Late last month, the CAO’s office announced the availability of a “logic puzzle” feature as an optional enhancement to the “Write Your Representative” online service already offered to House offices. The new feature is designed to reduce unwanted mass e-mail by requiring a user to complete a simple puzzle before being allowed to send a message to a Member. The idea is that only an actual person would be able to complete the puzzle and that automated mass e-mail programs would be thwarted from blasting offices with repeated form messages.

In the just more than two weeks since it was made available, about 60 Members have added the logic puzzle feature to their Web sites and, anecdotally, offices have said the service helps them respond faster and more effectively to constituents by weeding out mass e-mails.

But those in the business of targeting e-mails to Congressional offices on behalf of lobbying interests and grass-roots advocacy organizations are, not surprisingly, concerned about the new barrier to communication with Congress.

They say by curbing the overall volume of electronic communication, the logic puzzle also will curb qualified e-mails from genuinely concerned constituents. And some organizations say that by cutting down on overall e-mail communication, House offices are actually opening themselves up to more work as less efficient lobbying and grass-roots tactics increasingly are employed.

“We’ve heard from a number of our customers who are concerned about this, especially those inside the Beltway who are interested in building a communication bridge with the legislative assistants who handle their issues,” said J.C. Chamberlain, vice president of marketing and sales for The Soft Edge, which provides Congressional relations software for grass-roots and government relations organizations. “It seems like they are taking a step to cut themselves off from the kind of information gathering they have to do to be current on the view and beliefs of their constituents.”

He added that solving a logic puzzle may pose linguistic problems for certain cultures and also may present a bias as to what a “simple puzzle” is.

“Constituents are always, and the consulting community is always, going to find the ways to get their campaigns focused on,” said Suzanne Clarke, vice president of political involvement initiatives for e-Advocates, a sister company of Virginia-based advocacy consulting firm Capitol Advantage. “If we can’t do that through e-mail all those things like phone calls, office visits and faxing offices are going to increase and those things are infinitely more time consuming. ... E-mail should be their best friend and they haven’t figured out how to make it their best friend.”

The plea for finding a new way to prevent unwanted mass e-mails first was raised by the office of Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) in January.

“We just wanted to reduce the amount of spam we were receiving,” said Taylor Amstutz, Nunes’ communications director. “We were getting so much spam mail we felt the need for this, specifically from a staff perspective, in order to manage what was coming in.”

After looking at some verification and anti-spam technology used in the private sector, Nunes’ office began working with House Information Resources to find a solution to its mass mail overload.

“We wanted to make this system as easy to use as possible for folks,” Amstutz said. “We wanted to make sure we didn’t create any burden when writing in.”

For instance, the logic puzzle feature that eventually was developed sticks to number sequences and simple text-based questions rather than shape recognition for low-vision or legally blind individuals.

However, the CAO’s office noted in an e-mail introducing the new feature on May 22 that the logic puzzle is likely only a temporary solution.

“Just as antivirus software cannot protect against all computer viruses, the Logic Puzzle may not prevent messages from being submitted by all automated programs, and may lose its effectiveness over time as new technologies are developed to circumvent the feature,” CAO Jay Eagan wrote. “In the event that the Logic Puzzle feature is rendered ineffective, the CAO’s House Information Resources team will continue to monitor emerging technology for solutions to address these issues.”

“We’re already in an arms race,” said Jon Brandt, spokesman for the House Administration Committee, which oversees the CAO’s office. “Our main goal is to ensure that constituents are able to communicate directly with Members of Congress, that is first and foremost. And when offices are inundated with blast e-mails it means legitimate communications from constituents do not get responded to in a timely manner.”

Brandt noted last week that on June 5 there were 8,262 views of the logic puzzle feature and that, of those, only 1,568 actually were answered.

“I don’t think it’s because the question was so hard,” Brandt said. Some logic puzzle questions include “What is five minus one?” and “What is the sum of two plus one?”

Regardless of the level of difficulty, companies that consult and provide the technology for advocacy and grass-roots groups already are working to make sure their clients’ messages are heard.

Late last week, Capitol Advantage President Bob Hansan sent a letter to customers assuring them that software programs already had been updated so that messages are still being delivered.

“When this situation came to light about three weeks ago, our technical team started on a solution immediately,” Hansan wrote. “Please know that we will continue to actively pursue not only technical solutions to any barricades that elected officials erect, but will also work with those officials on solutions that are beneficial to the entire advocacy community.”

According to Kathy Goldschmidt, deputy director of the nonprofit, nonpartisan Congressional Management Foundation, focusing efforts on understanding both sides of the issue rather than continuing the technological e-mail arms race is the most practical way to develop an effective, and lasting, solution.

In a report released last year titled “Communicating with Congress: How Capitol Hill is Coping with the Surge in Citizen Advocacy,” the CMF found that many Congressional staff doubt the legitimacy of identical form communications and that personalized or individualized messages to Congress have more influence on Members’ decision-making process. Yet the report also notes that “preliminary research suggested that most of the communications sent to Capitol Hill are authentic communications from constituents, or at least include the consent of the constituent at some stage in the process.”

“What we see as the long-term solution here is for the two sides to get together to vet their issues and dispel the misperceptions that abound on both sides and agree on solutions that are mutually beneficial,” Goldschmidt said.