>>I've been in touch with my Congressman <snip>
>> I found that>Congressional staffs are aware there's a problem because so
>many bozos >send
>>blanket mail to everyone in Congress that their mail system has been set to
>>simply filter (sometimes with an explanation) mail from any host/domain not
>>identifiable as from the Congressperson's home district. >
>>/s Murphy A. Sewall <[log in to unmask]>      (860) 486-2489 voice
>------------------
>I know this doesn't really relate to this list, but I find this practice
>*very* disturbing.   It is often the case that an MC from another state is
>sponsoring/supporting an important bill which will potentially affect all
>citizens, not just the ones in her/his own district.  That is the nature of
>a *federal* government!  Why should I be barred from giving my input (via
>e-amil or any other means) about such measure just because I don't happen to
>be in the position to reassure or defeat their re-election?  I'm still
>affected by the outcome!  Please, please, pass this message on to your
>representatives, since it appears that I would not be able to do so!
>
>Lynn Richardson, PhD (in political science!)
>
>
>  ***************************************************************************
>  Lynn M. Richardson
>[log in to unmask]
>
>  GAC Genealogical and Research Services
>  Co-owner Sibernet-L
>
>
>
>****************************************************************************
>******
-------------------------------
From Dr. Botello:
        You are absolutely correct.  Many admirable Americans are fighting
for causes that affect all or a significant number of states and territories
of the United States, and the foreign affairs of the nation.  A
congressperson from Wyoming or Maine can be sitting in anyone of several
relevant committees, and that official should be held to answer to all
Americans, not just the ones in his home district, if his or her vote is
going to affect us all.
        To limit our participation in our democratic form of government via
the Internet, as Mr. Sewall proposes is not only censorship, but oppressive.