Even eight hours a week -- a fifth of the work week -- doesn't sound like it'd be enough time to get to all of the complaints and issues.
15 minutes per issue for eight hours (no accounting for breaks or time between) would be 32 issues. Per week. Even 40 hours a week is 160 groups, which seems pretty small given the size of the US.
Lobbying and staffers exist because the time of our representatives is really limited. I think it's a really awful solution, but I'm not surprised that it exists.
I think this is a fair point, but I'm arguing for this in addition to all the other ways we have right now, including emailing, letters and phoning, which staffers mostly deal with. The point here is to get representatives to spend face to face time with their people on a regular basis instead of the cold aggregate summary from a staffer.
To make things more time efficient, you could even say than more than 5 people, with a designated spokesperson, can group together to block out an hour of time instead of making the representative hear the same issue the 5th time, and they have the benefit of being able to explain one subject in depth in an undivided manner.
Today we have the most amazing transportation and telecommuting technology available to perform duties in D.C., along with staffers to help. If representatives still can't make time for their constituency, maybe we ought to rethink their work division and responsibilities. Otherwise we run the risk of having presidents who don't know the price of milk.
15 minutes per issue for eight hours (no accounting for breaks or time between) would be 32 issues. Per week. Even 40 hours a week is 160 groups, which seems pretty small given the size of the US.
Lobbying and staffers exist because the time of our representatives is really limited. I think it's a really awful solution, but I'm not surprised that it exists.