The Lobby Meeting is Tomorrow!!

[Zerbie]

Any last minute wisdom from the collective forum archives?

(If anyone does NOT know what I'm talking about, scroll to my thread called "Lobby Meeting." Nutshell: I signed up via HRC to go meet with staffers for my US Representative to urge their support for federal employment protections and hate crimes legislation.)

Seriously folks - help me get my head out of term-paper-land and into Lobbyland. If YOU were a "religious" conservative legislator (okay, his STAFFER), what questions or oppositions would you have regarding a federal ENDA and federal hate crimes legislation? And what would your LGBT activist rebuttal to those oppositions be?

I want to be as prepared as possible. There are only two of us going.

Thanx all.
:love:

Z:cool:

[BenL]

Zerbie,

Here are my thoughts:

ALL people should be protected from discrimination. The Declaration of Independence states that all people (men in the 18th century language) are created equal. No one should have to worry about or fear losing a job, not being able to find housing, being terrorized or otherwise picked on by the majority. This is a quintessential American value. Race, religion, ethnic origin are covered by the law. Now it's time to add sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. Emphasize that this is NOT special treatment, but what every American expects. Steer away from the moral (read: religious) angle and emphasize the ethical, constitutional value.

Thanks for being willing to take up this cause.

[tdogg]

Hey Zerbie - GOOD LUCK!! You are going to do great.

I think Ben is pretty much right on. Be prepared to address 'special rights' and steer any focus away from religion. It is basic human rights and protections that is being sought. This will afford protections to ALL people, that has to be the main selling point. Be straightforward, answer directly and briefly, and as you truly believe what you are discussing, there isn't a need to demonstrate a firm belief - you will do that subconsciensiously.

You are awesome Z - I truly appreciate you taking the time and effort to do this on behalf of people everywhere.

You are a true crusader! Go girl! :love: :pray: :love: :rolleyes: :rainbow: :weee: :applause:

[Rick336]

Zerbie,

A religious conservative legislator might ask:

1. Aren't homosexuals already protected against discrimination?

2. Why do homosexuals need to announce their sexual lives to the world?

3. Why do homosexuals need special rights?

4. I believe homosexuality is a sin. Don't you?

5. Do you think a church should be forced to hire homosexuals?

6. If homosexuality can be cured as some are saying, why is this even an issue?


These are a few questions that come to mind that a religious conservative legislator might ask.

Rick

[Sherrie Z]

Such great suggestions above!


Here are a few more thoughts below ... : )

A conservative legislative leader might have questions about what legislation might be appropriate for the individual states to decide, rather than what the federal government might decide ...

A conservative religious legislative leader might respond to a personal story with an emotional appeal ... if time allows ... such as a personal story of someone who has suffered due to lack of legal protections ...

It might be helpful to remind them that the separation of church and state is meant to protect and support both the church and the state ... it might be helpful to remind them that "family values" includes families that have gay members and those families would want protections for their family members ...

They also might feel reassured if visited by someone they can relate to ... for instance, depending on the legislator, seeing a visitor who is wearing a cross necklace or a fish pin, or who makes use of language containing "code words" as in certain spiritual or religious terms worked into the discussion ... so they get the sense that you have at least some spiritual experience or viewpoint in common ... (NOTE: not the same as having a religious discussion as such, very much keeping to the civil aspect instead ... but perhaps using such words or phrasing where appropriate, if appropriate) ...

If you know of other legislators who support your bill, and you're sure they are of a similar philosophy as the legislator you're meeting, maybe mention their names too ... if you know of any progressive legislation, or related legislation to the bill in question, that the legislator has supported in the past, thank them for that support.

Maybe compare notes with your co-visitor, to decide who will say what ... and don't let the legislator get you into a theological argument ... but stay on the common ground of the specific legislative goal as much as possible ...

I know you will do great!!! Thank you for your wonderful efforts! : )

Love & Hugs,

Sherrie Z

[Zerbie]

Thanks for the many thoughts. Ben, I WILL remember, and probably say, "quintessential American value." Good turn of phrase.

T - thanks for all the smilies. I feel so fortunate to even have the opportunity to meet with the Powers That Be over this issue.

We will meet with 2 (female) staffers, the legislator (himself a Mormon individual, so he comes from a conservative *religious* background) will not be present.

Comfort level for staffers. . . . Sherrie: The two of us going are both young (30-ish) married women. I'm suspecting that the young married female demographic may put potentially conservative staffers at ease if they might have been expecting, well I dunno what a conservative staffer might expect. . . drag queens??? :confused:

Rick - I especially appreciate your conservative "religious" sample objections above. Will prepare to hear them, and then if I don't get asked those things, all the better. :)

And another thing: To everyone, for all your encouragement, THANK YOU!!!!!!

[Zerbie]

Zerbie,

A religious conservative legislator might ask:

1. Aren't homosexuals already protected against discrimination?

2. Why do homosexuals need to announce their sexual lives to the world?

3. Why do homosexuals need special rights?

4. I believe homosexuality is a sin. Don't you?

5. Do you think a church should be forced to hire homosexuals?

6. If homosexuality can be cured as some are saying, why is this even an issue?


These are a few questions that come to mind that a religious conservative legislator might ask.

Rick

I've got rebuttals set for all but the last question.

Anyone have a good, concise, brief rebuttal to question #6? A good smooth way to bring the conversation away from hairy endless debates about pathologies and cures back to the practical matter of job performance versus discrimination??

Rick - you posted the sample question. How would YOU respond to it? (and I hope you reply to this before 9am Tuesday morning! - PLEEEEEEZE!!) :)

Thanks, Rick, and ANYONE ELSE with a good response. :love:

[NathanATX]

If homosexuality can be cured as some are saying, why is this even an issue?

Sir. With all due respect, have you considered the ramifications of that question? Hitler believed the cure to the "Jewish problem" was death by gassing. Our American forefathers considered slavery as the cure to the "African problem." Gay & lesbian people are not a problem to be cured. They are your fellow citizens, equal partners in our "democracy." And, I believe, they are the greatly loved children of a powerful and wise God who knew what He was doing when He created them. As an American and, I presume, as a Christian, you must have some belief in the dignity and sacred worth of each human being? I trust you will be more careful with the words you use in the future.

[Zerbie]

Searching around for "opponent" arguments on the ENDA, I found this:

http://www.cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp?id=2578&department=CFI&categoryid=papers

Assuming the link works.

I think this is one for Emproph to chew on for another time.

Reading it made me feel ill and then scream out loud. :eek: Though I can't imagine the staffers saying anything like this - unless perhaps it turns out to be a worst-case scenario! :p

Thanks for the responses - please keep 'em comin'! I'll check back tomorrow morning around 9am Pacific time right before I get in the car to go to this meeting.

Prayers welcome. :) :pray:

[Daniel]

Even if it was possible to make everyone heterosexual (the underlying premise being that being gay is biological btw), what gives anyone the right to do such a thing? Who are we to play God in this way?

Hitler's Dr. Mengele thought he was doing good by creating a Master Race. And we know what that lead to.

[Sherrie Z]

Hi Zerbie!

Just jumping in because as I'm writing this, I haven't seen Rick's response yet, though of course I would also be interested in his (and your) responses ... (Re: If homosexuality can be cured as some are saying, why is this even an issue? -- asked in a legislative context)

My real answer would be ... why do we need to cure something that isn't a disease (or sinful) ... and of course those cures never really work anyway (duh) ... and of course the premise of the question is offensive in itself ... but some expedient answers in this type of (legislative) setting to someone with the "they can be cured" bias might be ...

On the psychological cure ... you can cite the American Psychiatric Association's 1973 decision to officially declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder ... in other words, the APA officially declared that homosexuality in itself is not a mental disorder.

On the religious cure ... you can cite the right to exercise Freedom of Religion ... Americans have a right to follow religious traditions that do not consider homosexuality to be a sinful condition (avoid getting into behaviors, just homosexuality itself), and we also have the right as Americans not to follow any religious tradition.

Maybe you could say that while the debate goes on over the question of a cure, for the minority of Americans who believe in pursuing that route ... we still need to have legal protections now for those Americans who do not pursue such a cure for whatever reasons.

They might not ask this question at all, especially given the time constraints, but it's good to be prepared just in case, for this event or for other contexts.

I know time is an issue now, but you might want to write up bullet points (maybe in Q&A form) of your main points here, in a form that the staffers could give to the legislator ... otherwise, something might get lost in the translation (aka staffer bias or just busy-ness), and then they'll have all your cool cogent arguments on hand to use when briefing their boss ... also for when their constituents start asking them those same questions. Maybe you could even present it that way ... "here is a list of specific points that you could refer to should [legislator] decide to support this legislation, here are some specific points that might be useful for [him/her] in discussing these issues with colleagues or constituents" ... then they'll feel that you're looking out for them as well as for those who would benefit from the legislation. Maybe include your name(s) and contact info on the handout too, in case they have follow up questions later on.

Come to think of it ... maybe Soulforce could produce such an all purpose handout for these occasions ... if that hasn't already been done.

Good luck! : )

Love & Hugs,

Sherrie Z


PS As I was writing most of the above, several others had posted in the interim ... good suggestions, everybody!

[Zerbie]

Maybe you could say that there is still much open debate on the question of a cure, for the minority of Americans who believe in pursuing that route ... but either way, we still need to have legal protections for those Americans who do not pursue such a cure for whatever reasons.

They might not ask this question at all, especially given the time constraints, but it's good to be prepared just in case, for this event or for other contexts.

I know time is an issue now, but you might want to write up bullet points (maybe in Q&A form) of your main points here, in a form that the staffers could give to the legislator ... otherwise, something might get lost in the translation (aka staffer bias or just busy-ness), and then they'll have all your cool cogent arguments on hand to use when briefing their boss ... also for when their constituents start asking them those same questions. Maybe you could even present it that way ... "here is a list of specific points that you could refer to should [legislator] decide to support this legislation, here are some specific points that might be useful for [him/her] in discussing these issues with colleagues or constituents" ...

Come to think of it ... maybe Soulforce could produce such an all purpose handout for these occasions ... if that hasn't already been done.

Good luck! : )

Love & Hugs,

Sherrie Z

Ooooohh! Particularly smart - of COURSE we should leave bulleted points behind with the staffers. Simple enough. I will print additional copies of the notes HRC sent us and leave them with the staff. I will underline or highlight particularly essential points. You're right - people forget, and need to have something in their hands with which to accurately remember (being something of a steel trap memory myself, I tend to expect others to be the same.)

Thank you tons much, Sherrie! :D

[Sherrie Z]

Thanks very much, Zerbie!

What's funny is ... as you were responding, I was editing my comments, so your quote looks different from my final version ... but that's OK, LOL! : )

Thanks for your earlier clarification about the staffers too ... : )

Good luck and prayers!

Love & Hugs,

Sherrie Z

[Rick336]

Zerbie,

Sherrie's answers and the others are excellent. The only thing I would add is that the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, The American Counseling Association, and the National Association of Social Workers have all determined that homosexuality is not a mental illness or psychological condition and therefore needs no cure.

Federal civil rights legislation for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans is an issue because in the United States in 2007 we still have no protection against discrimination in jobs, housing, and public accommodations.

Here's a link to the APA and their statements on homosexuality:
http://www.psych.org/psych_pract/copptherapyaddendum83100.cfm

I hope this helps.

Thanks Zerbie for going to bat for all of us. Good luck tomorrow. I'm sure you'll do a great job. :tup:

Rick

[Zerbie]

Thanks Rick!

Thanks everyone for the confidence!! Send prayers towards AZ - thanks!

:love: :pray: :)

[NathanATX]

I know you'll be grounded, connected to Spirit, and deeply compassionate.

Go get some sleep, girl! :D

You need your super-power rest!

[Emproph]

If homosexuality can be cured as some are saying, why is this even an issue?
Sir. With all due respect, have you considered the ramifications of that question? Hitler believed the cure to the "Jewish problem" was death by gassing. Our American forefathers considered slavery as the cure to the "African problem." Gay & lesbian people are not a problem to be cured. They are your fellow citizens, equal partners in our "democracy." And, I believe, they are the greatly loved children of a powerful and wise God who knew what He was doing when He created them. As an American and, I presume, as a Christian, you must have some belief in the dignity and sacred worth of each human being? I trust you will be more careful with the words you use in the future.

I would have also accepted:
Because they used to have the same cure for left-handedness.Remember: Jesus is at the Right hand of the Father.

Would you 'tolerate' that as a religious reason to be lawfully denied your livelihood?
~~
Denial of that pretty much puts a dent in someone's inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness, unless that's no longer an American value...

[Emproph]

At the meeting: (http://www.results.org/website/article.asp?id=2229)

1. Establish a personal connection with your member of Congress and their aide in the meeting by asking them to share their goals and the issues they care about. Share your own vision and concerns.

2. Acknowledge your member of Congress. It is rare that our representatives and senators hear the words “Thank You” from their constituents. Always thank them for the supportive actions they have taken or just be sure to thank them for taking the time to meet with you. Most likely your point person in the office will be a legislative aide, be sure to take time to thank them as well. Praising a good legislative aide in front of their boss is always a good thing.

3. Be concise. Summarize your request in 5 minutes or less.

4. Be prepared to summarize opponents’ arguments on the issue. Know the other side of the coin. There may be very articulate arguments against what you are asking for. Be prepared and do your homework on any opposition. Have talking points prepared to defend you position. Never attack. If you don’t know the answer or how to respond tell the aide or Congressperson you will get them further information.

5. Don’t be a zealot. Fair, balanced and thoughtful conversations will keep the door to your member’s office open even if you don’t find common ground. Always leave with a thank you and a commitment to follow up with relevant information.

6. Don’t be a know it all or talk down to an aide. Many aides are very young and may not know about our issues. Our professionalism and knowledge can be an example of effective, savvy grassroots lobbying.

7. Make the issues real. One of the most powerful ways we can advocate for our issues is to have someone speak who has been directly affected by these issues and can tell their experiences. Another possibility is to tell the story of a specific family or to show a video during your meeting that puts your legislator in the shoes of others for a few minutes and makes the issues real.

8. Paint the big picture and the small picture. For example, one person could tell their story about how the issue has affected her/him personally (the small picture); then, someone else could flesh out the current national or global statistics and impact (the big picture).

9. Make specific, clear requests and ask for an answer. Often, the main reason groups have unsatisfactory meetings is that their requests were not clear and specific enough. Your members of Congress need to know what you want them to do (what bill you want them to sponsor, what other representative or senator you want them to speak to, how you want them to vote). However, in addition to the specific requests you bring, don’t be afraid to ask the senator or representative what else they see they could do on your issue (whether they say yes or no to your original request).

10. Know your next steps. In the meeting, ensure that the next steps for follow up are clear (what your group will do next, what the legislator/aide will do next) and that you know which aides to contact for follow up. After the meeting, send a prompt thank you note and follow up on requests with the aide.

~~
That was the first result that came up in the Google search (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Lobby+meeting%22+congressional+representative s) I did. Guess which one came up second (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?p=24243)? :rainbow:

[Sherrie Z]

Thanks, Rick!

Thank you for the very kind words ... how cool to have that whole list of organizations in coordination with the APA ... excellent! Out of the closet and into the legislature!

Such great suggestions from you and from this entire group!

And I love Google having Soulforce's suggestions so high on their list (thanks Emproph)!

Go Soulforce! : )

Love & Hugs,

Sherrie Z

[Emproph]

(PS, And Those PERCEIVED-TO-BE)

I'm so sick of the color pink I don't even know what the word geay (<sp?) means anymore.

You owe me, and I mean bacon. ;) (don't fret if you don't see this or don't have time to appreciate this "in time" for the event... every time around I learn something new..:cool:)

And now back to hell:

That whole first part of that CWA page “In brief ENDA would:” part was to SEXUALIZE all lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, questioning and Intersexed Americans for the purpose of lumping us all into one big (Simple) perverted pile.

Yet other than their use of the word sex to fully describe us, they normally only use the word homosexual. So by limiting their own defamation of us, LGBTQI, to the letter G, they render their own argument useless.
--
Warning. From here on out it gets ugly. The worst arguments. The good news is however, that they really are terrible arguments.

May the emotional bloodbath begin, courtesy Concerned Witches of America:
----
THREATENING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

(Because jokes of the century don't come along every day.)

The bill utterly ignores freedom of conscience for individuals. And the question must be asked: If there is a presumption that it would be immoral to impose ENDA on religious bodies, why is it moral to impose it on everyone else?
~~
"The bill utterly ignores freedom of conscience for individuals."

It SHOULD ignore “freedom of conscience,” as in Freedom of THOUGHT, as it's already covered under Freedom of Speech, UNLIKE many other countries. Other countries not being America and all.

And the question must be asked: If there is a presumption that it would be immoral to impose ENDA on religious bodies, why is it moral to impose it on everyone else?

With all due respect, we’re talking about the civil liberties of a minority of AMERICANS, and not the “rights” of religious bodies to impose their moral status onto them.

A better question would be: Why would you consider civil liberties to be a moral or religious issue?
~~
Despite ENDA’s religious exemption... Businesses owned by devout Christians, Jews and Muslims would be forced to adopt a view of human sexuality at odds with that taught by their faiths.

Isn't religion already covered under existing ENDA laws?

So aren't they already "forced" to hire people whom they know are going to hell and who have no moral compass because they don't believe in the Bible?

Just a question.
~~
...as overzealous courts trample on religious exemptions in order to promote sexual “equality.”

Which is precisely the reason that The Employment Non-Discrimination Act is necessary for LGBTQI Americans. So that their EMPLOYMENT status cannot be religiously defined as “sexual.”

Although there is a world of difference between skin color and sexual behavior, liberal courts are likely to blur the distinction and to regard traditional morality as a form of “bigotry.”

Again, religiously defining Americans themselves as a behavior, sexual or otherwise, is precisely the reason ENDA is necessary. Secondly, courts don’t rule on “morality” or make determinations of “bigotry,” they rule on legality. That’s an important “distinction” to understand.
~~
“ENDA trashes the traditional respect for and accommodation of religious faith and practice found in civil rights laws. It seeks to chill and suppress religious expression and freedom of speech by using the law to transform or extinguish religious practices that are disfavored by the elite, such as the practice of declaring homosexuality a ‘sin.’ Because of its stealth design, ENDA discourages discussion of such issues.”
~~
“ENDA... seeks to chill and suppress religious expression and freedom of speech by using the law to transform or extinguish religious practices that are disfavored by the elite, such as the practice of declaring homosexuality a ‘sin.’

You mean like Leviticus 20:13, Genocide for Jesus (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=2444)? By all means, do go on about your constitutional right to "preach" the death of Americans in the secular workplace.

ENDA would initiate an inevitable assault on marriage as “discriminatory”

Marriage is not employment. This is an important distinction to make.

ENDA puts the federal government in an adversarial role against the basic sexual morality

Again, we’re not talking about sex, we’re talking about employment. This is an important distinction to make.

Furthermore, it would balkanize America by granting freedom of conscience to employers with fewer than 15 employees while denying it to employers with 15 or more employees.

Sidebar:
Balkanize - divide (a region or body) into smaller mutually hostile states or groups.

So business owners who had more than 15 employees might get jealous of business owners with less employees – who can legally practice their religious discrimination. In other words, ENDA would suddenly create animosity between small business owners and major corporations. :rolleyes:

ENDA will inspire lawsuits by homosexual activists, who will cry “homophobia” when an employer cleaves to policies that favor marriage, family and traditional sexual morality.

Are you saying that Employers in the public sector should not be sued if they willfully break the law?

What is the problem with legitimately inspired lawsuits. Legit, as in legal, as in law, as in lawsuit.

And again, we’re not talking about marriage, family, or sex, we’re talking about the right to make a living. It’s an important "distinction" to make.

***
Brought to you by Robert H. Knight, leader of Concerned Women for America.

That’s brilliant (as in that's just great..:rolleyes:)), the whole thing was written by a man.

~~
Overall I give it a perfect 10-steam-shooting-out-of-my-ears icons. 11 for the fact that we don't have that icon to use.

:sick: :mad: :D :smashy: :unhappy: :headbang: :wave: :headbang: :hissy: :D :mad: :sick:

How's that for confusing?

[Zerbie]

Hi Emp, Hi Nate!!

Emproph, thanx for steering that rubbish-y stuff back to the point. Good. Sorry to have sent you there (ya hafta admit it's sort of your speciality talent tho :p ).

Nate, thanks for the well wishes. :love: I woke up feeling really strong, calm, and energized. A good way to feel walking into my first lobby meeting with no idea what to expect!! The way I see it, the other person can do most of the talking since she is on the local HRC board (I think - she's in some kind of leadership position, so she's in charge of what we do/say this morning.) I'm there as the "regular" constituent in the representative's district. Guessing - being there looking nice and sweet and calm and caring will be helpful in itself. I guess? I'll watch our HRC staff person take the lead, and let things play out as they will.

Glad we hashed this stuff out - I feel prepared to steer things back to target if the discussion turns lively. :D

Okay - logging off - gotta get dressed and into the car shortly.

Love to all. :love:

[keltic63]

Okay - logging off - gotta get dressed and into the car shortly.

Love to all. :love:

Best of luck Zerbie.

We want pics of the outfit and please wear heels, you'll look taller and in charge!

[NathanATX]

Best of luck Zerbie.

We want pics of the outfit and please wear heels, you'll look taller and in charge!

... and even MORE fabu!

[Zerbie]

Just got back. :)

All that preparing for a worst-case scenario, and of course it was a lovely, cordial pleasant meeting. Two very pleasant young women, and the four of us chatted for a while about our various backgrounds and it was a very pleasant environment.

Our 30 minute meeting ran for an hour. :cool:

Their concerns were more along the conservative lines of less federal government interference, and in terms of the proposed hate crimes legislation, they had a lot of concerns about a hierarchy of violent crime victims. I think our responses to their concerns were good, even if we didn't thoroughly persuade the staffers - we raised some good questions for them to think about, and we spent most of that hour in the "grey areas" of the conversation.

[Sherrie Z]

Thanks, Zerbie!

I'm glad it was a positive experience ... yay!

Thanks for the update ... thanks for all your great efforts ... and thanks again for the kind comments ... go, Zerbie! : )

Love & Hugs,

Sherrie Z

[Rick336]

Zerbie,

I'm glad to hear that you had a pleasant and productive visit with your legislator's staff. Your presence in their office today has put a face on these important issues and has gotten the wheels in motion for positive change.

Great job!!:tup:

Rick

[tdogg]

Z

Sounds like you were terrific (of course) and gave them food for thought. It's usually a good sign if you keep them longer than the scheduled time, means they were interested in you, what you had to say and gave it some credence. Thanks for undertaking this action on behalf of everyone. I really appreciate that you are putting yourself out there and DOING something. You are awesome! Like I said before, a true role model.

Yes, please do post a pic! BTW, I was getting my hair done Friday and happened upon a certain People magazine, and sitting there with foil all over my head watching my gal get her hair cut while my color is setting, I turned to page to see....ZERBIE in her cool shades! I never put the cover to the issue when I grabbed it...but there you were. Of course, my gal and my hairdresser were cordial and smiled when I shoved the picture in their faces saying "That's Zerbie, that's Zerbie on the forums You know Soulforce. She went to the thing I wanted to go to in Phoenix. You know, the love won out thing." They nodded, smiled and most likely gave each other the 'look' while rolling their eyes...but I couldn't help it, I was excited! Anyways, if they knew you they'd have been running around the salon shouting too!

Oh, brown hair, blond and RED highlights and above the shoulders short!

[BenL]

I think our responses to their concerns were good, even if we didn't thoroughly persuade the staffers - we raised some good questions for them to think about, and we spent most of that hour in the "grey areas" of the conversation.

Spending time in so-called grey areas was probably the most productive thing you could have done. People need to be shifted out of black-and-white absolutism and realize that there are as many different shades of gray as there are people. Politics used to be the art of compromise. If find it's becoming more and more about unbudging obstinance.

[BruceChris]

I'm going to go right out and lobby MY elected representitives. But First, I'm going to go out to my favorite stylist, and get my hair done.

Peace and Love, Bruce Chris

[tdogg]

hey there BruceChris!

You're just one o' the girls now! It shouldn't take too long to put a fantastic do on your head (sorry, couldn't resist...:o ). U r cool just as u r! :cool:

[Zerbie]

Thank you so much everyone!! :D :D :D

Sherrie, Rick. . . :love: :love: I have positive feelings about it as a beginning. There are ways in which I think I could have done a notch better. I am going to follow up with thank you notes to each of the two staffers, and in the notes I will add one more point in support of the legislation that I wish I would have mentioned at the meeting. So the note can serve as a reminder/secondary lobbying "moment," as well as a Thank You For Your Time, note.

In addition, the experienced lobbyist who I went along with told me I did a "fabulous" job, and she asked if I would be willing to come to more meetings of this sort in future. I was like, DEFINITELY!! So this means, a lot more time shopping for "professional" attire. :lol: Might be time for a smart suit after all. ;)

Tdogg:love: - BWAAAHHHHHHH!!!!!! :lol:
So the hair has multi-highlights?? Did I mention mine is strawberry blonde again? The bright coppery red did not stay - it just faded out within a couple weeks. But the stylist was being conservative with the red, so we'll do more next time. ;)

Chris - I think the color trend this season is red/strawberry blonde highlights. But we love you whatever your "do." :love: Tho - if you're going to lobby your congressional reps, red is de rigueur as it lends just the right amount of spunk. Yeah. :cool:
:lol:
:p

[Sherrie Z]

Great idea on the thank you note ... and again, congratulations on doing such a great job ... a truly FABULOUS job indeed! Go, Zerbie! : )