In the summer of 2009, as Democratic town hall meetings grew unruly with protests over President Barack Obamas health care proposal, lawmakers looked for ways to calm the waters. One idea was to simply scrap the in-person town hall.

Instead of inviting constituents to community centers or school auditoriums, Democratic lawmakers would send out dial-in information for conference calls. People could still attend and questions could be posed. But the opportunities for direct confrontation the type that made for cable catnip were greatly limited.

I had hosted town hall meetings over the telephone so no one could act out, former Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.) told The Huffington Post. I knew [the protesters] entire purpose was to disrupt and create some video making a member look awkward and defensive. They didnt want dialogue. They wanted to shout at me and get on the television.

For short-term purposes, the strategy worked. Pomeroy and others were spared the heat of town hall unrest. But in the long run, it only cemented the image of lawmakers afraid to defend the very agenda their party was pursuing.

Looking back all these years, I didnt give them a platform to publicly humiliate me in a meeting for the purpose of trying to put me on TV, Pomeroy said. On the other hand, Id always prided myself on being open and engaging North Dakotans. In retrospect, maybe I should have done that more.

Eight years later, Republican lawmakers are faced with the same dilemma: to stand and endure the anger of constituents scared about the direction of their partys health care policy or to duck and cover in cozier confines. As in 2009, there appears to be some division over the best approach, with none proving particularly enjoyable.