Baird’s ‘Tele-Town Halls’ Appear to be a Sham
By Nansen at August 27th, 2009.
Our S.W. Washington Congressman has taken a drubbing in the press for his initial decision not to hold town halls. As cover, he tried lashing out. He then had to apologize. Now, even his apology has seemingly backfired.
At the moment, he needs to be perceived as reaching out, and re-building bridges he burnt to a charred crisp.
Baird’s first attempt at preempting criticism by trying to short-circuit the democratic process not only failed, it caused one heck of a backlash. Rather than be honest and earnest, Baird appears to be right back at it again: holding sham “town hall” calls with constituents.
FLASH: That’s right, Baird’s “tele-town halls” this week may actually be a complete sham. If you’re asking what tele-town halls, my point is already halfway made for me.
Let’s review: Baird has now held two of five in-person town halls. One in Vancouver, and one in Longivew. But he has three more to go: Ilwaco, Centralia, and Olympia.
Between the in-person town halls he’s holding, Baird setup several “tele-town halls,” which he proudly trumpets are reaching thousands of constituents. To be fair, some Congressman do use these with great effect. They schedule the call far in advance, publicize the call-in info in their local paper, and have a good exchange of ideas with constituents.
The only problem? Anyone wanting to take the initiative to participate in Baird’s “tele-town hall” is likely unable to.
In fact, from what I’ve uncovered, it appears Baird’s strategy is to intentionally sideline would-be critics. How do I know this?
Because I signed-up for Congressman Baird’s Pacific County tele-town hall, and waited by the phone at the appointed time.
And waited, waited and waited.
Meanwhile, my liberal friends were texting, tweeting and emailing me that they were on the call. The phone rang and I anxiously answered. Someone else was complaining they weren’t called either. More emails, texts, tweets and a facebook message:
“I called his office, and he said they pulled the list Friday night, so if we signed up Saturday (as I did), I am not on it… just more obfuscations from stupid and ill informed staff designed to pacify people who are being shut out of the process.”
This is really interesting since Baird sent out the initial invitation email on Saturday morning at 8:04am. Wait! He sends an email on Saturday to announce a town hall on Monday at 1pm? But pulls the list on Friday?
Apparently, Baird isn’t interested in including in his town hall anyone who actually wants to participate in his town hall.
As the clock ticked on the “tele-town hall” in progress, I emailed Kelly Love in Baird’s district office to find out why none of my three registered numbers were called. Curiously, about 4 minutes later and 17 minutes into the call, the phone finally rang. I also received an email explaining the delay:
“The calls go out in waves so you must have been part of the 2nd or 3rd wave.”
Waves? Now, in normal circumstances, I would take what Baird’s people told me with only a slight grain of salt. But these aren’t “normal” times. Because of the shenanigans of weeks past, the Congressman has barely a shred of credibility left. With all of the name-calling, obfuscations, and downright lying that’s been going on, getting shut-out of this call sure didn’t seem like an accident. But I digress.
Here’s the point: Brian Baird is either incredibly arrogant, or incredibly ignorant. If he really thinks I just fell off the turnip truck and have never teleconferenced before today, then he’s way more out of touch than I thought.
Yes, we do live in the sticks, but that’s why a lot of us rely on tele-commuting for work these days.
Besides, my husband and I own a technology company. We know software. And we’re savvy enough, having participated in other Congressional town-halls using the same system, that these are likely just more fabrications. Perhaps not even for political reasons, but fabrications to mask someone’s screw-up.
I worked my local Republican Party County Fair Booth today. Dozens told me similar stories. They registered. No call. And there was no listed call-in number. Some enterprising journalist ought to follow up on this. The Columbian, although it seems to be apologizing for Baird as of late, initially broke the story wide open earlier this month. They just might not have realized it.
Looking back over that initial story, something didn’t sit right with the techie in me; my political senses tell me something’s not right with this either:
Instead of appearing in person, where “extremists” would have “the chance to shout and make YouTube videos,” Baird said Wednesday, he’s holding what he calls “telephone town halls” instead.
…
His office used its Congressional allowance to buy the necessary software around the start of 2009, a spokesman said.
Secret schedule
Here’s how it’ll work: if you happen to be sitting near a publicly listed Clark County telephone line on the right day at the right time, your phone will ring.
In order to avoid software problems, Baird’s office says, the exact date and time will be kept secret from the public. [emphasis added]
If you answer your landline, an automated message will ask whether you have a question for your Congressman.
Press *3, and you’ll be asked your location and the subject of your question. Sitting at his own telephone at an as-yet-undisclosed location, Baird then will choose a name based on its location and the topic.
There will be no further pre-screening, Baird said. After the call is over, the recording will be posted on his Web site.
Baird said the phone interviews will include “a much better cross-section of the public” than some live town halls.
These sham “tele-town halls” are just that: pre-screened. Baird is posting the recordings, but why not just let everyone who wants to participate on the call, in an open and transparent manner?
And just what are these “software problems”? While one might question whether the real problem is that the Congressman or his staff can’t seem to tell the truth anymore…more charitably, perhaps his staff don’t know how to use the software correctly?
Anytime constituents are shut-out of the public’s business, it’s cause for concern. So how ’bout it, Columbian?
Tags: 3rd C.D., Brian Baird, featured, Pacific County, Software, Tele-Town Hall
Nansen
Tweet This
Post to Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark at Delicious
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
RSS Feed
[...] Baird: Arrogant, Ignorant Or Lying Loser? Jump to Comments Nansen Malin has an excellent post at NW Digest describing her difficulties participating in Congressman Brian Baird’s most [...]
Boy! If it weren’t for all of us extremists with computers, nobody would know that any of this is going on!! You’re not the only one the columbian is ignoring…
I’m still waiting to see proof that anyone from Baird’s Office ever did what they repeatedly said they did…
Rebutting Columbian Editor Lou Brancaccio: My name is “blogger”
I am the Private citizen who telephoned the Capitol Hill Police Department on Friday morning, August 21 2009, and I was the subject of Columbian Editor Lou Brancaccio’s Press Talk column from August 25th, “Moving Forward on the Baird Story”.
http://columbian.com/article/20090825/NEWS02/708259998/-1/NEWS
When I read a report that morning by Kathy Durbin of the Columbian that Congressman Brian Baird had reported a second “death threat” to the Capitol Hill Police, but was in fact based on a telephone threat he had received earlier in the month, I decided to see if I could find out any more information than what newspaper was reporting.
I used the internet search engine Google to find the web page of the Capitol Hill Police Department. On their “Contact the US Capitol Hill Police” I found :
Watch Commander’s Office:
202-224-0908
(Citizen inquiries or concerns)
I called the Watch Commander’s Office , clearly identified myself and told that person who I was, and that I was seeking confirmation that 2 “Death threats” against my US Congressman had in fact been properly reported and were in fact being investigated. The Watch Commander told me that the “Threats Office” might be able to help me and transferred my call to them.
When I talked to the Agent at the Threats Office, they told me the same thing that Mr. Brancaccio has already related (at least in part) in that the Agent could neither confirm or deny that any Investigation was or was not underway as a matter of policy. He did tell me that he could not investigate anything without a report being generated by the “Records and Reports Office”. He said he would try to transfer me, but gave me their unlisted number just in case. (202-593-4099 as it was listed in my initial report).
I called “Records and Reports” and identified myself as a private Citizen and said approximately the following:
Quote:
“My name is Bob Koski, I am a Private Citizen living in Vancouver Washington, and my local newspaper is telling me today that there have been 2 different “Death threats” made against my US Congressman Brian Baird, and that these matters have been “turned over to the Capitol Hill Police Department for investigation”. I am not calling to ask about any details, or to interfere in any way with an investigation that may be in progress, all I want to know is (A) Has there been a report made to your office about these Death Threats, and (B) are they under investigation?”
The answers I got were “No” and “No”. I left my full name and home telephone number with “Records and Reports” and asked that person to call me personally if they found out anything further.
I believe in my heart that I got an honest answer to a direct question precisely because I did not call and identify myself as a blogger who was just looking for something to talk about. I called in a quiet, calm and respectful manner, and connected on a personal level, one private citizen to another.
I deliberately did not ask for any identifying information from any of the people I talked to. I am not a professional journalist, but I am no child either. I am perfectly aware of the serious consequences that people are subjected to all the time for making unauthorized statements on matters like this. I attribute my ability to get an honest answer to being honest and non-threatening in my inquiry.
Since I placed these called from my home, I have my personal telephone records that will be available for Public examination as soon as I get them in the mail, to anyone who wishes to verify my calls. If necessary, the Capitol Hill Police can be asked to verify that I made those calls as well through their own records that prove they received the long-distance calls I placed to them from my home..
Mr. Brancaccio chose not to try and verify the statements I made at my website and e-mailed directly to his attention that same Friday morning, until sometime Monday when he realized that the story had been picked up Portland talk radio host Victoria Taft, who announced Monday afternoon that she was going to be discussing this issue with me on her show at Five O’Clock. Mr. Brancaccio rushed his column into print shortly before Victoria Taft went live that day.
I stand by every statement I have made to date. I am convinced that as of Friday morning, August 21, 2009, no formal report on any death threats against Congressman Baird had been made to the Capitol Hill Police. That is what I told Victoria Taft on the air shortly after Lou Brancaccio rushed his column to print.
As I made perfectly clear from the beginning, I am not interested in compromising an investigation, or being responsible for getting anyone fired, but considering the lack of direct information about these “death threats” it is now incumbent upon Congressman Baird to set the record straight himself.
In the interest of finding the truth, I am offering the following to anyone who wishes to verify my story:
1. I am willing to submit to a polygraph test to verify the accuracy of my statements of August 21st.
2. I am willing to swear out an official Deposition or Affidavit swearing to the accuracy of those same statements.
3. I am willing to submit my personal telephone records to prove that I really did make those calls.
4. I will talk to anyone, at any time, on the record and for direct attribution to me personally, about the exact details of what I discovered on August 21, 2009.
Anyone who wishes to contact me about this can e-mail me at:
bkoski@worldaccessnet.com
This morning I proffered an Olive Branch to Editorial Editor John Laird at the Columbian. I told him I regretted all of the bad blood between the paper and this website, and appealed to him for an opportunity to tell you exactly what I am telling you now, and he flatly rejected the offer. He did not even offer to connect me with one of his reporters to try and address what I sent to him directly last Friday.
I am exploring other opportunities to get the truth out about what I have said to date, and that I stand by every word. The columbian is clearly not interested in the truth, and have clearly rejected an honest offer from me to try and take the first step toward healing these gaping wounds that the columbian and I have inflicted on one another for what will soon enter it’s fourth year.
In my view, the only person who can truly settle this controversy now is Congressman Baird himself, and I call on him to issue a definitive written statement on these matters that directly details what happened, and when, and publish it himself on his website. I do not want to hear anything else that has been filtered through his Chief of staff, his District Director, the Columbian or anyone else.
I think that is a reasonable solution to this mess, and I will work to get that message directly to Congressman Brian Baird.
Your move Congressman.
[...] hall” calls, after a source sent me the call-in info. Last week I blew the top off Baird’s sham tele-town halls, revealing that he intentionally keeps the date, time, and call-in info [...]