Where has there been the least movement?
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Steven Clift
Nov 13, 2007, 11:52:44 PM11/13/07
to Openhous...@googlegroups.com, theopenho...@googlegroups.com
I'm working up a keynote for a conference in Mexico City and I'd like to point out a couple examples where political reform promises of the last election have brought tangile changes online in Congress and where there in reality has been no movement and strong resistance.
For example, are ethics filings any closer to full online access or are they still stuck in the basement with no timeline agreed for Internet access?
The point I'll be making is that a dynamic online campaign in 08 doesn't mean dynamic online governance in 09 (although it should).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://stevenclift.com
Sent via mobile: +1 612 203 5181
Tim McGhee
Nov 14, 2007, 3:28:19 PM11/14/07
to openhous...@googlegroups.com
I would say this is one of those things that is way to complex for it just to be a matter of one decision for one change that can just happen.
These are the kinds of things that take years to change, and year-to-year you just look for steps towards the goal, not results.
As for an open Congress, that depends on your definition of open. And does your definition of open look different based on how much control you have.
Sounds like you're making a valid point.
Tim
11,119 days
These are the kinds of things that take years to change, and year-to-year you just look for steps towards the goal, not results.
As for an open Congress, that depends on your definition of open. And does your definition of open look different based on how much control you have.
Sounds like you're making a valid point.
Tim
11,119 days
http://tim.mtopgroup.com
Psalm 90:12
So teach us to number our days,
That we may gain a heart of wisdom.
http://numberyourdays.com
John Wonderlich
Nov 14, 2007, 4:01:28 PM11/14/07
to openhous...@googlegroups.com
Nicely put, Tim.
I agree. I think the strongest examples of progress are coming in those areas where reform doesn't necessitate legislation, and won't interfere with any of the prerogatives of the majority (procedural control). This means getting RSS, structured data, and affecting the way IT reform that was happening anyway is prioritized.
The hardest reforms are the ones that have a more direct input on legislative maneuvres, like requiring bills be posted online before votes (contrary to the near omnipotence in scheduling afforded to the majority), requiring committee votes be posted online (contrary to the independence of the committee chairs), or requiring CRS reports to be publicly available (facing stiff administrative opposition).
Anywhere a clear trend can be recognized and illuminated towards distributed content and a clear public good, then Congress will be more likely to respond favorably. We just have to continue to create and encourage that narrative, and help connect the political, technological, and social dots to make it happen.
john--
John Wonderlich
Program Director
The Sunlight Foundation
(202) 742-1520 ext. 234
I agree. I think the strongest examples of progress are coming in those areas where reform doesn't necessitate legislation, and won't interfere with any of the prerogatives of the majority (procedural control). This means getting RSS, structured data, and affecting the way IT reform that was happening anyway is prioritized.
The hardest reforms are the ones that have a more direct input on legislative maneuvres, like requiring bills be posted online before votes (contrary to the near omnipotence in scheduling afforded to the majority), requiring committee votes be posted online (contrary to the independence of the committee chairs), or requiring CRS reports to be publicly available (facing stiff administrative opposition).
Anywhere a clear trend can be recognized and illuminated towards distributed content and a clear public good, then Congress will be more likely to respond favorably. We just have to continue to create and encourage that narrative, and help connect the political, technological, and social dots to make it happen.
john
John Wonderlich
Program Director
The Sunlight Foundation
(202) 742-1520 ext. 234
Tim McGhee
Nov 14, 2007, 6:46:35 PM11/14/07
to openhous...@googlegroups.com
John makes an important point I've been thinking about with respect to these issues lately: these reforms will change the
legislative process. (Of course, the legislative process needs
changing, or we wouldn't be looking for reform, right?) Pretending
they won't bring change will only slow down the opening process.
There are vast differences between legislating and programming. They are almost as different as language is from numbers. Yes, there is a legislative process, but that process is entirely controlled by written words--the rules of each chamber--not mathematical code. These rules are written in English (no immigration reference intended) which must be interpreted and understood. Some rules are more well known than others and some are more used than others. And then you hear about those rules that are rarely invoked, especially in the Senate, but a little more in the House these days, too.
Enter structured data. A system that comprehensively can record everything that happens in a legislative chamber must have a place or way to account for anything that can happen. That means a thomas.loc.gov, GovTrack.us, OpenCongress.org or any open government kind of site should thoroughly know about every rule that can followed/invoked at any time.
Anyone can read the rules of a chamber, but there are only a very select few people in the world that have a thorough understanding of how these chambers work, and those folks most likely either are working in the parliamentarian's office, or used to and are now making lots of money working for lobbyists.
To see what I mean, take a look at any bill status page on Thomas and you'll see what I mean. As I've thought about how a bill becomes text, I've realized that the bill status page is just like a Twitter page for each bill where the chamber clerks manually write a line about what happened. A lot of it is consistent and therefore can be parsed, but there are no parsers out there that can anticipate every possible event that could be recorded there.
Now, let's assume for a minute that we achieve our goal and get over that rather formidable hump and we have a parser that truly knows everything that can happen in each chamber. Whoever builds that will know the chambers better than any staffer, and even staffers will know more of their procedural options for their legislative jousting efforts.
Once you know what your additional options are, you will use them!
That's when these reforms will change the legislative process.
Creating and getting Congress to internally adopt that kind of comprehensive electronic legislative recording environment means changing things with easily more than a century of history. Yes, this is indeed an uphill climb. These are not the efforts of one Congress or one election. These may not even be efforts of a single lifetime.
Tim
11,119 days--
Tim McGhee
703-798-3227
38.8205, -77.0445
There are vast differences between legislating and programming. They are almost as different as language is from numbers. Yes, there is a legislative process, but that process is entirely controlled by written words--the rules of each chamber--not mathematical code. These rules are written in English (no immigration reference intended) which must be interpreted and understood. Some rules are more well known than others and some are more used than others. And then you hear about those rules that are rarely invoked, especially in the Senate, but a little more in the House these days, too.
Enter structured data. A system that comprehensively can record everything that happens in a legislative chamber must have a place or way to account for anything that can happen. That means a thomas.loc.gov, GovTrack.us, OpenCongress.org or any open government kind of site should thoroughly know about every rule that can followed/invoked at any time.
Anyone can read the rules of a chamber, but there are only a very select few people in the world that have a thorough understanding of how these chambers work, and those folks most likely either are working in the parliamentarian's office, or used to and are now making lots of money working for lobbyists.
To see what I mean, take a look at any bill status page on Thomas and you'll see what I mean. As I've thought about how a bill becomes text, I've realized that the bill status page is just like a Twitter page for each bill where the chamber clerks manually write a line about what happened. A lot of it is consistent and therefore can be parsed, but there are no parsers out there that can anticipate every possible event that could be recorded there.
Now, let's assume for a minute that we achieve our goal and get over that rather formidable hump and we have a parser that truly knows everything that can happen in each chamber. Whoever builds that will know the chambers better than any staffer, and even staffers will know more of their procedural options for their legislative jousting efforts.
Once you know what your additional options are, you will use them!
That's when these reforms will change the legislative process.
Creating and getting Congress to internally adopt that kind of comprehensive electronic legislative recording environment means changing things with easily more than a century of history. Yes, this is indeed an uphill climb. These are not the efforts of one Congress or one election. These may not even be efforts of a single lifetime.
Tim
11,119 days
Tim McGhee
703-798-3227
38.8205, -77.0445
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages