Index of SPPS Budget Discussion http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/spps-posts.html _________________________________________ I suspect I shouldn't be surprised that Tim and I would disagree on this issue.
The private home of an elected official is no more out of bounds for a constituent than a constituent's home is for the elected official. Now that's a black and white statement that fails to consider the appropriateness of timing and behavior in the act of visiting the official. The mere act is perfectly appropriate in light of the official's chosen vocation as a representative of all other residents of his district (I'm purposely widening the arena beyond City Council here). Appropriate times would not be late at night, during mealtimes, etc., and obviously, the personal call should show respect for the official called on. A great deal of insulation stands between elected officials and their constituents. Getting the ear and attention of elected officials who may not want to hear what you have to say can become impossible, what with gatekeepers (aides and secretaries) and such. Frustrations over a refusal to return calls (no matter the reason) or be otherwise unavailable for contact beyond letters are legitimately resolved by personal visits. If nothing else, it may elicit return calls in the future. No citizen is immune from personal visits, and I suggest elected officials are less deserving than most for privacy over and above that accorded any other citizen. The official has the choice of acknowledging or not acknowledging the doorbell or the knock, or to put off the the caller in any way s/he sees fit within legal bounds, or to listen to the issue and concerns of the caller and offer answers in whatever form. All in all, I find it altogether too encouraging for officials to stay out of touch with constituents and their concerns when most citizens have neither the time nor resources to call on their representative(s) during working hours - unlike, of course, professional lobbyists of one sort or another, whose access to those same officials is a given in the business of politics and policymaking. No. The door of elected officials, be it at the office or their houses, should be open - at least to those they represent. Andy Driscoll Crocus Hill ------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 10:42:50 -0600 From: Tim Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This post is intended to reflect my opinions as a citizen and not as the list manager. ---------------------------------------------------- Yesterday, someone in this forum, suggested that they might drop by their council members private home to register disapproval over a city council vote. They made it clear, that they do not know this council member. This caught my eye and I've since had some offline exchanges with several individuals about the ethical considerations or appropriateness of a constituent dropping by an elected officials home unannounced to complain about their job performance. The responses have been mixed, some of those I exchanged emails with thought it was reasonable, others agreed with me, that it might be inappropriate. I'd very much like to hear what others have to say. For me, this is a serious breach of an elected officials privacy. Most of our elected officials provide phone numbers, email addresses, and offices where they can be reached. For constituents to visit their home, without an invitation, feel to me like a serious and unnecessary intrusion into their private lives. Some have pointed out to me, that elected officials regularly knock on other peoples doors while campaigning. However, in my opinion that is something very different. Reaching out to random constituents by door knocking does not feel the same. A constituent can easily turn a politician away or refuse to speak with them, the politician is very unlikely to press an uninterested citizen to speak with them. An angry citizen, on the other hand, has come to the elected officials home with one purpose in mind. The elected official is going to be under some pressure to drop whatever personal business they were engaged in to respond and the constituent is much less likely to take "I'm not interested" as a legitimate response and move on. When elected officials or candidates visit private homes, it is often because this is the most convenient means for that interaction to take place. However, there are many more appropriate and sufficiently convenient opportunities for citizens to contact their elected officials. At the very least, I find the idea of dropping by an elected officials home unannounced to register an opinion to be very disrespectful at the worst an illegitimate invasion of their private and personal lives. I welcome feedback on this and am completely open to changing my position. I'd be curious about how often this kind of thing takes place and how elected officials feel about it. What do you think? Best wishes, Tim Erickson Hamline Midway [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____________________________________________ SPPS Budget Reduction Forum - Feb. 23-27 Co-Sponsored By NEAT: http://www.stpaulneat.org/ _____________________________________________ NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
