28
while characteristics of the content are primary in determining the effectiveness of any
given message, legislators have learned to identify a tendency for certain methods of
sending messages to exhibit certain characteristics. In some cases, they even articulate a
theory to explain why a particular method is more likely to exhibit those characteristics.
In regard to e-mail specifically, there are a number of characteristics associated with this
delivery methods that some legislator view as problematic. These include the perception
that compared to other types of constituents messages, e-mail messages are more often
ruder, more impersonal, less thoughtful, and so informal that contact information is more
often left out. A third of responding legislators acknowledge that e-mail from
constituents has at times overwhelmed their office staff. Thus the possibility presented
by some legislators that even thoughtful e-mails can get lost in the barrage of mass
mailings and spam messages they receive. However, despite these drawbacks, a clear
majority of legislators believe that they hear from more constituents because of e-mail,
and only a small minority believes e-mail senders are less committed to issues than other
constituents who write them. In the next section, we will give more attention to the ways
in which legislative offices in Minnesota and Wisconsin handle and respond to
constituent messages.
Procedures Used To Process and Respond to Constituents’ Communications
Some of the survey questions about procedural matters asked about constituent
communication in general and some focused more specifically on e-mail. One of the
general questions focused on who reads the specific communications from constituents.
Most of the legislators said that they read all messages, or at minimum all constituent
Convention