Does sending letters to members of Congress
affect legislation significantly?

Definitely yes.

Example 1: PIPA and SOPA. Both
bills were about to pass; voters
got up on their hind legs against
the bills, and both bills went down
in flames.

Why? Because most elections are decided
closer than 60-40. So, for a person in
elected office to totally torque off
10% of his constituents is a good
path to another job. Even 5% of
constituents can be influential.
Actually, even 1% can be influential
because the member of Congress can
easily understand that if torque off
1% here, another 1% there, and have
that 1+% talking to others, the results can really
add up.

That's why members of Congress are good
at smiling, kissing babies, shaking hands,
speaking in generalities with platitudes
and cliches, etc.: Find ways to please
or sooth voters, ways that don't torque off
even 1%.

Members of Congress are good at counting
votes and letters from constituents.
They can also count campaign dollars,
but dollars don't actually vote, and
constituents can and, when motivated, do.

Not everyone in Congress really
'gets it' on these points, but nearly
all members of Congress who have won
more than one election do.

For a little more, just think: Take
just the Verizon data. With that data,
can pick a Verizon customer and know
where they were at each phone call.
So, really, can track their movements.
Also know who they they called. So,
if there are any 'secret romantic
connections' going on (and is there any doubt about that?), then have a good
shot at detecting some of them. Presto:
Blackmail, shakedown, extortion,
recruit as an informer or a mole,
etc. So, now a large fraction of all
the Verizon customers are torqued.
So, in any congressional district
or state with a lot of Verizon
customers, the relevant member of
Congress needs to be quite concerned.

Combine data such as that from Verizon
with IRS
data and actions, and have more
opportunities for blackmail,
shakedown. Could throttle opposing
political efforts, not that anyone
in the Cincinnati office of the IRS
would ever actually try such a thing.

Gee, I omitted banking records!
So, some big shot is paying
the condo fees for his mistress;
can see that in his financial records,
especially if he bought a new BMW
for his mistress for over $10,000
(is there any other kind?).
Then combine that data with
phone data and location data
and show that he was often in the
condo or calling the phone of
the mistress. Now, have got the
guy; have him on a short leash.
So, back to the movie, 'Godfather
II' where the Senator suddenly
became a really big supporter
of the Corleone family. It's called
blackmail, and it's one of the
oldest professions. That Verizon
data is a wide open, engraved
invitation to massive blackmail.
Did Nixon ever consider using
IRS data? Hmm ....

Really, that Verizon data is a wide open,
engraved invitation to a dirty
dictatorship.

But Verizon could use that data for
such dirty stuff now?

Yes, and about the second time they
tried, the effort would become public
and their brand name would be dirt
and their business dead. Also
Verizon doesn't connect closely
with the IRS, FBI, INS, DHS,
etc. but the NSA can.

One of the best parts of the US
is our Constitution. So, a big
part of protecting the US is
protecting the Constitution.
So, 'protecting the US' while
trashing the Constitution is
destroying the US, not protecting
it.

Yes, maybe trashing the Constitution
would make it easier to catch
loser, wacko, nutjobs like the
Boston bombers, but: (1) As we
know, the NSA, CIA, DHS, INS,
FBI, and the Boston police didn't catch the Boston
loser, wacko, nutjobs even though
Russia had told us that they were
dangerous wackos. (2) NSA did
trash the Constitution. So,
the NSA is good at trashing the
Constitution but not so good at helping
catch loser, wacko, dangerous nutjobs,
even when given good hints that
they are dangerous nutjobs.

The job of the NSA, CIA, DHS, FBI,
INS, etc. is both (1) protect the
Constitution and (2) catch the bad
guys. Both. Trashing the Constitution
destroys much of the US and, thus,
necessarily cannot be part of
protecting the US.

Yes, yes, yes, we know: The NSA
cooked up an excuse:

First they
just collect all that data,
e.g., all the Verizon data,
all the data through that AT&T
building in San Francisco, all
current Internet e-mail data,
etc. So, their excuse is that
just collecting that data does
not hurt anyone because they
have yet to look at that data
or have yet to use that data to
look at any individual. Or maybe
for the e-mail data they
look only at the header lines.
Sure that's all they do! Trust
them on that!

Second they argue that they only
look at that data for one individual
at a time given a good national
security reason to look at that
individual. And then they only
use data that crossed a US
border. Yup, Virginia, you
can be sure; you can trust
your Federal Government!

Third, they claim that, thus, their
actions don't use data
that was only 'domestic',
don't involve just any
US citizens, and, thus, don't
violate the
Constitution. That is,
they have this huge box
of chocolates, but they
never open the box.

Right, that's what they
claim. And, right again, they would
never let that data, that they
are keeping essentially forever in Utah,
be used for anything else.
Right, and this car was driven
only by a little old lady
and only to church on Sundays,
and trust me on this.

To heck with the lame, contrived, tricky,
delicate excuses: The NSA is not
supposed to be collecting data that is
only within the US and is not supposed to be
collecting data on ordinary US citizens
and certainly not on all or nearly
all US citizens. Right, anyone
could use such an excuse:
"I confess; I stole the book;
but that's okay because I
haven't yet read it! And, yes,
that prime rib roast, I stole
that too, but that's okay, too,
because I haven't yet eaten it!".
So, the NSA trashed the Constitution.

The US government works for
us, the US citizens; we don't work
for them; we are the ones to
be trusted, not them;
we are the ones presumed innocent
until proven guilty, not them.

Their job is to protect us and
the Constitution, not to
monitor and control us and
trash the Constitution.

Yes, if we get the NSA, CIA,
DHS, FBI, INS, etc. back
within the law and back to
respecting the Constitution,
then the next pressure cooker
that goes "Boom" in a crowded
place will raise the question
of, can we afford the Constitution?
The answer is simple: (1) We need
the Constitution; trashing the
Constitution trashes much of our
country and, thus, necessarily
does not protect it. (2) If we
have too many bad guys, then we need
better police work, not a weaker
Constitution. (3) Police work
is not perfect, and our security
cannot be perfect.

For one more, the main issues in
US national security are not
loser, wacko, nutjobs with
backpacks with pressure cookers.
Indeed, now wackos hijacking
airplanes are no longer a main
issue in US national security.
Instead the main issues, for which
we need the NSA, CIA, FBI, etc.
are: (1) Actions by nation
states, e.g., China hacking the
Internet in the US. China
stealing US military secrets.
Pakistan building more nuclear
weapons. Iran going nuclear. (2) Actions by
small groups, terrorists, e.g.,
Al Qaeda, toward a serious
WMD deployed in the US, e.g., a
nuclear fission explosion
in the hold of a ship in
a major US port.

At (1) and (2), we are pretty
good: NSA's SIGINT and the
CIA's HUMINT, etc. can be quite
good well within the Constitution.
For nuclear fission devices, must
first get the materials, and that's
still not so easy. We've been
working hard for decades locking
down the materials.

We need to protect the US and
the Constitution, not try to protect
the US and trash the Constitution.

So, the Constitution is under attack,
and we have to push back and protect
and defend the Constitution. Could
this be true? Actually, not only true
but expected:

"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."