We’ve not even seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to digital advocacy being mobilized.

I would add that while some modes of member communication may indeed be “better” than others, one still has to ask, “better for what?” Goals may differ for different organizations and different issue campaigns.

For example, a goal of an advocacy campaign could be to enhance the reputation on the Hill of an association or professional society. Simple form communications provide an opportunity for a citizen supporter to show who she “likes” (to borrow a metaphor). This citizen may not feel comfortable penning a personal dissertation on some neglected corner of the US Code. But she might feel very comfortable lending her support to a position taken by an organization that she trusts.

At the very least, thousands of form messages sent supporting an organization’s position should enhance the standing of that organization with congressional members simply because such an organization has earned the trust of so many citizen supporters. And it should be remembered that this same organization will likely be contacting these same citizens at election time “educating” them about the candidates positions and voting records.

Congressional offices will not want to ignore what Tocqueville recognized as one of the distinguishing features of our political culture: the propensity of Americans to form associations that represent their interests. Rather than seeing form communications as a scourge, Hill offices should see them as a window into the relationships of their constiuents and the organizations whose lead they follow.