Sandbox

Hi All,

Does anyone out there know of an 'email a politician' component?
We have forms-to-email and can use this, but it would be ggreat to show the target number of emails required and the count so far.

Like http://www.getup.org.au/campaign.asp?campaign_id=9 or
http://www.rightsatwork.com.au/campaigns/takeastand (which admittedly is in flash).

thx

Hi Dex,

What you really need is something that isn't provided necessarily by a CMS, but rather by an email blast system or a CRM (constituent relationship management system).  There's a great variety of products that will do this in the US, two of which we recommend are CiviCRM (a Joomla component now, but really is like a stand-alone CRM, http://www.openngo.org) and Democracy in Action (http://www.democracyaction.org).

What exactly are you trying to do?  Just a count?  Do you want to make it easy for people to create multiple forms?

-Ryan

Ryan

Thank you very much for your kind response. I am looking at civiCRM now.

I just want to show the site visitor a target number of emails and the count of emails sent to date on a particular issue (.i.e. for a particular instance of a form-to-email form)

I might just pop in a little bit of code to do this myself, if I get brave. Perhaps in setting up the form, it would just need extra fields to nominate an issue filename and a target count, which I would then store along with a count-to-date.

dex

Dex,

I really like your idea.  I've seen simple write to your legislators before, but not one that has a target and a counter for the constituents to make sure they write x number of emails to their legislator.

The systems that are out there will allow you to do some good stuff, like pre-populate the email forms so that individuals will have a base form letter to start from, and then they can write more if they want, and include their personal information to show validity.  What we've found in the US Congress is that officials rarely take much weight in form letters, but much more weight in individual letters that are written in a personal voice by constituents.  I'd say you take that route, move away from form letters, but keep the counter.

One other thing to think about is how you're going to store the email data on the officials you're targeting.  Do you want to let people find out who their own representative is, and create the email address themselves, or are you planning to have the admin target who they want to focus all their emails?

We might be able to help you out with the code if you like.  Would be a cool component to have in our toolbelt.

Best,
Ryan

Hey Ryan

Yeah - I think an achievable target really gets people going. Well it works on me anyway!

And yes, just as you say, a combination of 'ideas paragaphs' (for people not familiar enough with the issues) and personal comment would be the go. I agree that standard letters will not be read, altho a large volume of them can't be ignored.

I'd be thrilled if you could help us out with this. I can imagine many other orgs getting some mileage out of it.

This is a partiularly good example: http://www.getup.org.au/campaign.asp?campaign_id=12. We could use a dropdown box of politiicians relevant to the issue/the constituent's location, but then we would need to store their email addresses somewhere - we have all the email addresses.

cheers
dex

Dex,

Great to hear, good ideas.  I think that we'd need something in the administrator that would allow groups to store the contact data of the politicians it wants to target.  We could essentially make an address book of all the politicians that a campaign would want to track, and then build that into the administrator.  Then, for each "campaign", you'd be able to choose who you'd want to put in that drop down list.  Even better, in the US, you could put in your zip code, and it would tell you who your congressman is, and prepare the email form for you immediately (think ajax).

What we need from you to think about is the types of fields that we're going to need for this, the flow of actions, and then what the administrators would be able to configure from campaign to campaign.

I imagine in the front-end:
-multiple campaigns
-addressbook of politicians
-ability to preform talking points information on a campaign
-a thank you page/further call to action page

Fill in where i'm missing the items, and we can see what we can do to continue to give back to the community.  We want this to be world-focused, not just US based.  Anyone else have any ideas here?

Best,
Ryan

Ryan,

As you say.
Plus a bonus on the thank you page would be an 'email to a friend' option to spread the word.
Naturally we would also encourage people to sign up for our own e-newsletter. There may even be one specifically for the campaign.

Multiple campaigns, most of which have an end date (when a bill will be passed, or whatever).

This page has it all-
http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/Please ... aign_id=13.

We will usually need to collect name, email address, maybe state/post/zip code.
We may need to 'cc' other people.
We may offer to sign them up for our e-news.
We will offer talking points.
The visitor will enter their personal details (at least name, email address, sometimes postcode, state), email title and email message. They may need to select a politician, if more than one is targetted.
We may also have other random tick boxes for other unforseen angles to the campaign, e.g. volunteering for other kinds of actions or to receive other updates. This form could be used for online petitions as well as email a politician - when you think about it, the data collection and method are very similar. It could just be a Campaign/Take Action module.

Dex

Hi all,

I’m so glad to see this discussion coming up again. I’d been attempting to get something like this started with Mambo for some time (see http://forum.mamboserver.com/showthread.php?t=1238 for the earlier discussion). I believe that this sort of component would make both Joomla! and components like CiviCRM absolutely invaluable to many non-profit organizations. 

Many non-profits spend $5,000 or more a year for a simple system that provides this sort of function (like Capitol Advantage, etc.). Obviously, that severely limits the number of non-profits that can deploy such a system. Even if they could afford it, those commercial applications don’t interface with Joomla! or CiviCRM, which also decreases their overall usability.

That’s why we could really use such a component.  

I suggest that everyone interested in this topic start by reading this report on how Capitol Hill is coping with the current surge in online advocacy - http://www.cmfweb.org/SupportingFiles/documents/CwC_How_Capitol_Hill_is_Coping_with_the_Surge_in_Citizen_Advocacy.pdf. I’d also suggest checking out the Congress Online Project -  http://www.congressonlineproject.org.

There are a couple of details that we should keep in mind, at least as far as contacting members of the U.S Congress:

1. While it’s not essential, it might be useful to consider having people register with the website before using the “Contact a politician” component.

That way, the person’s information (name, address, email, etc.) can be stored into the database –CiviCRM would seem optimal.  You could either have the person register beforehand, or have their information stored afterwards, but it would be useful to get the info into the database.

2. Once a person is registered, the next thing the component would need to do is determine the users Congressional District.

While it’s not 100% accurate, a database of tables matching Zip+4 codes to Congressional Districts might do the trick. Groups like CongressMerge (http://www.congressmerge.com/) make that sort of data available (for a fee). Perhaps there is a way for a number of non-profits to pool their energies and resources to create such tables, too? It would be incredibly useful to be able to store the Congressional District info into CiviCRM for additional campaigns.

While I used to think that it would be easy to implement this sort of component using forms, Congress has instituted another wrinkle: see this interesting report on communicating with Capitol Hill put out by Capital Advantage. http://capitoladvantage.com/capwiz/pdf/InsidersBulletin1.pdf

3. We need to figure out how to deliver the letter to the appropriate politician.

As the report indicates, most U.S. Congresspersons no-longer accept emails sent directly to them. Instead, they’ve adopted a form-based approach for receiving emails - http://www.house.gov/writerep/ . Congress members get lots of email from non-constituents, and depending on the office, this mail may get deleted automatically. Furthermore, with the continuing problem of SPAM, the House and Senate mail servers may implement filtering technology specifically targeting incoming email addressed to all members. Simply put, by emailing everyone in Congress, your message may get to no one in Congress.

This will require new solutions, beyond a simple form-based approach to sending emails to Congress members. Another option to consider is to use the component to collect letters via forms, the organization would then collect them, print them out, and hand deliver them. This option has significantly higher impact on both Congress members and Congressional staffers.

4. Once the person’s letter has been sent, their information stored, and a "thank you" email sent, they should also see a page to “tell 5 friends” about the campaign.

The count of emails sent/ target would also be incredibly useful to have, and seems like it would integrate well into CiviMail.

I know that's a lot to consider all at once, but I thought it might be useful to generate some additional discussion on this topic.

Perhaps someday we'll be able to have a CiviCongress addition to the phenomenal CiviCRM component?

Cheers!

Devin

Hello!

I liked low-fi's input above.

I am so happy to see this thread.  I  asked a similar question about this a while back.  The response may be useful to you developers looking at this issue presently.  Please take a look at:

Sending Emails from the site to specific emails
http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic ... 35525.html

MaMML is now [I think] Anjel and can be found here:
Anjel
http://anjel.schmalls.com

Anjel Discussion
http://developer.joomla.org/sf/discussi ... discussion

Anjel Download
http://developer.joomla.org/sf/frs/do/v ... .anjel/frs

You may want to speak with the Developer of Anjel as well to see if a more collaborative effort could be done incorporating some of Anjel's code.

Feature Requests I would have are to:

• Enable the Administrator [with a message notifying the sender of course prior to sending] to be able to keep a copy of the email sent out and to which individuals and/or location.  As I am sure you are aware, things like emails can disappear   particularly when the recipient of the email may not want to deal with a specific issue/problem.   Also, this is the Internet we are dealing with and it is not perfect, sometimes things do get lost.   It would be good to have a back up copy of the emails to provide "hard copy" evidence if necessary that the emails were sent.
• Also, it would be good to provide the option to a Site Administrator of allowing registered site members  and/or site visitors to send the "directed" email(s) by email verification.  This is done in some petition software like Back-End CMS (http://sourceforge.net/projects/back-end/)
• Ability to have more than one Email Petition and Petition List on a site.
• Ability to place suggested text in the e-mail.  There should also be an option for the Admin  to allow the site member/visitor to change the content. [Still thinking about it though. ]
• Ability to send an Email petition to more than one recipient on one submission.  [Also, still thinking about it though. ]

Emails are one form of petitioning.  Another form is the Petition List.    There is mosPetition, which will soon only be developed for Joomla according to its Developer's website (http://graymoose.co.uk/javalamp/).  While perusing through SourceForge.Net I saw other interesting petition concepts, but there were no scripts filed as of yet. 

thePetitioner
http://sourceforge.net/projects/thepetitioner

iwantobecagov
http://sourceforge.net/projects/govno

e-Petition
http://sourceforge.net/projects/e-petition

SUGGESTION
Maybe Joomla Developers interested in this could pull a group together from some of these Developers to write Email Petition and Petition List core components for Joomla.

Just my views on it.

Thank you to all who read this long post.

WP1

Man, this would be SO useful!

Not much action on this thread, but is there anything to be done?

actually i think i'm gonna write one myself. it'll be a while though - don't hold your breath

For those of you in the US, I just spoke at a Net Squared meetup for advocacy and non-profit groups in Washington, DC.  The issue I discussed was better ways in which organizations can more effectively petition government than via email.  The issue is, the US House of Representatives has made it harder for forms like the ones we're discussing in this thread to actually work from our organizations' Web sites.

So, instead of email, we're looking for alternative ways that data can be passed from stakeholders to congressional members.  Sending data via XML, providing reports, etc, all seem to be steps in the right direction.

If there are any Joomla members reading this that are looking for ways to better interconnect with US congressional members from their Web sites, please feel free to contact me via private message or email.  We're interested in hearing different ways in which we can work on boths sides to make this easier to digest.

Best,
Ryan

cozimek wrote:
So, instead of email, we're looking for alternative ways that data can be passed from stakeholders to congressional members.  Sending data via XML, providing reports, etc, all seem to be steps in the right direction.

Congresspersons already scan popular community sites and read blogs to catch the drift of what's going on. We don't need to present information that they can ignore. Instead I propose to make something so complete and compelling that they will eagerly watch for shifts and trends, falling over themselves to be the first person to propose an initiative or explain their policy decision in a way that can be read and reacted to.

The DC NPO scene is well over 6,000 organizations, representing (and obtaining funding from) millions of people. Together they represent a force that is hard to conceptualize in the current political environment.

Ideas like temporary focused alliances between these organizations have cropped up from time to time and they would be easier to implement now than ever before.

email from an individual has been labeled 'inconclusive' or 'subject to fraudulent entries' by the same pundits who go on junkets with Senators and do the whole /wine/dine/ fandango. Frustratingly, the NPO scene has this perpetual myth that 'things take time' and that the long slow strategy works best. Meanwhile the Powers That Be go out and "make history" while the rest of us are doomed to live through the results as bystanders, hoping for a crumb or two to fall off of the Halliburton plate.

Members of Congress are forced to *listen* to their constituents when the constituent is in the popular media representing a popular cause or when the numbers are absolutely staggering. On the other hand, Congresspersons are forced to *act* when the benefits are overwhelming in the state's favor and/or when their election is at stake.

It is hardly coincidental that email popularity is increasing along with the postage stamp price/ while 'they' tell us that email isn't read as much as snailmail.  What is to be done?

IMHO the solution does not rely upon 'them' telling 'us' that email (or faxing etc.) is the best way to make contact. Each Congressperson ignores communications from their constituents at their own peril. Constituents from both sides of the political scene will quickly acknowledge that their Congressperson reading Constituent communications is vitally important. Yet the truth of today is that staffers and Reps discard/ignore/sweep past large volumes of information if it can be put out of mind easily and without consequences. Emails fall into this category right now. Faxes, letters or a truckload of rotting salmon are obviously harder to ignore but the truth of today is that people are using these methods less and less.

Short of an authenticated per-user national database (electronic voting anyone?) there do exist a few solutions. A primary objective that I see for this system is an effect more than a method. The effect is for all of 'us' to recognize our strength in numbers and use that in a well thought out manner to affect change that we all can agree to, and have the opportunity to discuss the things where we have differences.

Individual NPO's have a body of members/donors that they interact with. Newsletters get sent, credit card #'s obtained, emails posted and replied to. Plenty of information to identify an individual and verify their existence.

If each member NPO was responsible for authenticating the factual existence of its membership, then a consortium of NPO's wouldn't have to divulge any member information other than to confirm that [email protected] is actually an individual. If email addresses were submitted to this system it is then only necessary to obtain a "trusted yes" or "trusted no" status. It is not necessary to provide any connection between the individual and the org. or any personal data as long as the org maintains updated info. Kinda like a DNS server for the population.  A voluntary certification process could be established (i.e. best practices, data security, age of addresses, false address checking etc.) for NPO's and all of the opt in or out stuff for those so inclined.

Flow Example:        petition signed by [email protected]

                        |__  all names from petition submitted to service

                        |___ service authenticates from most recent list

                        |____ questionable entries authenticated by service down to NPO (1 chance)

                        |_____ no response or positive/negative is handled appropriately within 24 hours.

                        |______ complete, authenticated petition (example) is submitted to the intended audience


Many examples of trusted servers out there with much more vital info. If all of the aggregated results were made available publicly, many more opt in because of the 'power in numbers' perception [fact]

This opens up possibility for a collection of sites feeding one another opinions on a myriad of topics and presenting results graphically. With a wiki style single topic/single opinion, national feelings and reasons for it become available in near-realtime. Near enough for electorial politics anyway. Discussions are usually about two different people trying to force agreement on a single 'best' idea. I'd allow just the single idea per topic, per person and that would be aggregated for the national flavor. Fuzzy opinions and editing allow for people to read other's opinions and be swayed, perhaps changing their own opinion somewhat. So stats become relevant in realtime and can be tracked against events in near realtime.

Myspace, Craigslist etc. prove that people are willing to divulge more personal info than this asks for and interact massively. With best practices, involvement is not limited to NPO's, but users of MSN Passport, Amazon, Ebay, Yahoo, AOL etc. are all eligible to be involved as well as individuals willing to go through a verification process.

Sure, it is all kind of anecdotal, but then again, massive involvement would make it a de-facto source for the public to gauge one anothers feelings and browse the rationales. Comments possible, but should be in another location. trackback to a blog of specific forum would allow for conversation apart from the user's "basic" opinion. To then interact with Congressional behavior, voting records and policy initiatives is relatively simple, but pulls it all home. We have the means for a 'responsiveness quotient' and an opportunity for the Congressperson to reply to the general issue when enough people or the situation warrants.

It would be hard for the Rep to ignore a growing red line that indicates constituent interest. Hard also for them to use the kind of lame soundbites that the rare TV appearance affords.

Proposal:        -semi centralized hosting environment
                        -module that each NPO or org uses to gauge interest in their specialized topics
                        -those results submitted to central presentation server
                        -validation of trusted submitters
                        -invisible, but validated user info

Once in place any Rep would be literally crazy not to go see the simple charts and graphs indicating national will.
Once the image is in front of a threshold number of citizens, action will be easy to coordinate and results demanded. When viewing the results of their personal interest, other opinion data and opportunities are readily available to participate in (once per issue per validated person).

Just the info would be cool to see and participate in, added to the knowledge that it has an impact in the real world... I see a phenomenon happening. Entirely proportional to the rigour of NPO 'certification', but again, it is the same basic stuff they need to do anyway  /address checking/etc../