Legislation 2.0

by: Matt Stoller

Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 18:29


Over the course of the next week, we're going to be holding an experiment in using the internet to help create legislation.  Senator Durbin, one of the Democratic leaders in the Senate, is asking for our advice and help to craft a national broadband strategy.  He's asking for the public to participate in government, and to use the most populist medium ever devised to do it.  A variety of industry and public interest representatives are going to be a part of this discussion.  You will see, in some manner of speaking, how the process of legislating works.  And your blog posts and comments will be put on par with those of telecom and industry experts.  At the end of the discussion, Senator Durbin is going to take our feedback and use it to craft a bill.

This is a first of its kind collaboration, but hopefully it will not be the last.  Like many of us in the blogs, I came into politics through the electoral angle, principally by being a part of the Bush-Kerry contest in 2004.  The net neutrality discussion in 2005 was my first experience in legislative coalitions.  With very little attention in the traditional media, the conversation over the issue of network neutrality nevertheless took place in public, online, and our words and ideas actually had a big impact in Congress.  Subsequently, the conversation has moved to the states, and now, to the FCC, where there's a furious argument on the public airwaves among public interest groups, telecom and cable companies, public safety officials, Google, and the public itself.

At stake is not a set of wonky policy details, but a fundamental vision of how Americans communicate and relate to each other.  Is the internet, and broadband access to it, something to be held for people who only live in certain geographic areas?  Is the internet a content delivery vehicle offering a wider choice of content than any previous medium, or is it a public space to nurture democracy?  The set of incentives put into our airwaves and our national wireline infrastructure is the physical answer to these moral questions.

In other words, it's now time to begin to figure out our vision for a universal internet.  You're going to hear from people with whom you don't agree.  There are real and massive stakes in this fight.  Legislating is often known as a sausage factory, or a contest of interests done in private.  And in fact, I think a lot of the negative impressions of our lawmaking bodies comes from the secrecy of the process.  With the internet, we can put everyone and every lobbyist on a level playing field, and have a genuinely open contest of ideas.

So leave a comment for Senator Durbin.  On Tuesday, at 7:00pm, he's going to respond to comments and questions.  If you link to this conversation from your own blog, he'll read that post as well.  This is a collaborative project, meant to include as many voices as possible.

The internet opens up a lot of new possibilities for our republic, and hopefully, we'll explore them together.

Matt Stoller :: Legislation 2.0

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Legislation 2.0 | 13 comments
Count me in on this Matt! (0.00 / 0)
And I'll post about it and try and drum up some interest. Looking forward to chatting with you at YK2007. Hopefully anyway....I think the word for it will be 'zoo'. But maybe Gina's got it under control.

Hope so.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.


Another step in virtuous cycle (0.00 / 0)
This is great Matt.  Big thanks to Sen. Durbin for taking this step.

Props to Senator Durbin (0.00 / 0)
Let's hope that this legislation is successful. It would be nice if this was a test case for using this sort of model more frequently.

Poverty and the internet (0.00 / 0)
Probably like most visitors to this site, I think the internet is rich with democratic potential.  I would like to see this potential extend into communities plauged by poverty.  Since the beginning of the summer, I have been working on an anti-poverty campaign in Illinois, and even more than I expected, I am amazed at how under utilized the internet. This is tragic not only because the internet is such a powerful political tool, but it would also, I think, create economic opportunities in communites that need them.  Some of this is definitely question of organizing.  Poverty activists need to do a better job using the internet not simply to talk with each other, but also help people experiencing poverty use the net themselves.  But access to the net is also a problem.  I hope any net neutrality legislation takes this issue into account: not only to assure and protect a more democratic internet for all of us, but also create specific and targeted ways for people experiencing poverty to use the internet. 

Forgot to add. . . (0.00 / 0)
I recently began a blog for the anti-poverty campaign I mentioned in my initial comments  The Campaign's full title is From Poverty to Opportunity: Realizing Human Rights.  If you want to check out the campaign, just go to 
povertytoopportunity.blogspot.com

[ Parent ]
come on Tuesday at 7pm (0.00 / 0)
The internet's relationship to poverty is an interesting, and underexamined issue.

[ Parent ]
Access in public vs. private networks (0.00 / 0)
Good point. Low income rural and inner city areas tend to have the lowest level of broadband availability and penetration of PCs and Internet access.  Some muni-wireless projects focus on steps to bridge this "digital divide" as part of their plans, including funding to support subsidized access, distribution of PCs and some training.

It seems useful for anti-poverty groups and activists to share info and lessons learned about practical strategies for bridging the digital divide and leveraging increased Internet access to help overcome the economic opportunity divide.  There are probably already a good number of success (and failure) stories and case studies that could be shared and learned from by other communities.

A few companies have developed routers specifically designed to support WiFi-based sharing of a single broadband connection by multiple households (e.g., in an apartment complex).  One of the problems this faces is that broadband providers typically don't allow this kind of sharing. 

This speaks to the value of a publicly-owned access network whose goal is to maximize access rather than maximize internal cash flows.  For the former these network extensions would be viewed as contributors to the "business model" (maximum connectivity at the lowest per-unit cost).  For the latter they're likely to be viewed as a threat to the business model, and therefore resisted.


[ Parent ]
Let's start a conversation (0.00 / 0)
I think it's a great idea to bring together anti-poverty groups and activists who have experience in using internet technology in their work, so that we can share successes and failures and build better strategies to use the internet to fight poverty.  Any thoughts about how to get something like this started? 

[ Parent ]
Maybe contact muniwireless.com? (0.00 / 0)
It might be worth contacting groups that have gotten involved in some muni-wireless projects.  The Philadelphia project comes particularly to mind, since I believe its been pretty heavily focused on digital divide issues. 

A potential resource for finding such people/organizations might be Esme Vos, founder of the muniwireless.com web site (http://www.muniwirel...).  You might contact her, mention the basic idea and ask her if she could recommend some people well suited to help make something like that happen. 

There's a lot of "activism" in the muni-wireless space, but the drivers of it tend to vary by local community.  Esme might know where it has attracted anti-poverty groups and who best to contact. 

The muniwireless.com site is sort of an information hub for muni wireless projects and activists (they also regularly do conferences). You might consider posting some comments there in response to posts potentially related to this subject...or maybe even ask Esme if you could do a guest post about the potential value of low-cost Internet access to support anti-poverty efforts.  I'm pretty sure you can send her an email via the web site.


[ Parent ]
Thanks (0.00 / 0)
I'll follow up on these leads, and let you know how the go via a diary entry.  Thanks again.

[ Parent ]
One ($100) Laptop Per Child (0.00 / 0)
It might also be worth contacting the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) group(http://laptop.org/) I mentioned in another comment. Though their focus is on developing countries and they don't use a Windows OS, they might welcome dialog with the U.S. anti-poverty movement...and may already have some going.  It's an intriguing project and should at least be considering U.S. applications for their $100 laptops.

[ Parent ]
I'l be there Tuesday (0.00 / 0)
I'm just beginning to look at the internet's relationship to poverty.  I'm looking for any information, studies, etc. I can find.  I'd appreciate any suggestions you--or anyone--might have.  Just email me: povertytoopportunity@gmail.com

Thanks for this site and all the work you have done!


[ Parent ]
Government 24/7 + WiMAX tech (0.00 / 0)
Why do government services still operate mostly on a M-F, 9-5 basis?

I looked at some recent BLS data (an '00 paper on shifting employment trends) and around 16% of all Americans work 'alternative' (2nd or 3rd) shift. So why aren't government services staffed accordingly?

I use this example in a discussion of broadband because my Mom is now going late evenings to get treatment under her Medicare program because two local hospitals are sharing equipment (some radiation equip is down at one hospital). Everybody seems to be happy just to get the treatment with very few complaints even with 9 PM appointments. She checks her billing online 24/7 and can access medical information (not her records, after care recommendations and such) online 24/7 using a robust WiMax connection from a commercial provider (Clearwire). I know there are people who have the same medical conditions as my Mom who lack internet access and therefore lack the ability to get the same customer service my Mom gets. Showing up to get her radiation treatments at 9PM and checking her bill online at 11PM is as convenient as shopping at Amazon.com. But other people in this community have to deal with Medicare customer service by phone 9-5, can't get directions online at a glance to the medical facility, and can't focus on their own schedule and recovery.

I live in one of the few communities that have WiMax (a wireless broadband) and it seems to me this technology is ideal for community purchase and distrubition to all residents in a given area. Australia has chosen WiMax as part of a plan to deliver broadband to all it's residents and Italy and Thailand are working on WiMax solutions.

I'm not a tech expert but WiMax works almost exactly like a cell phone tower and the service has been great even in stormy FL weather at the edge of the service radius. It seems to me like this kind of wireless broadband is the way to go - at least in rural America where the number of users drawing bandwith on the same signal would be fewer. And building towers has to be cheaper than laying cable.

Is wireless broadband the future? Obviously cable companies are going to say NO based on their infrastructure but I would had for our internet access infrastructure to be shaped by who can profit most (like our health care system) instead of what is most effective and efficient.

Thanks for your time and leadership!

John McCain


Legislation 2.0 | 13 comments
Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search