Out of the Smoke-Filled Room and Onto the Internet
The concept of crowdsourcing — soliciting information from a wide range of people responding to an open call over the internet — is drawing some interest at the Capitol and could play a significant role in the way Texas lawmakers handle a key issue next session.
“Let’s say you want to take drafting legislation out of the smoke-filled room and turn it over to the hands of the populace,” said Steven Polunsky, floating the idea of drafting a bill through crowdsourcing to a group of developers at a recent meeting of Social Media Club Austin.
It wasn’t a hypothetical scenario ...
Comments (8)
Tedi Elliott via Texas Tribune on Facebook
He knows, doesn't he that we won't be needing his services much longer?
audrey fisher
In this dream scenario, isn't he also saying that those who do not have internet access in TX (latest estimate I saw was 30-40 %) are being further disenfranchised. Not to mention that this could easily be an ALEC backed members try to run the table and say it is "democratic" process.
Steven Polunsky
@Audrey Fisher - The opposite of what you're thinking. This approach augments all the existing methods of input and in some cases is better. For example, right now anyone in the world can send a fax, or multiple faxes, on any subject, but only if they have access to a fax machine; one fax at a time can be received, and it's not easy for anyone other than the receiving office to see what was faxed. If an internet forum approach is used, all the messages are received publicly and available for anyone to see.
audrey fisher
@Steve, OK, so now tell me how this would actually enable the process? Do you really believe that those who want "x" would not hire lobbyist's like individuals to increase the number of points based on how that would benefit themselves? We already have seen how many Internet websites have been "gamed", or have you forgotten the "push" by some to assure that their POV was enabled and the opposition POV was buried? Do a search of the Diggs. Anyone with Internet saavy can create multiple addresses. If people were concerned that a POV was being gamed, how would that be addressed?
I am not necessarily for or against this, but I have seen how this can be gamed. So before we get all excited about this, there need to be some real protection in place. Sorry, I'm not the person with the answer, but I am the person with questions.
"Political Humor": we currently have more lobbyists than politicians and I'm willing to bet a nickel that their salaries are above the mean (not median) annual salary of $55K.
Steven Polunsky
@Audrey you're right to be asking those questions, government is something of a contact sport. The exact mechanics are still under discussion and your comments are helpful. At a minimum, it's casting as wide a net as possible for input and reaction and inviting anyone with an interest one way or another to share their thoughts publicly, where everyone can see them. It increases access and augments the process.
audrey fisher
@Steve, ok, now I am laughing! "The exact mechanisms are still under discussion". Where is this "discussion" being held....certainly, not here on the Internet! Or at least not on a site that I know of, where it can be broadly discussed.
audrey fisher
@Steve,
Just one more thought. If this process was to go forward, one more inherent problem. Legislation is not clear cut, as much legislation is in reference to laws currently on the books and is referenced as a "change". However, for those (like me) don't have the time to research what the newly proposed legislation will actually do.
Off the top of my head, consider a US Congressional piece of legislation written by Price (GA), 2010,which was the GOP healthcare legislation. Is was only 200 pages long, but most of it was about change to the Federal Code, which is listed but not explained. Then try and find the CFR and try and understand it - nearly impossible.
In a first come, first serve piece of legislation, or even ballot initiatives, few individuals read much more than the Headline, which can say one thing and really not do what is noted in the Headline.
Transparency is a good thing, don't get me wrong, but there is always a word to those who propose this, at present, I have reservations if the debate / input would be factual.
Steven Polunsky
Those are great comments. You're right, it is a big challenge to get widespread input on complex issues, and have that input reflected in the outcome. We'll do our best. I'd like to thank the Social Media Club of Austin for letting us raise the concept in a public, Internet-broadcast discussion, and the Texas Tribune for bringing it to a larger audience and providing this forum for feedback.