http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/
This one works well - plug in your address and it gives you contact info, including fax number.
Larry
-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Timothy Scarlett
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 1:06 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: retraction
Hi all,
I’m sorry to retract my email.
This group only routes emails if you have a local address in the rep’s district. If you lived in the committee chair’s district, you could email them through their websites, which makes the existence of the facilitating group irrelevant.
Sorry,
Tim
> On Apr 28, 2015, at 1:51 PM, Timothy Scarlett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Live in the USA and need access to Representative’s email addresses, but you don’t live in the district of the Rep you wish to contact? These emails are hard to get. This organization pledges to route email communications through to official email addresses:
> https://www.opencongress.org/people/representatives
> <https://www.opencongress.org/people/representatives>
>
> Cheers,
> Tim
>
>> On Apr 28, 2015, at 1:03 PM, ian Burrow <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>> This is potentially very damaging to historic properties of all kinds. It could provide all federal agencies with an easy way out of their responsibilities under the National Historic Preservation Act: who can object to "national security" as an argument?
>>
>> If it gets adopted by the committee it will be included in a bill in the House of Representatives, where it probably has a good chance of passing.
>>
>> Ian Burrow
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Ellen Chapman
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 11:47 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: Fwd: Urgent: help needed to oppose proposed National
>> Historic Preservation Act amendment
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> SHA just sent this message out about potential erosion of the National Historic Preservation Act TOMORROW (Wednesday). Please contact your representatives if you can!
>>
>> Ellen
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: SHA Mailing List <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Date: Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:01 AM
>> Subject: Urgent: help needed to oppose proposed National Historic
>> Preservation Act amendment
>> To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>
>> Dear SHA members:
>>
>> SHA's Government Affairs counsel just learned about a possible
>> amendment to the National Historic Preservation Act that would significantly impact the protection of land and sites, allowing federal agencies to prevent inclusion on the National Register due to concerns about "national security." We urge all members to contact their Representatives in the House -- particularly those on the House Armed Services Committee (see http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/members <http://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/members>) -- to voice your opposition to the amendment. A sample email is provided below.
>>
>> Please note that time is of the essence because the markup is scheduled for this Wednesday. Contact Terry Klein ([log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>) or Eden Burgess ([log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>) with any questions.
>>
>> Thanks for your help with this critical issue!
>>
>> ~~~
>>
>> Dear Representative ____:
>>
>> My name is ______ and I am a constituent. [explain your job and its
>> relationship to preservation, such as "I work for a cultural resource
>> management firm" or "I am an archaeologist at _____."] [I also run a
>> small business based in/with locations in the State of ______.]
>>
>> I understand that this Wednesday, the House Armed Services Committee will be marking up the NDAA (HR 135), and that the markup will include consideration of an amendment that would amend the National Historic Preservation Act to allow federal agencies to object to the listing of a site on the National Register due to "national security" concerns.
>>
>> I strongly oppose such an amendment, as it is overly broad and the amendment is poorly drafted. In addition, I am aware that last Congress, DoD's Maureen Sullivan, Director for Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health at the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, testified against a similar bill (HR 3687) as unnecessary and likely to cause confusion. Ms. Sullivan also testified that DoD sees no benefit to the bill and that DoD has never been stopped from maintaining or repairing any building, or from conducting any training exercise, because of the National Historic Preservation Act's requirements. NPS and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation also opposed the bill last session.
>>
>> I urge you to oppose this amendment to the NDAA.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> ____________________
>
|
