OPINION:
For many Americans, emailing a state legislator is the best way to make their voice heard. What happens when those messages never reach the people they elected to represent them?
Wyoming offered a stark example this fall. As Cowboy State Daily reported, conservative group Honor Wyoming claimed the Legislature was blocking thousands of advocacy-driven emails, raising questions about whose voices are actually getting through.
Ultimately, lawmakers rejected a bill that would have required staff to track messages.
Across states, laws regarding constituent communication vary. In Connecticut, analysts in the Office of Legislative Research concluded that the legislative branch may legally delete emails, saying that retention laws apply only to the executive branch and political subdivisions. In Washington state, the House reinstated a 30-day auto-delete policy.
Supporters of deletion argue that storing every message would overwhelm understaffed offices and risk exposing sensitive details, but deletion carries democratic costs, especially as artificial intelligence adds new complexities. A Cornell study found that lawmakers often can’t distinguish real messages from AI-generated ones, prompting concerns even as AI helps citizens communicate their views more clearly.
Research shows that constituent communication influences policymaking. A field experience summarized by the London School of Economics found that legislators who received calls from constituents were 11% to 12% more likely to adopt the requested position. A Harvard study found closer alignment between voter preference and roll call votes when lawmakers receive direct input.
Wyoming demonstrates the danger of a system in which messages disappear entirely. Because the Legislature is exempt from the state’s public records act, voters cannot verify whether their messages are being received — undermining trust and making it harder to judge whether representatives are listening.
Inequities persist even in states that retain emails. Staff may prioritize messages from influential community members while discounting others. A Cambridge study shows that simply saving everything does not ensure fair treatment.
The solution lies in strengthening civic communication infrastructure. Modern advocacy platforms help citizens craft personalized, compelling messages. Tools such as CiviClick and Quorum create independent audit trails that allow constituents to preserve proof of engagement.
Retention rules and privacy protections are achievable, but sweeping auto-deletion policies tilt power toward insiders. Democracy requires verifiable records of constituent voices and tools that ensure they remain visible, traceable and impossible to ignore.
CHAZZ CLEVINGER
Founder and CEO, CiviClick
Los Angeles, California
Please read our comment policy before commenting.