Congressional Management Foundation | Communicating with Congress: How Capitol Hill is Coping with the Surge in Citizen Advocacy

selected charts

Figure 2. Contacting Politicians
Figure 3. Postal and E-mail Communications to Capitol Hill: 1995 - 2004
Figure 6. Effects of the Internet on Congress
Figure 7. Influence of Individual Communications
Figure 15. Offices Responding to E-mail with E-mail
Figure 16. Influence of Individual Postal Letters
Figure 17. Office Response Policies and Practices
Figure 18. Influence on Member Decision-Making
Figure 19. Staff Views on Form Communications
Figure 21. What Staff Want in Constituent Communications

figure 2. contacting politicians

"In the past year, have you...?"
(click image to enlarge)

This chart is based on data provided by the Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet (IPDI) at the George Washington University. IPDI found that citizens who write or call their elected officials are far more involved than the general public in influencing public policy in other ways. They are about six times more likely than the general public to belong to a group trying to influence public policy or to attend a political rally, speech or protest. They are three times more likely to write an article for a magazine or newspaper, and four times more likely to work for a political party.

figure 3. postal and e-mail communications to capitol hill: 1995-2004

(click image to enlarge)

Since the Internet was introduced to Capitol Hill in 1995, total communications received by Congress have increased significantly. As this chart shows, total postal mail and e-mail to Capitol Hill have increased from approximately 50 million in 1995 to 200 million in 2004, nearly a 300% increase. These data represent all incoming e-mail and postal communications to the House and Senate, not only communications from constituents to their elected representatives. However, most offices have experienced comparable growth in constituent communications.

(House e-mail and postal mail data provided by the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives. Senate e-mail data provided by the Senate Sergeant at Arms. Senate postal mail data provided by the Office of the Senate Postmaster. These volumes do not include faxes or phone calls, which cannot be measured in aggregate. E-mail data prior to 1998 in the House and 1999 in the Senate was not available and is only an estimate.)

figure 6. effects of the internet on congress

“Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree that e-mail and the Internet have…”
(click image to enlarge)

The Internet has had both positive and negative effects on Congress and public policy. A large majority of congressional staff surveyed agree that e-mail and the Internet have increased the number of constituents who communicate with congressional offices and made it easier for constituents to become involved in the public policy process. A majority of 55% also believe that the Internet has increased public understanding of what goes on in Washington. However, 64% of staff surveyed also believe that e-mail and the Internet have reduced the quality of constituents’ messages to congressional offices.

figure 7. influence of individual communications

figure 15. offices responding to e-mail with e-mail

“How much of the constituent e-mail you receive is responded to with an e-mail message from your office?”
(click image to enlarge)

Many congressional offices are not embracing IT tools to help them address the increase in constituent communications. In the Senate, 38% of surveyed offices respond to all incoming e-mail from constituents with an e-mail response; in the House, only 17% respond to all constituent e-mail with e-mail. Nearly 40% of House offices and one-quarter of all Senate offices surveyed still respond to constituent e-mail with a postal letter response.

figure 16. influence of individual postal letters

(click image to enlarge)

This chart compares the impact of identical form postal mail with that of individualized postal mail. The differences between the two are significant. In cases where the Member/Senator has not reached a firm decision on an issue, 44% of staff surveyed said that individualized postal communications have "a lot" of influence, compared to only 3% for identical form communications. This preference for individualized communications over form communications was a theme that staff repeatedly emphasized throughout our research, some quite passionately. The chart below shows a complete breakdown of the different types of campaigns and the levels of influence they have on undecided Members of Congress.

figure 17. office response policies and practices

"How does your office process the following constituent communications when they agree with your Member's/Senator's position?" (Survey of House correspondence staff and Senate Office Managers)
(click image to enlarge)

figure 18. influences on member decision-making

"If your Member/Senator has not already arrived at a firm decision on an issue, how much influence might the following advocacy strategies directed to the Washington office have on his/her decision?"
(click image to enlarge)

Staff report that personal interactions between Members and their constituents - whether through in-person visits or personalized postal or e-mail messages - have far more impact on Members' decision-making processes than do identical form communications or visits from lobbyists.

figure 19. staff views on form communications

"Most identical form communications campaigns are sent without the constituent's knowledge or approval."
(click image to enlarge)

Congressional staff often seriously doubt that identical form communications are actually sent by constituents. Instead, the prevalent belief expressed in our surveys, interviews and focus groups is that grassroots organizations are creating these communications from membership lists, rather than through direct constituent action.

figure 21. what staff want in constituent communications

"How helpful is it for messages from constituents to include the following?”
(click image to enlarge)

The more information constituents provide in their communications, the easier it is for congressional offices to serve their constituents effectively. According to staff, it is “very helpful” or “helpful” for constituents to provide such details as reference to specific legislation and the bill number and title that their communication addresses. Additionally, staff would like to see more detail about how the issue affects individual constituents, including their reasons for supporting a bill or issue, the constituent’s perspective on how the bill would affect his or her district or state, and even a personal story related to the bill or issue.

CwC: How Capitol Hill is Coping with the Surge in Citizen Advocacy

Read the full report: pdf CWC_CapitolHillCoping (754 KB)

46 pages

**About the Communicating with Congress Project**

Project Overview - In 2001, CMF began work on this project to improve communications between citizens and Members of Congress.

How Capitol Hill is Coping with the Surge in Citizen Advocacy - A report on congressional staffs' views of constituent communications based on focus groups, interviews, and surveys of 350 House and Senate Staff in 200 offices.

Conference on Constituent Communications: Dispelling Myths and Discussing Solutions - A forum in which more than 200 experts and stakeholders from both sides came together to share perspectives and discuss possible solutions.

How the Internet Has Changed Citizen Engagement - A report on citizens' views on communicating with Congress based on nationwide telephone and online surveys of citizens.

Recommendations for Improving the Democratic Dialogue - This report is the culmination of CMF's nine years of research, outreach, and study, with recommendations for all stakeholders on how to improve communication between citizens and Congress.

Navigating the Rising Tide of Grassroots Advocacy - CMF offers educational presentations for grassroots/advocacy organizations on the topic of how to effectively communicate with Congress.