Van Orden Visit Report

From Barbara:

On Friday February 21, 2025, nineteen citizens of Wisconsin’s Third Congressional District met with an aide to Representative Van Orden, Mary Carney. We were given a half hour to share our concerns. Though the conference room was large enough for all, only eight of us were allowed into the room. I can understand the concern that they might feel overwhelmed by the larger number. It was unfortunate for those excluded and uncomfortable for us included. 

As the organizer I was not informed of the size limitation till the day before by email. Our Congressional aide had tried to find a larger space when I sent an email that we might have many people attend. A larger space was not found.I was not informed of the time limitation till we were four minutes late in being invited in. We were moving in without invitation at that point. 

We tried to focus the meeting on two concerns with the chaos that has erupted in the Executive branch of the U.S. Government since January 20, 2025. First, we spoke of the great number of people’s lives being compromised physically, economically, professionally and most assuredly psychologically. Second, that we have seen the utter disregard for the rule of law as enacted by the Congress and as determined by the Judiciary.

I left knowing that the meeting could have been better. It held me for a long time. We attended a presentation about “Braver Angels” Friday night here in Viroqua. Then, while seeking sleep, I found the lack that I was seeking.

We had a good meeting of trading our realities back and forth. But there were at least two missed opportunities for a deeper conversation that I missed as organizer of the meeting. I share this description now because, perhaps, I and maybe others can seize those opportunities as they arise in the future. I am exploring options in the following analysis and hope that others may come up with similar responses to what I have been able to construct. If you do please share them.

An important moment in the discussion of the first concern above came when our aide reassured us that the funding cuts were “temporary.” That was a moment to step back from our trading of world views to examine those world views. I could have asked for clarification: What does temporary mean?  What do you think the effect of the “temporary” has on individuals, on service organizations, on farmers, businesses? I had asked that Mary Carney construct a line from 1 to 10 on her note paper to record negative to positive responses. Are these most “necessary/top priority” (10) or are they (1) “harmful/destructive diversions”?  

Then, the next question is why do you rate it at that number rather than another number on the scale? That question can then be reiterated to urge further expression of the reasoning/feeling underlying the first. This expression of curiosity can be followed further. A possible result is to find where the two world views meet.

During my reading of my script on the second concern above, another moment when curiosity would have been important occurred.  I read, “the pardoning of January 6 rioters who were convicted in various jurisdictions by a full court trial.” Mary Carney interjected that (as I remember): “They served four years!” Here again I could have stopped reading my script, which I had submitted as a paper copy, and asked for her rating of that pardoning from (1) Negative to (10) Positive. And why that number? And….

Perhaps in these two cases we might have found a deeper conversation possible. I invite, as I wrote above, readers of this to think of other “scale questions” that might have brought more meaningful communication than trading world views. Share them here or there.  Use them when an opportunity arises. 

We have a gulf in our nation that needs to be bridged. [Shared: YouTube video about Braver Angels.]