From: Wales.Larrison@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: alt.callahans
Subject: Politics, Opinions and Votes/letter -- continued 
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Oct  1 1992
Date: 03 Nov 92  21:12:14

I write:
>   "A typical Congressperson will pay attention to an individual
>letter or call on a specific topic.  I've been told by staffers
>that a single letter is seen as representative of the opinions of
>100-1000 others who were too apathetic to write or call.
  
Speak-to-Minerals replies:
>Sounds impressive, doesn't it?  At least until you look more
>closely at it. Ask any staffer working for a Congresscritter,
>they'll tell you exactly the same thing, probably in exactly the
>same words.  I suspect it might be part of some sort of standard
>orientation package they get when they come to work for a
>Congresscritter.
   O.K., O.K., I used a gross generalization.  First of all, I put
the range of responses on the value because the number of letters
depends upon the issue.  A couple of years ago I got to know one of
the staffers for my local congressman. (I mentioned I was a part-
time pro-space activist, didn't I?)  I called up and talked with my
local congressman's staffer for space, science & technology.  Over a
couple of phone calls --he doesn't get a lot on those topics)-- I
found out one of the things he does is carry out an ongoing
statistical analysis of the mail (and phone calls and telegrams and
personal visits) the Congressman gets on specific topics.  He
specializes in the space, science & technology area (and a couple of
other areas, since the Congressman's staff isn't that large), so he
sees ALL of the mail/telegrams/ visit reports etc. on that area.
   On a esoteric topic like the "Remote Sensing Act of 1992", the
Congressman may get as little as 1 letter on the topic  (that one
was mine, and I objected to some parts of the act).  In that case, 1
letter is worth, what 150,000 voters opinions?  On another topic
like Social Security Reform, the Congressman may get more than 1,000
individual (non form) letters. There, each letter is representative
of about 150 voters opinions.  The range I gave was what the staffer
I talked to said his on-going statistical analysis shows -- in
general, and dependent upon topic. (I called and reconfirmed #'s)
  
>Of course, if it meant much of anything, you wouldn't get exactly
>the same answer from all the staff members (just like form letters
>to Congresscritters don't count for much).
   On the other hand, I would expect some reasonable statistical
norms for the US population as a whole.
  
>   Let's look more closely at the statement.  First of all, there's
>no need for the order-of-magnitude uncertainty in the statement.
>It's easy to figure out: Divide the number of voters by the number
>of people who write letters. ...
    Agreed, but the number of people who write depends on the issue.
Some issues will attract more attention and more people who see that
issue is important enough to them to write.  Other issues, won't.
  
>... The result is the number of voters whose opinion your letter
>represents  (... form letter impacts deleted to save space ...)
   I agree. And I agree that obvious data basis can be removed, such
as form letters, or where the letter writing population isn't a
"fair" population (e.g., retired folks write more than working
folks). If there are enough data points in the sample (say 100
letters), that can be probably be adjusted for.
  
>Also remember, if YOUR opinion is taken to be representative of
>1000 others, so it the opinion of every other letter writer.
>Putting it in the terms they do is, as best I can tell, simply
>intended to stroke your ego.  Looks like it works, too. ...
   I agree with the first of this -- if you are discussing a general
topic.  The staffers do a statistical analysis in those cases. But
the counter argument is if you don't write and give your opinion,
then you assume your opinion is the same as a statistical sampling,
as given by the letters received at the Congressman's office. Is it?
   But in many cases I am interested in things which are not at the
forefront of public attention,  where such statistical sampling
breaks down to lack of sample size (very few letters). In some cases
I am one of very, very few people who care to speak up on some
issues -- yet the Congressman is supposed to vote on these.  I would
prefer to have my opinion known, rather than him guess at what my
opinion is on those issues.
  
>...So how many people your opinion is considered to represent is
>pretty immaterial.  The question, as with voting, becomes, "How
>many other people are out there writing letters to your
>Congresscritter?"  If that number is small enough, then your letter
>MIGHT carry some weight  ...
    Well, I don't think my opinion is immaterial, and how much
statistical weight it has is dependent upon the issue.  Again, based
upon talking to a staffer, my Congressman gets (on average) about
100 letters total a day.  Some days more, some days less.  As I
mentioned before, there may be as few as 1 or 0 letters on an issue.
On others, up to a thousand or more.  The impact varies.
  
>...On the other hand, the Congresscritter might also decide that a
>commissioned survey will be a better indicator.  If, on the other
>hand, there are enough people out there writing letters, once again
>your own contribution to the overall statistics becomes
>insignificant.
   My Congressman also commissions a few surveys on specific issues,
and uses other surveys performed in his district or area by such as
local newspapers, etc (I saw copies posted in his district office
when I was last there).  However, he can't fund a survey on every
single possible issue.  For most issues, letters and personal
contacts with his constituents must suffice.
 ------------------------------------------------------------------

--- Maximus 2.00
Newsgroups: alt.callahans