Congressional Record, Volume 147 Issue 78 (Thursday, June 7, 2001)

[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 78 (Thursday, June 7, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H2980-H2982]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

{time} 1345
PRESIDENT BUSH AND INCREDIBLE WHITE HOUSE FORM LETTER COMPUTER

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Hart). Under a previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a remarkable
automated and superbly efficient computer system in the Capital of this
Nation. Madam Speaker, this computer network is extraordinary. It
tracks and it responds to the correspondence of more than 500 people. I
would note that it is so powerful it is able to keep track of not only
the incoming mail from these people on a wide variety of issues but it
is also able to respond to each and every one of the people and each
and every one of the letters with an identical form letter, which, if
you will note, is changed only with regard to the subject matter.
I am not describing a top-secret computer lab at CIA, nor am I
describing NASA's computer network at Cape Canaveral. No, Madam
Speaker, this computer is located at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. This
afternoon I rise to discuss this computer and the remarkable White
House form letter that it generates.
I share with my colleagues the opportunity to have interacted with
this amazing machine on more than a dozen occasions. Each time I have
written to President Bush, I have received an identical response.
Whether the topic is the energy crisis or election reform, I get the
same letter back. More than a dozen letters to date, each faithfully
signed by the President's aide, Nicholas Calio, unless Mr. Calio has
used an autopen.
I wrote the President about HMO reform, I received the following:
``Thank you for your recent letter regarding a bipartisan Patient
Protection Act. I have shared your letter with the President's advisers
and the appropriate agencies who have been formulating policy
recommendations in this area. Your comments are receiving their close
and careful attention. Thanks again, Nicholas Calio.''
I wrote the President on education, veterans, environment, trade and
foreign affairs. I again received the same letter. I say to President
Bush, ``Thank you.'' And to you, Nicholas Calio, ``Thank you. Your
computer serves you well. It has moved the science of computers forward
to newer and higher levels.''
I would note that with such close attention to detail, it is hard to
fathom how the United States ever lost our seat on the United Nations
Human Rights Commission. How on earth could our allies be unsatisfied
with diplomatic dispatches such as, ``I have shared your letter with
the President's advisers. Your comments are receiving close and careful
attention.''

[[Page H2981]]

Indeed, the existence of such a superior computer system response
makes the departure of Senator Jeffords from the Republican Party all
the more puzzling. How is it possible that that distinguished Senator
from Vermont could become so disenchanted with the White House when it
uses such an advanced computer system to communicate with Members of
the House and the Senate? How could Mr. Jeffords or any other Member of
the Congress become disenchanted with such careful and precise personal
attention from President Bush? Were the words, ``Your comments are
receiving the close and careful attention of the appropriate agencies''
simply not enough?
I would like to point out one of the examples of this splendid
computer's responses to Members of Congress. I would note, however,
that my policy since I was elected to the Congress a number of years
ago has been to personally respond to each letter I receive from over
half a million citizens of the 16th District of Michigan and to give as
substantive a response as is possible to do. Clearly, that idea is out
of date at the Bush White House.
Well, thank you, President Bush. You have shown us a new way. Thank
you for changing the tone in office and your tone in Washington. Thank
you for identical form letters from your amazing computer. At least
when I write the White House I know I will get a response. It may be
unresponsive, but I will get it nonetheless.
Seventy days ago, on March 28, I wrote Administrator Whitman of the
Environmental Protection Agency seeking information about her decision
to weaken the new protective standard for arsenic in drinking water.
This is a health issue affecting millions of Americans. I would note I
received no answer. A month ago I sent a similar letter seeking
additional information from Ms. Whitman about her arsenic decision.
Again, no answer. No information, no acknowledgment has been received.
Now, it would appear that the White House could inform Administrator
Whitman that stonewalling Congress is bad policy and that she should be
responding if only with a form letter. In any event, it appears the
Bush administration has this wonderful policy which needs to be
chronicled here. It is either a form letter or no response at all.
Madam Speaker, I will place in the Record these wonderful examples of
computer science in the hope that my colleagues will be able to share
perhaps their thoughts on similar events.

The White House,

Washington, March 14, 2001.
Hon. John D. Dingell,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Dingell: Thank you for your letter
regarding the Montgomery GI Bill program.
I have shared your letter with the President's advisors and
the appropriate agencies who have been formulating policy
recommendations in this area. Your comments are receiving
their close and careful attention.
Thank you for your interest in writing.
Sincerely,

Nicholas E. Calio,