15. Letters to Elected Officials

``TO SIN BY SILENCE WHEN THEY SHOULD PROTEST MAKES COWARDS OUT OF MEN.''
Abraham LincolnCoalition of NJ Sportsmen, July 1991.

	The section on letters is one of the longest in the book. Why?
Because writing to legislators and other public officials is the
single most effective way for a regular person to influence the
political process. In preserving Second Amendment rights, nothing is
more important than exercising the First Amendment right to write
letters. For ease of reading, we refer to ``legislators'' in this
chapter, but the suggestions are equally applicable to any public
official

Style and Mechanics

	Include your return address, so the elected official can recognize
that you're from her district, and can send you a reply.

	If know or have met the legislator, and feel it is appropriate to
address him/her with a first name, do so. (A familiar salutation will
get more attention from the staffer, but will annoy the legislator if
you're never really met him.) If you're not in a position to write
``Dear Pat,'' then use either of the following salutations for Senators:

		Dear Senator

Dear Senator Grobnowski

The salutations for a member of the House of Representatives can be
any of the following:

		Dear Representative Zortch

		Dear Representative

		Dear Congressman

		Dear Congresswoman

		Dear Congressman Fudpucker

		Dear Congresswoman Zortch

		Dear Mr. Fudpucker

Use the same principles for other officials. ``Dear Governor'' and ``Dear
Governor Jameson'' are both fine; ``Dear Backstabbing Liar'' isn't.

	Keep the letter to one page or less. It's much more effective to
use your time to write several short letters instead of one long tome.

	If you'd like to convey more information than can fit on one page,
send along copies of supportive printed materials, such as newspaper
and magazine articles, or other studies.

	Type the letter if you can; otherwise write neatly.

	If you have personal or business stationary, use it.

	If you know the fax number for the office you're writing to, send
a fax, since faxes (being rarer than letters) get noticed.

	When you sign the letter, don't bother to include your affiliation
with a pro-rights organization (unless you're writing on behalf of the
organization). Your legislator already knows what the NRA thinks about
the bill, so adding ``NRA Life Member'' to your signature block doesn't
tell the legislator anything new. Gun rights groups get their
influence from citizen activists, not the other way around.

	In contrast, signing something about your role in the community
(college student, bus driver, nurse, or the like), may help the
legislator learn about the broad cross-section of the community that
is pro-rights.

	Originality is essential. You don't have to go do your own
statistical analysis of the effectiveness of state waiting period
laws. But you do have to say things in your own words. Simply mouthing
the slogans from pro-gun sources shows that you didn't care enough to
think up your own language. Since you appear less committed, your
letter will be less influential.

	If you feel shy because you may not write as smoothly as does
someone who writes for a gun magazine, don't worry. Legislators aren't
looking for superior rhetoric and linguistic excellence. They just
want to know that you care.

	Originality is also essential in the physical letter. Don't even
think of writing one letter, and sending photocopies to several
elected officials. If the issue isn't important enough to you to send
an original copy, the legislator won't worry much about pleasing you
with his vote.

	Of course you can use your word processor to send various original
print-outs of the same text to several legislators. As far as the
legislators can tell, they're getting an original.

	You can save time by keeping a letter-writing file containing the
addresses of officials you write to. Chapter 16 of this book contains
addresses for many federal officials, and includes space for you to
pencil in the addresses of everyone you write to.

	Encouraging other pro-gun people to write is an excellent idea.
Gun clubs can have ``letter parties'' at their monthly meetings. Bring a
supply of paper, envelopes, and pens, and let the club know about
what's going on in the legislature. Fifteen minutes later, all 25
members have written letters that are ready to be stamped and mailed.

When

	The time to write a letter is whenever a gun bill is being
considered by a legislative body. Over the course of a typical year,
everyone ought to write at least two letters each to her US
Representative, two Senators, President, Governor, and state
legislators. Some hardworking folks will write more often, and as long
as they don't write to the same official more than once every month or
two, every extra letter helps.

	The time to violate the one letter/month letter limit is for the
follow-up letters described below.

Who

	The most important people to mail to are people whose elections
you vote in. A Congressman from California doesn't care a lot about
what people in West Virginia think. So when you write people whose
election doesn't depend on your vote, focus on people who might want
to stay on your good side anyway. The US Representative who represents
a district on the other side of your state may care about you if he's
thinking of running statewide for Senator or Governor.

	Also, if a Congressperson has taken a leadership role on
pro-rights issues, send him or her a thank-you no matter where you
live. The Congressperson will like the idea of becoming a
nationally-known leader.

Substance

	Be polite. Honey catches more flies than vinegar.

	A letter should be about one particular issue or bill, which the
letter should identify right away. If you know the bill number,
mention it. For example: ``I am writing to let you know of my
opposition the proposal to outlaw many semiautomatic firearms, Senate
Bill 666.''

	Offer reasons why your action would be a good idea: ``The
preemption bill would make gun laws uniform throughout the state.
Everyone will have an easier time obeying one consistent set of laws,
instead of hodgepodge of city and county laws.''

	Mention anything about your background that would be especially
interesting to the official. If you are affiliated with law
enforcement (e.g., police officer, former prosecutor), say so. Same if
you're a kid. (Only people who are presently children should say so;
being a former child doesn't count.)

	It seems counterintuitive that being under the voting age would
make a legislator more interested in your letter, but it's true. First
of all, the legislator expects you to become a voter one day. Second,
children and teenagers are less involved than are adults in political
issues, so the fact that you are involved stands out all the more.
Most importantly, children and teenagers get less mail than adults do,
and tend to treat the mail they do get as more significant. Thus, the
legislator thinks that his letter to a young person may be brought to
a history or civics class for discussion, or at the very least talked
about within the young person's family.

	If you have voted for the elected official before, or contributed
to her campaign, or are an active member of her political party, let
her know. Of course don't make something up.

	If you are familiar with any of the legislator's past acts or
words on the gun issue, weave them into the letter. For example,
``During your campaign, you stated at a speech at South Bonaparte High
School that you were against gun control. I hope you will be able to
maintain the pro-rights commitment you made then by voting against the
waiting period bill.'' Or: ``Your vote several months ago in favor of
the ban on semiautomatic firearms was very disappointing. Too many of
our American rights have already been eroded. I hope you will be able
to protect what's left of the right to bear arms, and vote against the
waiting period bill.''

	Personalize the letter as much as you can. If you met the
legislator ten weeks ago at a public event, say so. It's okay if all
the meeting amounted to was you shaking his hand and saying ``I'm John
Josephson,'' and all he said was ``Nice to meet you.''

	The prior meeting need not have had any policy discussion to be
worth mentioning in your letter: ``It was good to say hello to you last
month at the county frog-jumping contest. I'd like to let you know
about my concern regarding the upcoming vote on S. 228, the handgun
waiting period bill.''

	Likewise, if you've met or talked with a staffer, say so: ``I
called your office last May to discuss the gun issue, and had the
pleasure of talking with your assistant Bob Anderson.'' And if the
staffer was pleasant or helpful, say so.

Things not to do

	Getting hysterical about the issue or making excessive assertions
doesn't work. ``If the gun registration bill is enacted this year, all
guns will be confiscated next year, and the Communists will take over
the year after that'' will not convince anyone.

	Bragging about how important or influential you are will not be
persuasive. If you're influential, use your influence to convince
other folks to write to the legislator.

Follow-through

	Less than one percent of people who write to Congress write a
response to their Congressperson's reply letter. Moreover, big
lobbying organizations have no ability to generate reply letters, so
legislators who read a reply know that you are strongly motivated.
Accordingly, follow-up letters get noticed by the Congressional staff.
And since your follow-up letter probably can't be replied to simply
with a form letter, the mail staffer may have to write an individual
reply, which will of course engage his attention all the more.

Follow-up to the Evasive Reply

	Your follow-up letter needs to be carefully keyed to the
legislator's reply. Be on the lookout for replies that were designed
to give the impression that the legislator is on your side, but
actually made no commitment. Phrases such as ``I am happy to let you
know that hearings on this issue have been scheduled,'' ``Many people
share your concern,'' ``I will keep your views in mind when the bill
comes for a vote,'' or ``I am following this legislation carefully,'' do
not, in themselves, indicate anything about the legislator's actual
view or intended actions.

	If the legislator sent you an evasive reply, write back and
politely ask for some substance: ``Thank you for replying my recent
letter about semiautomatic prohibition. Unfortunately, the reply
didn't answer the most important question: do you support or oppose
the prohibition?'' (From here, you can proceed as usual, offering an
argument or two in favor of the pro-rights position.)

Follow-up to the Negative Reply

	Another type of letter you may get, rather than being evasive, may
forthrightly explain that the legislator disagrees with you. In this
case, write back, and refute his arguments. However much the stupidity
or prejudice displayed by the letter may anger you, don't letter your
anger show through in your reply. Remain polite.

	Refuting the legislator's arguments can be difficult sometimes,
because the legislator is likely getting his ``facts'' from the anti-gun
lobby, and the facts may have no connection to reality. For example,
if he tells you that ``semi-automatics are 20 times more likely to be
used in a crime than other guns,'' you may have trouble refuting the
claim, unless you are happen to know that the ``20 times'' figure is a
distortion of statistics about firearms traces analyzed by Cox
newspapers. (For the truth about the ``20 times'' statistic, see The
``Assault Weapon'' Panic, Issue Paper, discussed in chapter 1.)

	So don't worry about refuting every single sentence, if you don't
have the facts at hand. Limit your reply to pointing out errors by the
legislator for which you do have the facts available.

	If any new facts have come to light about the issue, bring them up
in the letter, to offer the legislator a chance to reconsider.

	Include in the follow-up letter a question or two, designed to
force a response from the legislator.

	In your reply, recognize that the legislator was at least honest
enough to tell you how he feels. Here's a sample follow-up.

Thank you for answering my recent letter about semiautomatic
prohibition. I appreciate your honesty in stating that you would
support a gun ban. I think however, that your position may be based on
some mistaken facts.

For example, your letter claimed ``There is no reason why anyone needs
a machine gun in today's society.'' Actually, the semiautomatic
prohibition has nothing to do with machine guns. While some
semiautomatics look like machine guns, they do not fire like them. A
semiautomatic fires only one bullet at a time-- just like every other
gun. Would you agree that gun laws should be based on how guns
actually function, and not how they look?

Two weeks ago, the Hometown Gazette ran a story detailing how
so-called ``assault weapons'' are never used in crime. A copy of the
story is enclosed. In light of the new information, perhaps you would
want to re-evaluate your position regarding these guns.

Finally, I would like to point out that semi-automatics are very good
guns for home defense. Because the operation of the semi-automatic
action diverts recoil energy away from the shooter, the gun is easier
to fire accurately, and there is less chance of a stray shot. Were you
aware that semiautomatics are therefore actually safer for
self-defense than other guns?

Follow-up to the Positive Reply

	What would you think of a parents who scolded their children when
they did something bad, but ignored them when they did something good?
Well that's how most Americans treat their legislators. No wonder
things are such a mess!

	If you've written your legislator to ask to take a pro-rights
stand, and he writes back to say he will, by all means send him a
thank you letter. Supply some positive reinforcement.

	Consider making photocopies of the legislator's positive letter,
and giving them to your pro-rights friends. And when you write to
thank the legislator, tell him about how you're circulating his
letter. In effect, you've multiplied his favorable interaction with
one constituent into favorable interactions with a dozen constituents.

	In your thank you letter, mention any new facts that validate the
legislator's pro-rights stance. Send a copy of a recent editorial or
article or letter-to-the-editor that supports the pro-rights position.

	And finally, your reply can gently urge the legislator to take a
more active role on the issue--such as by cosponsoring a good bill, or
speaking up on the floor during debate.

	A sample thank you:

Thank you for responding to my letter from last month, and letting me
know that you support the firearms preemption bill. You are absolutely
right that things will be easier on the police and on ordinary folks
if there is one consistent set of gun laws that applies throughout the
state.

Enclosed is a letter to the editor from the South Wasquatch Herald.
The writer explains how she was arrested for carrying a firearm for
protection in East Wasquatch, even though carrying for protection is
legal in her hometown of South Wasquatch. The letter is just one more
example of why our state needs to have consistent, uniform laws.

In addition to voting for the preemption bill, would you consider
adding your name to the list of cosponsors? It's going to be a tough
fight to get the bill enacted, and any support you could offer would
be very helpful.

Telegrams and Mailgrams

	Generally speaking, mailgrams are better than telegrams, because
mailgrams contain up to a hundred words, while telegrams are much
shorter.

	The telegram's sole advantage is that it will arrive within four
hours, while a mailgram will arrive early in the morning the day after
it is sent.

	Mailgrams and telegrams are best when they are not a substitute
for a personal letter, but a supplement to it--as a last minute chance
to reemphasize your views.

	And mailgrams/telegrams do have some value for legislators who
still haven't made up their mind at the last minute. As the legislator
leaves his office to go to the floor and vote, an aide may tell him
``We got 20 mailgrams against the bill this morning.''

Who reads the letters?

	A major federal official probably won't read your particular
letter. But he might. President Johnson would often walk across the
street from the White House to the Executive Office Building and
personally sample some random letters from citizens. President
Johnson, like almost every other elected official, cared a lot about
what people thought of him. And he knew that anyone who cared enough
to write a letter probably had a pretty strong opinion.

	While most Congresspeople don't have time to read every letter,
they do take their mail seriously. Most Congresspeople believe that
answering letters promptly does more to help their re-election than
almost any amount of paid advertising. Letter-writers are people who
care about Congress, and are hence likely to vote, and to influence
how their friends and family vote.

	Congresspeople like getting mail from home so much that if it
falls in volume, they get nervous. The issue questionnaires that some
Congresspeople send out are intended in part to stimulate mail.

	Most state legislators or city councilpersons read everything sent
to them. And no matter what, the letter will almost certainly be read
by a staff member for the legislator.

	These staffers are particularly important people to influence.
Usually they are young, well-educated people who are doing legislative
mail (and many other staff jobs) for a few years or a few months. Some
of them go into politics later, and nearly all of them end up having a
reasonably large influence on public policy somehow.

	For almost all of them, their job doing letters is the first time
that they've worked full-time inside government. They're just learning
the ins and outs of a world that's always interested them. They're
impressionable, and they beginning to live in a world where big
government is regarded more highly than folks in the rest of the
country regard it.

	At this impressionable time, the staffers are forming their views
on issues which they may not have thought about much until then. Gun
control will likely be one. When you send letters that are polite and
neat and easy to read, and when you use the letters to bring up
convincing arguments, the staffers are paying attention.

	If you keep up with writing letters several times a year, it's
likely that you'll end up provoking some positive thought in a staffer
one day. Although you'll never see the exact result of your work,
you'll be doing a world of good.

	And of course even the staffers who are jaded and don't care still
count the mail, and all legislators still pay close attention to the
mail count.

	Even if your legislator is already solidly pro-rights, letters
still help. She can use the letters to help influence her colleagues.
For example, if her mail tells her that a proposed federal ban on
semiautomatics would harm the many target competition clubs in her
district, she can use the fact to urge her fellow representatives to
oppose the ban.

	Does mail make a difference? Colorado in early 1989 was ready to
outlaw all semiautomatic firearms using a detachable magazine. Popular
Governor Roy Romer had said so. The major chiefs of police agreed. The
President of the State Senate gave the gun ban a special legislative
preference. When concerned gun owners tried to hire a professional
lobbyist, no-one would accept their money. The lobbyists didn't want
to waste time trying to stop a bill that was certain to pass.

	A few weeks later, gun prohibition was defeated by a 5-4 vote in
the first committee to consider it. Why? Thousands of Colorado
gun-owners had written letters to state legislators.

	The same story is repeated every legislative season. In 1991,
Maryland's anti-gun Governor William Donald Schaefer suffered a
humiliating defeat when the Maryland Senate responded to the tens of
thousands of Marylanders who sent letters to the Capitol, and rejected
Schaefer's ban on semiautomatics.

	The pen really is mightier than the sword--or at least mightier
than William Donald Schaefer's mouth.