They've annoyed me for years. In principle, constituent communication is supposed to be a primary means of self-governance. I am convinced that the USA ceased being a body of self-governing people a few generations ago, probably in the 1910's or 20's, but maybe as late as the 1960's.
Political leadership is in the game for pure self-serving reasons. I think the "open communications," "free speech," "free press" and "free elections" are mere pressure indication and relief devices. The leading class obtains feedback as to whether it is pushing too hard or too fast (but the leading class is relentless in pushing to demolish the power of the middle class and to make the US a sort of plantation), and it legitimizes its actions as being the will of the people (see free elections). The more the people talk, the more the action becomes legitimate.
I think the republic would be better off if the general public STOPPED wasting energy communicating with leaders, and caused the leaders to show their own hand. The leaders follow orders of well-heeled lobbyists, and rarely, if ever, change a position on account of public pressure. The Congress would really get the willies if the public suddenly dummied up. They watch the public like hawks, looking for signs of serious dissent (i.e., signs that the people have figured out that talk is pointless), all the while assuring the public that they (Congress) have a majority of free people supporting them, and thereby have the authority and power to fix what ails the country.
Every call, even those in dissent, adds legitimacy to Congress. They're so smart, let them act on their own. The principle of self-government is busted, and I, for one, quit pretending it works.
As brilliant as our forefathers were, I don’t think they ever anticipated a 1-party takeover of all three branches. They gave the people more credit than we deserved.
It saddens me but you post is true.