10:06 AM | Posted in ,
Given the new found promptness with which Gary Gross received access to Michele Bachmann and her staff this week, I decided to take advantage and send off a few emails. Within each email I asked about various issues and concerns I have about my representation in Congress. We will have to see if this new found promptness is merely a product of a supporter gaining access while the rest of us are forced to languish without representation or if we are heralding a new day in which questions and concerns are answered in a quick and comprehensive manner.

Mr. Miller,

Thank You for your quick response to the request by Mr. Gary Gross for the O’Reilly Factor video. It is encouraging to me to see how promptly you were able to get back to him. Given this new promptness, I was wondering if you might answer a few questions for me.

To my knowledge, Mrs. Bachmann has yet to hold an open public forum to discuss any number of legislative issues. Is there a reason for this? Some months ago Mrs. Bachmann expressed her lack of access to the public due to the five day work week established by the leadership. Yet, in the months since then there have been many legislative breaks as well as a reduction to a four day work week and we have still not seen Mrs. Bachmann at any public forums within the district. When might we expect her to hold such an event? Could you provide me with a schedule of any and all future events at which Mrs. Bachmann will be appearing?

Some in her district, including myself, are concerned about the lack of direct access to Mrs. Bachmann.

Thank You,

'Political Muse'


Mr. Miller,

Earlier this month, Mrs. Bachmann joined only 22 of her colleagues in the House of Representatives to vote against H.R. 4848 which extended the 1996 law creating a certain amount of mental health parity.

Could you provide me with a statement from Mrs. Bachmann on why she chose to vote against mental health parity? Does she support the measure put forward by Republican Congressman Jim Ramstad on mental health parity?

Thank You,

'Political Muse'


Mr. Miller,

In January, Mrs. Bachmann sent out a press release about her participation in the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation’s Walk to Cure Diabetes. While I commend Mrs. Bachmann for her participation in such an event, she doesn’t appear to be very supportive of the goals set out by this organization.

For example, one of the organizations goals is increased funding for stem cell research. She voted against H.R. 3 (The Stem Cell Enhancement Act of 2007). How does Mrs. Bachmann justify participating in an organization whose goals for a cure run counter to her beliefs?

Also, this organization has been advocating for another bill, HR 2762, which reauthorizes special diabetes programs for Indians. Yet, Mrs. Bachmann has not signed on to this legislation even though it currently has large bipartisan support from 238 other representatives. Will Mrs. Bachmann be signing on to this bill?

Thank You,

'Political Muse'


Mr. Miller,

I am wondering if you could provide me with a statement or reaction from Mrs. Bachmann on a recent study done in California on the subject of immigration and criminal activity. The study found that immigrants were far less likely to be involved in criminal activity than the citizen population. In fact, the study looked at a subsection of those immigrants that are most likely to be “illegal” immigrants and found that even they were far less likely to involved in criminal activity.

From the article:

“Among men 18 to 40, the population most likely to be in institutions because of criminal activity, the report found that in California, U.S.-born men were institutionalized 10 times more often than foreign-born men (4.2 percent vs. 0.42 percent).

Among other findings in the report, non-citizen men from Mexico 18 to 40 -- a group disproportionately likely to have entered the United States illegally -- are more than eight times less likely than U.S.-born men in the same age group to be in a correctional institution (0.48 percent vs. 4.2 percent).”

I would be interested in what Mrs. Bachmann thinks of this particular study.

Thank You,

'Political Muse'


Mr. Miller,

During her appearance on the O’Reilly Factor, Mrs. Bachmann brought up an amendment that failed in the Minnesota legislature that would have provided an English Only drivers exam.

How does Mrs. Bachmann feel that this would have prevented the incident in Cottonwood, Minnesota? If we have an English Only exam, what is to happen to the large population of legal immigrants who have yet to learn the English language but are in need of a driver’s license? It seems to me that this is punishing an entire population of immigrants for the crimes of a few illegal immigrants. How would Mrs. Bachmann respond?

I would like to hear more from Mrs. Bachmann about how instituting an English Only provision will solve the problem of illegal immigration.

Thank You,

'Political Muse'


I encourage everyone in the district to email Mr. Stephen Miller:

Stephen.Miller@mail.house.gov

Take advantage of this new found access to the offices of Michele Bachmann. Please be sure to keep things respectful so that we can see if this access is genuine or if the rest of us will continue to be the shunned constituents of the 6th Congressional District. If you do get a response, please email me at (political_muse@hotmail.com) with the text of your message, the text of the message you received, and how long it took for you to get your responce. Also, let me know if you sent something but received nothing and how long it has been since you sent your message.

Cross Posted on Dump Bachmann
Category: ,
��

Comments

3 responses to "Selective Constituent Services..."

  1. Gary Gross On March 1, 2008 at 10:48 AM

    It might help if you didn't bombard them with a flurry of emails. You'll get better results if you're more courteous.

     
  2. lloydletta On March 1, 2008 at 1:30 PM

    The emails were all courteous. It's clear Miller responds to you, Gary - but you are an unabashed supporter of Michele Bachmann. The question is whether Miller will respond to a constituent who questions Michele Bachmann on issues.

     
  3. Gary Gross On March 1, 2008 at 2:17 PM

    The content of the emails was courteous, Eva, but the sending of multiple emails in such a short time wasn't.