The Senator Jeff Sessions Response Challenge
I don't expect a response to every form letter that I send to my reps, but if I go to the trouble of composing a letter, it's nice to know that someone read it. My senators and representative seem to have a different opinion.
Senator Richard Shelby is the most responsive of the lot. He's very good with the email acknowledgement, and he usually follows up with a letter by snail mail. The letter is mostly talking points, but it is on topic. He doesn't always answer. I'm still waiting for a response to my question of whether he is American first and Republican second, or vice versa. All the same, if there are applicable talking points, he does reply.
Representative Jo Bonner has a working auto response on his web site. Once or twice, he even followed up with a detailed response, even if it was nothing but talking points.
Senator Jeff Sessions is in a world unto himself. As best as I can tell, his in box goes straight to the great bit bucket in the sky. Not a single peep from him.
Which leads me to my challenge, what does it take to get a response from a mute representative? I've named the challenge in honor of my own resolute Senator, but I'm interested in hearing what has worked, or not worked, with any other non-responder.
Labels: Congress, Elections, Jeff Sessions
posted by Cheryl @ 1:37 PM
2 Comments:
It's likely that Sessions' methods are to put as little in writing as possible. After all how can he justify most of what he votes for or against? "I'm part of the elite who would put an end to the New Deal so that those of us at the top will have complete control of how our companies are regulated and give us the power to take all tax money and use it for our own purposes. Forget considering that tax money should be redisbursed to society for the good of the masses. Oh, by the way, war is very good for the quarterly reports of my sponsors. Amen."
So I guess I can't blame him for staying mum.
Don't feel alone as silence pervades his reign:
"Last year, the bill stalled in the Senate after Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) put a hold on it, a congressional staffer said. "Some people felt it was an entitlement that shouldn't exist," said the staffer, who was not authorized to discuss the matter on the record.
A Sessions spokeswoman, Emily Mathis, said that the office doesn't confirm when the senator puts a hold on bills. She said no one was available to comment on the bill." As Expiration Nears, a Push for D.C. Tuition Plan
Yep, justifying his decisions doesn't work because it doesn't add up:
"Two senators who normally support the Justice Department, Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said that officials there should not have said the U.S. attorneys were fired for incompetence. Both said that U.S. President George Bush has the right to replace U.S. attorneys and found no evidence that the eight were dismissed for political reasons." Republicans attack Justice Department
So let me get this strait... the judges who were fired should have a letter of recommendation, Bush can fire them for no reason if he wants to even though they were excellent judges, and no way any of it is political (what the article fails to add is that each of these judges had cases where repub donating corporations weren't getting their way)...maybe this is why he stays mute.
Thanks for reminding me of your blog Cheryl, and thanks for the link Dan.
Thanks for the info on Sessions. I'd missed those. I'm just starting to learn about Alabama politicians, but he looks like an unusually bad one.
Post a Comment
<< Home