise me, when I checked on how many votes Representative Putnam received in 2002, to see that he had had no major opponent during the last election. Placing legislators beyond accountability (or businesspeople, or clergy members, or civil servants, or Whomever) rarely brings out the best in them.

If your legislator has no meaningful opposition for re-election, please pay special attention to OPTION E.

(E) HELP FRIENDLY CANDIDATES WHO WILL BE REPRESENTING PEOPLE OTHER THAN YOU.

Since there are 100 U.S. Senators and 435 voting Members of the House of Representatives, and you can only vote on who 3 of them should be, it makes sense to support a national movement by supporting -- with money, volunteer time or other forms of assistance -- some candidates you aren't in a position to support with your vote.

While there is some general rationality behind this option, the case for it becomes especially compelling if there is -- at present -- no one you can vote for who shares your views on the issues that matter to you most.

So “the grass may be greener” in Someone Else's backyard. The candidates who best represent YOU may be running elsewhere in your State, or even elsewhere in your country. Consider donating some money, IF you can afford it, and/or some time and energy. (Example: Howard Dean's Presidential campaign recruited volunteers from all over the country to write personal letters to registered voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and other early primary states. Also: Campaigns for offices from President to Mayor routinely invite volunteers from neighboring States to pass out leaflets in “swing” precincts, stuff envelopes and so on.)

As a starting point for your own “candidate evaluation process”, you might begin with the proven friends of HOA antenna reform in Congress: that is, those 37 Members of the House of Representatives who have recorded their names as sponsors of H.R. 1478.

A list of the 37 Congressional legislators who have sponsored H.R. 1478, and some additional information about them, has been included at the end of this article. You will find the list of legislators below the Sample Letter To The Editor.

2 final points -- both of them concerning campaign contributions:

1. Never send a campaign contribution directly to a legislator's office. It is illegal for you to send (or hand deliver) a campaign contribution to a legislator's office -- and it is illegal for them to accept it if you do. What you CAN do, instead, is to call, Fax or E-Mail the office, asking them where to send campaign contributions. Alternatively: You can probably find a Web Site for a legislator's campaign committee through a search on www.google.com or a comparable search engine.

2. Make sure you identify your campaign contribution as coming from YOU, as an INDIVIDUAL. The NATIONAL ANTENNA CONSORTIUM (NAC), ARRL and similar organizations are not allowed to endorse candidates or to solicit campaign contributions. They can provide information, if they have it, on where candidates stand on issues which concern their Members. This includes the right to identify which legislators, if any, have been helpful. But that is as far as groups like NAC and ARRL can go. They can provide information, but what you do with it has to be your decision … 100%.

So: If you make a campaign contribution, and if you mention that HOA antenna reform has been a factor in your decision, please do not bring the name of NAC, ARRL or any similar organization into the discussion. Speak only in your name … as AN INDIVIDUAL whose attributes include a ham radio license.

WHATEVER YOU DECIDE TO DO, IF ANYTHING:

GOOD LUCK!!!!

73's,

Don Schellhardt

SAMPLE PETITION TO A CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATOR

Dear Representative -----:

We, the undersigned, hereby Petition you, as our United States Representative, to co-sponsor, and otherwise support the enactment of, H.R. 1478. [For a U.S. Senator: Replace “Representative” with “Senator”, and replace “co-sponsor,” with “introduce in the Senate,” ]

In particular, we urge you to support adding the text of H.R. 1478 to the pending bill on the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.

H.R. 1478 has been introduced by Representative Steve Israel, D-NY. It would ban the currently widespread bans on Amateur Radio antennas, aka ham radio antennas, by Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) and restrictive covenants. HOAs and covenants could still adopt reasonable regulations, including their height and design, but these regulations could no longer be carried to the point of banning Amateur Radio operations completely.

Enactment of H.R. 1478 is vital for the preservation and enhancement of emergency preparedness and national security. Because hams cannot operate without antennas, HOA antenna bans effectively keep Amateur Radio Service operations out of HOA-controlled communities. Because countless disasters over the past 90 years have proven the value of Amateur Radio Service as a crucial supplement to -- or even substitute for -- public sector emergency communications, the bans effectively “unplug” HOA-controlled communities from the full measure of normally available emergency communications protection. 4 out of 10 Americans live in such extra-vulnerable, under-protected communities.

We are petitioning you for action collectively because of your unresponsive replies to those of us who have contacted you individually. Perhaps our numbers will attract your attention. In any event: Please understand that the enactment of H.R. 1478 is very important to us personally, as registered and active voters in your Congressional District. [For a U.S. Senator: Replace “Congressional District” with “State”.]

We want to see action before the current Session of Congress adjourns.

Sincerely ….

(PLEASE INCLUDE YOUR NAMES AND SNAIL MAIL ADDRESSES -- ALONG WITH YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESSES, IF POSSIBLE)

SAMPLE LETTER TO THE EDITOR

To the editor:

The recent Gulf region hurricanes have demonstrated, yet again, the value of Amateur Radio Service operations, aka ham radio operations, as a crucial supplement to public sector emergency communications. In Palm Beach County, Florida, ham volunteers even had to “pinch hit” for public sector emergency services when those communications -- police, fire, rescue -- went down for 11 hours.

Unfortunately, all across the country, Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) and restrictive covenants ban all ham antennas, and thus all ham radio operations, from their communities. This leaves HOA-controlled communities, where 4 out of 10 Americans now reside, extra-vulnerable and under-protected in the face of natural or man-made disasters.

Fortunately, Representative Steve Israel, D-NY, has introduced H.R. 1478: a bill that would ban the bans by HOAs. Reasonable regulations by HOAs and covenants would still be allowed, but they could be carried to the point of banning ham radio operations completely.

Unfortunately, Congressional leaders are planning to adjourn this Session of Congress for the year by early October. This would kill H.R. 1478 and all other pending bills.

Fortunately, a campaign is underway to enact H.R. 1478 by adding it to the fast-moving bill on the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.

Unfortunately, my own Congressman, Representative ----------------, has not lifted a finger to help. [For a U.S. Senator: Replace “my own Congressman, Representative ------,” with “Senator -------“ . Make this plural if BOTH of your Senators have been unresponsive, but in that case be sure to change the next sentence, replacing “he [or she]” with “they” and “his [or her”] with “their”.] In fact, in response to my correspondence, he [or she] will not even tell me his [or her] position on this bill.

Perhaps public disclosure of his current unresponsiveness, in this newspaper, will motivate Representative ------ to co-sponsor H.R. 1478 and support its inclusion in the 9/11 bill. [For a U.S. Senator: Replace “Representative -----“ with “Senator ----“ or “Senators ------ and -----“. Also change “co-sponsor H.R. 1478” to “introduce H.R. 1478 in the Senate”.] I certainly hope so.

Every day that Congressional leaders fail to act on H.R. 1478 is a day that lives are put at risk -- for no good reason.

Sincerely,

(PLEASE INCLUDE YOUR NAME, SNAIL MAIL ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER -- ALONG WITH YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS IF POSSIBLE)

CURRENT CO-SPONSORS OF H.R. 1478:

Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Consistency Act

Introduced by Representative Steve Israel, D-NY

Situation As Of 9/20/04: 20 Democrats, 17 Republicans

(Ranked By Apparent Vulnerability In Re-Election Races)

After each name, we have listed the percentage of the vote this Representative received in the 2002 election. Source: The “U.S. Congress” Section of www.congress.org (maintained by the League of Women Voters).

1. (Tie) Dennis Moore, D-KS … 50%

Anibal Acevedo-Vila, D-Puerto Rico … 50% (Non-voting Member of Congress)

3. (Tie) Rick Larsen, D-WA … 51%

Joseph Hoeffel, D-PA … 51%

5. Michael Michaud, D-ME …. 52%

6. Rob Simmons, R-CT … 54%

7. (Tie) C.A. “Dutch” Ruppersberger, D-MD … 55% (Serves on House Government Reform AND Intelligence Committees)

Marilyn Musgrave, R-CO … 55%

9. (Tie) Carolyn McCarthy, D-NY … 56%

Charles H. Taylor, R-NC … 56%

11. (Tie) STEVE ISRAEL, D-NY … 58% (SPONSOR of H.R. 1478)

Ralph M. Hall, R-TX … 58% (Serves on House Commerce Committee)

13. (Tie) Mark Udall, D-CO … 60%

J.D. Hayworth, R-AZ … 60%

15. (Tie) David E. Price, D-NC … 61%

Mike Ross, D-AR … 61%

17. Ken Calvert, R-CA … 63%

18. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, R-CA … 64% (Serves on House Intelligence Committee)

19. (Tie) Patrick J. Tiberi, R-OH … 65% (Serves on House Government Reform Committee)

Michael Honda, D-CA … 65%

Dennis R. Rehberg, R-MT … 65%

22. (Tie) Rick Boucher, D-VA … 66% (Serves on House Commerce Committee)

Roscoe Bartlett, R-MD … 66% (Has a ham, “Pudge” Forrester, as a legislative advisor on his staff)

Tammy Baldwin, D-WI … 66%

25. (Tie) Marion Berry, D-AR … 67%

Zoe Lofgren, D-CA … 67%

27. (Tie) Anna G. Eshoo, D-CA … 68% (Serves on House Commerce AND Intelligence Committees)

John J. Olver, D-MA … 68%

Pete Sessions, R-TX … 68%

30. Jim DeMint, R-SC … 69%

31. (Tie) Mike McIntyre, D-NC … 71%

Donald A. Manzullo, R-IL … 71%

33. Greg Walden, R-OR … 72% (Serves on House Commerce Committee … Also a ham)

34. Michael McNulty, D-NY … 75%

35. John J. Duncan, Jr., R-TN … 79%

36. (Tie) Todd Russell Platts, R-PA … No major opponent in 2002

JoAnn Davis, R-VA … No major opponent in 2002

Prepared By:

DON SCHELLHARDT, ESQUIRE

pioneerpath@hotmail.com

9/20/04