Category Archives: Articles

A to Z for E-Government and Democracy – The Continuum of Government Online Support for Democracy – By Steven Clift – 1998

A to Z for E-Government and Democracy

The Continuum of Government Online Support for Democracy

(This was my outline for piece I had hoped to include in the G8 Government Online Services and Democracy Publication of which I was Co-Editor. Oh, well.  Here it is now.)

By Steven Clift
Copyright 1998

All points assume the availability of remote electronic information access through the Internet.

A. Access to basic contact information.

B. Access to basic purpose and function information.

C. Access to basic government information on voting and elections.

D. Access to directories of government organizations and services.

E. Ability to contact the government organization through multiple methods including e-mail.

F. Access to detailed information explaining the decision-making process, public participation opportunities, and functioning of a government organization.

G. Timely access to up-to-date schedules of all public meetings, hearings, and other events that make up the formal decision-making process.

H. Ability to communicate electronically directly with individuals or appropriate contacts points within government organization as a part of the participatory, decision-making, or formal complaint process.

I. Use of informal online comment forms, surveys, and other feedback tools.

J. Consistent and reliable access to all legally disclosable government information generated as a part of the official decision-making process (legislative, administrative rulemaking, official recommendations from councils and other appointed bodies).

K. Provision of searchable information locator tools to indices or full text of publicly available government documents and information.

L. Push distribution of timely information or pre-set preference determined decision-making information as it becomes available on government information access systems.

M. Use of interactive technology (video or audio conferencing) to allow remote public testimony or observation as well as member attendance and voting at in-person public meetings.

N. Special interactive online events are hosted by government organizations to complement in-person public participation or education programs on government activities and public issues.

O. Ongoing use of interactive online events and communication spaces.

P. Establishment of formal electronic information request mechanisms for government information that is not available publicly online, but is legally available upon request.

Q. Access and remote use of database tools for access to detailed government budget, spending, and other public accountability information.

R. Access and remote use of database tools for access to legally read more to their available campaign finance, spending, elected official expense information and lobbyist information.

S. Automated remote access to drafts, internal proposals, and other more politically sensitive, but legally public documents. (Many laws prohibit this deep of access while others allow specific requests for documents to be met under various conditions.)

T. Ability to legally register to vote or update citizen registry information online.

U. Ability to vote in elections or referendums through ones preferred secure method including those that use information technology.

… V. W. X. Y. Z. – The A-Z for GOL and Democracy!

Building Citizen-based Electronic Democracy Efforts – By Steven Clift – 1997

Building Citizen-based Electronic Democracy Efforts


This paper was presented to the Internet and Politics: The Modernization of Democracy Through the Electronic Media conference sponsored by the Academy of the Third Millennium in Munich, Germany on Feb. 19-21, 1997.

The Power Point slides from this presentation are available: Building Citizen-based E-Democracy Efforts – HTML/JPEG Version or Text Slides or the actual Power Point file for Windows for downloading – be sure to save as.

By Steven L. Clift

Copyright 1997, Steven Clift – Non-commercial use of this document is encouraged. It may be photocopied and distributed or linked to for such purposes. Publication or electronic reproduction for public dissemination or general commercial use requires permission of the author.

Table of Contents

  • Introduction
  • Organization and Mission
    • Leaders
    • Mission and Outline
    • Geographic Audience Focus
    • Neutral on Positions
    • Core Volunteer Group
    • Focus and Expectations
  • Information Infrastructure
    • Donated Infrastructure and Collaboration
    • Electronic Conferencing for Core Group
    • Announcement E-mail Distribution List
    • World-Wide-Web Site
    • Citizens’ Open Discussion Forum
      • E-mail Lists
      • Newsgroups
      • WWW Conferencing
      • Minnesota E-Democracy’s Implementation
    • Public Access Points
  • Participants
    • Building Audience One Person at a Time
    • Attract People with a Mix of Experience, Backgrounds and Opinions
    • Develop a Media Strategy
  • Conclusion
  • Recommended Further Reading and WWW Sites

Introduction

Over the last century we have witnessed a revolution in communications that has moved much of the public discourse and agenda-setting from the individual and community level to the mass level. As communication technologies and their use by people continues to evolve there are indications that this trend is now reversing with some notable globalization exceptions. With computer-meditated communications, people are reclaiming their communications power from mass institutions. This paper is a concise guide geared toward those who want to build citizen-based efforts that work to ensure that this shift toward many-to-many communication increases the capacity for citizen participation in democracy.

Just as individuals are using the Internet for their own personal interests, so to are traditional political, government, media, and other organizations. Most existing organizations will determine how to use the Internet and electronic communications to represent and further their own interests. Organizations that do not do so within the next few years may not exist a decade from now.

If most of the interests in society “get online,” does that mean that democracy will be improved? Will this by default improve citizen participation, public discourse and public problem-solving? In my general opinion, the answer is no, but it doesn’t have to be.

I work from the premise that technology is essentially neutral, but that strategic and organized use of information technology and networks by citizen-based efforts will make an important contribution to improved democracy at many levels. As a start, information networks hold the potential to raise awareness about elections and candidate positions, but the ultimate benefit will be a more democratic society. A society where more people are able to hear and listen to each other, have a public voice in agenda setting, and have an increased ability to contribute toward the resolution of public problems.

Citizen-based electronic democracy is about creating the online public spaces for interaction among citizens and organized interests (that are for the most part only focused on using electronic communication to further their own goals.) In a simple sense, we are creating an open and on-going town hall meeting where ideas, agendas, personalities, interests, and beliefs may mix dynamically. We are creating an arena for public expression, development of opinion, and accountability.

This paper presents a concise outline of steps one must take in the establishment and carrying out of a citizen-based online citizen participation project primarily from the Minnesota E-Democracy experience. In traditional terms, the is about creating an online combination of a debate society, voter participation organization, and a public policy group (that all happen to be meeting in the same corner coffee shop at the same time.) The three main sections of the paper are Organization and Mission, Information Infrastructure, and Participation. Much of what is covered will come across as “Organizing 101.” These lessons will help move us from individuals with heady goals toward a global association of individuals and organizations dedicated to building online citizen participation in our own communities, regions, and nations.


Organization and Mission

1. Leaders – An effort to establish a citizen-based organization requires leadership. In the few places around the world where citizen to citizen online political participation efforts have been established or are under development, someone took the initiative to publicly propose the idea. They found people who were interested and made the personal and public commitment to take the public interest and make the idea a reality. The first step is to determine if you are going to be the person to offer leadership where you would like to see a project established. If yes, then think about your strengths and your limits and then seek help by finding others who are interested. Perhaps your role as a leader is to simply propose the idea and gather those interested. If you don’t see yourself as a leader, then be ready to offer your help as an active volunteer once someone else publicly proposes an effort (but why wait?).

2. Mission and Outline – Develop a clear and concise mission. This mission should lead off a document with a more detailed outline of the project’s ideas, plans, and needs. The outline can then be used to build a base of public interest and awareness through wide distribution. The mission and outline will help develop the needed volunteer base and help others determine what they might bring to the project. Depending upon the reaction and number of interested individuals the effort should be flexible enough to revisit and improve the mission if needed to gain broader consensus and support. Also, while funding might help a project get started, most projects will be started with in-kind donations and support.

3. Geographic Audience Focus – Defining the geographic audience from the start is essential. While the Internet is often referred to as a “global community,” a project geared toward promoting citizen participation in “real” politics needs a geographic focus to become relevant to a broader cross-section of the population. Think of it as the “glocalization” of the Internet. Further, while the culture of a region does vary from place to place, the larger the population and area covered, the more difficult it is to build a sense of place and accountability. The ability to have online discussion participants meet for in-person events and the realization of publicness versus the (false) sense anonymity on global forums can help ensure a more relevant and civil exchange. From neighborhoods and townships to cities and regions to states and provinces to nations and international regions, the potential for projects exists. Over the next decade blocks of more local efforts will become the foundation for regional or national efforts, in other cases national or state-wide efforts will lead to local efforts.

4. Neutral on Positions – Key to a successful project is the broad participation of many individuals and organizations. a citizen-based effort requires a non-partisan approach and no formal political positions should be taken by the effort’s oversight structure. The main purpose of a citizen-based effort is to bring people together with diverse opinions and backgrounds for electronic interaction and discussion of public issues deemed to be important by the participants. Thousands of political, media, government and commercial organizations are now online. Our challenge is to create public spaces where they can interact. The disappointing application of the Internet in politics thus far has been the lack of adaption toward interactive communication among different organized interests. Current use has been focused on traditional message control and prompting of protest from their supporters to various level of representative government or general advocacy/candidate support. While there is nothing inherently wrong with using information technology to put pressure on elective representative bodies, if that is all we use advanced technology for we will simply freeze the process without prompting new avenues for public consensus development.

5. Core Volunteer Group – a core group of 5 to 15 volunteers, depending upon the scope and scale of activities, is all one needs to begin implementing a project. Minnesota E-Democracy, the project I launched in the summer of 1994, currently has around 8 dedicated volunteers with fairly well defined roles and responsibilities. Ensuring that volunteers receive public credit and thanks for their work is very important. Also, in some cases an effort like this might be led by a committee or sub-group of a community network. Involving people active from a mix of political parties, public policy organizations, government, media, non-profits and business sector in the core group will help ensure unbiased project development and increase its credibility. It is important to point out that the Minnesota experience shows the value of formal and informal connection to a variety of groups. As a citizen organization you will have more flexibility than larger institutions. However, you will not always have the resources of an newspaper or established public policy organization for example. If a mix of organizations can take the lead on a project activity as a part of your broader effort it should be seriously considered. I am currently of the opinion that in the end, comprehensive efforts like this require the establishment of new institutions that are “of the Internet” and not simply reconfigured or sub-projects of efforts born of other communication technologies.

6. Focus and Expectations – Keep the project focused on the agreed upon mission and project outline. Never over-hype the project – raised expectations will never be met. Based on the understanding that the technology for online citizen participation exists, the human implementation and use will take years, one should stretch expectations over the long-term. Only expand your efforts in areas where you have the volunteer support to maintain those efforts. Scan the online efforts of other groups in the target area and highlight their good work from your World-Wide-Web service. This will help bring these groups into your efforts and promote “links” back to your online efforts. Starting “small” with election information and discussions and moving into general citizen participation and public issue discussions has worked well for the Minnesota project. Elections provide a deadline for activity and help a project develop a sense of action and accomplishment.


Information Infrastructure

1. Donated Infrastructure and Collaboration – Work with community networks, educational networks, commercial online services (both content and Internet service providers), and others to develop the technical information infrastructure you need. Minnesota E-Democracy has its WWW pages on the community network called the Twin Cities Free-Net and its major public e-mail list, MN-POLITICS, is hosted by the non-profit, but commercial, Minnesota Regional Network. By clearly identifying your information infrastructure needs you will encourage a bit of “collaborative competition” among groups interested in supporting your effort. Minnesota E-Democracy has received its basic information infrastructure on an in-kind donation basis (for the most part our volunteers are responsible for general infrastructure administration – WWW pages, e-mail list administration, etc.). Now that we have started fundraising from foundations, we are contributing toward the community network for their excellent support. In the fall of 1996 we received WWW support in a crunch from Minnesota Regional Network that allowed us to “virtual host” with the permanent WWW address of: http://www.e-democracy.org – Virtual hosting is important because it allows you to move your WWW site if needed.

2. E-Mail and WWW Conferencing for the Core Group – The core volunteer group should be connected through a small working group e-mail address. This helps make our in person meetings much more effective and efficient. When anyone sends e-mail to our “e-democracy@freenet.msp.mn.us” address it actually sends a message to our board members. This allows the group to share in responding to questions and suggestions from others. It is primarily used as an internal project communication tool. The core group should also consider using newer WWW-based conferencing tools for organization and volunteer activities.

3. Announcement E-mail Distribution List – E-mail lists (listservs) are the “heartbeat” of the Minnesota E-Democracy effort. It is essential that a project have a one-way, low volume announcement list that interested people may subscribe their e-mail address to. The “MN-DEMOCRACY” list has over 1000 subscribers. This is a powerful tool for communication of important project updates and solicitation of new volunteers and content needed for the WWW site. Be sure to heavily promote subscriptions to this kind of list from your WWW site and in print materials.

4. World-Wide-Web Site – The primary place people who are online will discover your project is through the WWW. Your site should be well organized and kept up-to-date. Do not disappoint your audience by placing “under construction” signs everywhere, if you are going to use the orlando roofer roof top services try to do so during the weekend, so your sells still the same, and most importantly, your costumers stay happy. Use the WWW to provide access to the descriptions, subscription processes, and archives of your public e-mail lists. Use the WWW to present “community content” developed by volunteers. a number of your pages will be directory pages that point to other sites and information resources within your citizen participation, politics, and elections focus. Do this well and your site will generate increased traffic. Your project should be accessible to as many people as possible; therefore it is advised that you use standard HTML (3.2 or lower) for formatting your documents. This will help ensure access for the disabled and through text-only browsers like Lynx that many library systems use. While your “image” and use of graphics is important, use them carefully and be sensitive to the download time of users.

5. “Citizens’ Open Discussion Forum” – Electronic conferencing among participants in interactive forum(s) is very important. This ensures that your project moves from the publishing/broadcast mentality to one that builds online public spaces whose sense of ownership can be assumed by participants. There are three main Internet-based conferencing systems that allow for ongoing discussion – e-mail lists, newgroups, and WWW-based conferencing. Another system not described here, but worth exploring for special events, like a guest speaker in real time, is chat. Ultimately the user should be able to choose the platform they are most comfortable with, but practical differences in technological implementation lead to different interactive characteristics. Some general comments and reflections are below.

E-mail Lists – An e-mail list allows people to subscribe their e-mail address to a list server which then forwards them e-mail sent to a single e-mail address. Lists typically have descriptions or charters which limit the scope of discussions and some lists are moderated. They tend to work fairly well when well defined and guided, but have limitation when the membership rises over a certain point. (From my experience, open discussion lists with over 1000 (perhaps even 500) people tend to generate a volume of postings that drive people away or are difficult to manage from a technical perspective.) E-mail lists require the most commitment of participants and are “active” in that once you join a list you have to make the decision to unsubscribe in order to leave that “online public space.”

Newsgroups – Newsgroups are the backbone for global topical discussions and information exchange that work through a distributed server system. Newsgroups also exist at national and more local levels. It has been estimated that the per message distribution scale of news makes it the most technically efficient mechanism in terms of network traffic. There are more state and provincial level newsgroups on politics than there are e-mail lists, however, they tend to not be sponsored or promoted in the way that e-mail lists are. It is also less likely that rules and guidelines on posting volumes (unless the group is moderated, which takes extensive volunteer time of a person) exist or would be viewed as acceptable. The GovNews effort (http://www.govnews.org) effort may offer newsgroup space for local electronic democracy efforts and organizers to meet. Newsgroups, like WWW-conferencing require a user to go to a conference. Then is a sense newsgroups are “passive,” while the user must be active. Noting that e-mail is the most used buy zolpidem in uk online tool, moving strictly to newsgroups would limit your audience. From an organizers perspective “making the sell” once is a lot easier than having to do it every time someone decides to go online. One alternative is to gateway your e-mail lists to newsgroups, but make sure that your rules are available to newsgroup readers who are generally not used to posting limits. Also, the desire to create scores of topical or geographical based “community” or more generalist online discussion spaces will find the economics of news much more to their liking than e-mail lists. Overtime with gatewaying software, hybrid possibilities should be explored.

WWW-Conferencing – The WWW for conferencing is gaining in popularity and dozens of political WWW conferences have emerged at the national and state level. Like newsgroups they offer the reader the ability to access the “discussion thread” of their choice and allow the creation of highly topical discussions with smaller and likely more interested audiences. WWW-conferencing is still in its beginning phases, but the various competing proprietary systems are making rapid improvements. These systems may offer great tools for organizational development and volunteer activities. It may also become the preferred platform for special online events that are organized by citizen-based efforts. The challenge with this form of conferencing is building and keeping audience and commitment of participants to return to a WWW conference. If the commitment is already there, this might be an excellent platform. However, it must be noted that WWW-conferencing requires a continuous connection to the Internet while e-mail and newsgroups allow the person to download messages and read and compose responses off-line.

Minnesota E-Democracy’s Implementation – This project is the most experienced in the use of e-mail lists and is biased in that direction. The “MN-POLITICS” e-mail forum has been the heartbeat of the Minnesota E-Democracy process and has around 400 direct e-mail subscribers. It is the largest state-level politics e-mail list in the United States and averages close to 10 postings a day. Subscribers have the options of receiving messages individually (the default) or through a digested version of the posting sen periodically in one large indexed message. All the postings dating back to the start of the list in August 1994 are archived on the WWW.

It is important that a forum of this nature have a well developed charter and that rules and guidelines be developed over time to ensure that this unmoderated “public space” is of ever increasing value to most of the participants. Having a “list manager” or other project volunteers step in from time to time to guide the discussion back to the forum’s focus is very important. The first two or three months of a list is the most crucial time frame to establish a pattern of successful public conferencing. Our two messages per person per day rule helps keep anyone person from dominating the discussion. It does not censor what someone can say, just how often they can say it. This also helps ensure time for discussions that involve more people before they are taken too far or “into the ground.” In terms of mixing discussion with tips on “hard” information resources, it is also helpful to develop a set of volunteer WWW “hunters” who look for interesting content and WWW site references for distribution on the list.

E-mail forums require commitment and so does civic participation! By subscribing to an e-mail list you are essentially saying, “Come into my home. I am interested in hearing what you have to say.” With a good charter and list guidelines subscribers do have the right to say, however, “I’d rather you not wipe your dirty feet all over my carpets and I am sorry but parts of my house are off-limits.”

In the fall of 1996, through the work of our E-Debate Coordinator, Scott Aikens, we reengaged our MN-DEBATE e-mail list for our second, and the only, U.S. Senate candidate e-mail based debate. In 1994 we held online debates for both the Governor and U.S. Senate candidates. In a sense we created an online stage and structure for a week long debate on three questions with designated rebuttal periods. The debate content was fed into MN-POLITICS for public reaction as well as distributed to a number of high profile media-based online efforts in Minnesota as part of the Minnesota Town Hall 1996 effort. The debate feed was then threaded into a number of different WWW conferencing systems. Over the last year, Minnesota E-Democracy has floated a proposal for another list called MN-FORUM which would create an similar structure to MN-DEBATE, but likely be issue based for “organized online moments.” Depending upon resources and volunteer capacity this forum may be launched in the next year.

Some important references for more details on these topics include:

6. Public Access Points – “Electronic Democracy” will forever be elitist without some capacity for people without computers or home Internet connections to participate. This paper argues for leveraging of the necessary information infrastructure from various organizations. Along these lines working with libraries, schools, colleges, cafes, and other current or potential public locations of Internet public access points is an important extension. The online content efforts of the commercial and government sectors have a tremendous interest in promoting public access for their own reasons. Work to ensure that your effort is one of the reasons why such access points gain community support (for the most part free to use Internet public access points require public monies to exist.)


Participants

1. Building Audience One Person at a Time – People will be brought into your efforts, either as volunteers or participants in your forums, one person at a time. There is no short-cut to broad participation, so focus on creating a valuable experience for those you are able to bring in the project. The one-way announcement e-mail list will help with the development of an audience of “civic-minded” individuals and organizations. Many of the people who are interested in your project will be new to the Internet and you don’t want to overwhelm them right away with a flood of messages. It is much more likely that an elected official would appreciate project updates, but initially only a few will take the time to follow the open forum discussions. Overall, be strategic and use “traditional” means of outreach to involve key people, organizations, targeted populations, and the general public.

2. Attract People with a Mix of Experience, Backgrounds, and Opinions – The key to Minnesota E-Democracy’s early success was that it involved people with a diverse mix of skills and experiences. We had people with political, academic, organizational, non-profit, public policy, business, and technical backgrounds involved from the start. The project outline identified a set of needs that no one person could ever hold – so when we attracted a good mix of people who were willing to commit time to the project we were able to move forward without wearing out any one volunteer.

3. Develop a Media Strategy – My own quote is that the “Internet has 5 million channels and everything is on.” Build it and they will never come unless you tell them where it is. Currently, the traditional media is the best way to let a population in a specific area know about the project. So write and strategically distribute press releases, collect media e-mail addresses and encourage them to join your announcement e-mail list. When dealing with the media, encourage publication of your general e-mail address, subscription information for the announcement list, the project’s WWW address, and the general open forum’s subscription information. In general under-hype, yes under-hype your project. Letting the reporter decide that your project is newsworthy or some how noble is much better than telling them that it is. In general don’t claim that “citizen-based electronic democracy” is representative or some form of self-selected direct democracy. Instead talk about how you are working to something positive to encourage more purposeful use of the Internet now that more people are going online.

In the end, the real success might be measured in how people begin using the global Internet to come home to their neighborhood or actually getting people out to public meetings (this has happened a number of times on MN-POLITICS where people have reported on meetings they attended). As more and more members of the media have joined our lists to follow our discussions, it has become clear that we have created a new public opinion sphere that has led to a number of topical stories in the traditional media. This has given a number of participants the opportunity to be quoted in the paper or interviewed on the radio.

Conclusion

This is about real democracy. “Electronic democracy” is not some notion of a future state of affairs, it is simply today’s democracy with an infusion of people using information networks and technology to assist their participation in “democracy.” Information technology is changing our current form of democracy. Will is be for th better? We don’t know. Without the development of online “citizen participation centers” across the world, I think the primary direction will be negative. We know that established interests and organizations will use information technology to further their interests. That is how democracy works. But without an open “public space” online, these interest’s use of technology will simply raise the level of noise and conflict in out traditional political institutions and media. With a well established, neutral, online public space perhaps these interests will enter a circle of accountability and public awareness that will enable everyday citizens to become real part of broad public discussions and hopefully part of future solutions.


Recommended Further Reading and WWW Sites


Digital Democracy Report – from the Minnesota Government Information Access Council – 1996

This report was released by the Minnesota Government Information Access Council (WayBack Archive) in December, 1996. In 1994, an extensive list of policy questions that I drafted helped launch this important policy exploration funded by our state legislature.

As a Senior Planner with the Information Policy Office (now part of the Office of Technology) in the Department of Administration, I provided extensive staff assistance to this council and drafted many parts of this very collaborative document. Like so many useful government documents, this document is not longer available online from the State of Minnesota directly. So here is the text below.

(Correction – A version scanned from the paper version by the Legislative Reference Library is now online.)

MINNESOTA
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
ACCESS COUNCIL

DIGITAL DEMOCRACY

Minnesota Citizens’ Guide for Government Information PolicyTABLE OF CONTENTS

Government Information Access Council: Digital Democracy

Citizens’ Guide for Government Policy in the Information Age

Executive Summary……………………………………………. iA. Recommendations…………………………………. i

B. Principles……………………………………………. iii

I. Introduction………………………………………………. 1

A. Tools of Democracy………………………………. 1

B. Vision………………………………………………….. 2

II. Recommendations……………………………………… 3

A. System Design……………………………………… 4

B. Training……………………………………………….. 4

C. Government On-line……………………………… 5

D. Information Policy Organization

and Enforcement…………………………………… 6

E. Community Access………………………………… 7

F. Additional Recommendations………………….. 8

III. Guiding Principles……………………………………… 12

Appendices

A. The Government Information Access Council (GIAC)………………………. 19

B. GIAC Enabling Legislation, and the Minnesota Data Practices Act…….. 25

C. Nominal Group Process Used for Recommendation Prioritization………. 31

D. Working Group Objectives and Report Excerpts……………………………….. 32

E. British Columbia Model for Independent Commissioner of

Freedom of Information and Privacy………………………………………………… 58

F. Bibliography and Resources……………………………………………………………. 59

G. GIAC Member Additional Comments………………………………………………. 60

H. Reader Comment/Feedback Form…………………………………………………….. 61

DIGITAL DEMOCRACY

Government Information Access Council

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Minnesota Government Information Access Council (GIAC) was created in 1994 by the Minnesota State Legislature for the following purposes: to improve public access to government information and, therefore, to improve the democratic process, through the use of information technology; and to help government become more efficient, effective and responsive to the public through the use of information technology.

GIAC is a broadly representative group of 29 members who have met to provide vision and leadership for the tremendously exciting and challenging issues that the Ainformation age@ brings to a democracy. The Council embraced input from additional citizen members in their Work Groups, and traveled across the state conducting public meetings to include any interested individual or organization; all to gain inclusion and capture the collective wisdom of the people.

The vision guiding the Government Information Access Council is an ideal of more open government and more participatory citizens. All policy for access to and dissemination of government information and services must revolve around this philosophy; therefore, GIAC recommends that the following vision statement be formally adopted in statute as a guidepost for all future planning: A primary purpose of providing information access is open government.

A series of recommendations and a review of the GIAC basic principles is offered in this report. Although many important issues remain to be resolved, these can form the foundation for action on the part of elected officials and other government decision makers as deliberations proceed on how to enhance Minnesota=s position as a leader in quality of life. The tools of technology can and will affect Minnesotans= opportunities, rights and responsibilities. Thoughtful consideration of the guidance, observations and needs of the citizens will serve our state and our country well as leaders establish policies on information technology and applications.

I. RECOMMENDATIONS

Specific action is required to move forward in the implementation of the vision. To that end, GIAC has made the following recommendations:

A. Systems Design: All new or redesigned electronic government systems containing public information and services should fully integrate electronic public access to the information and services, and they should be interoperable to the greatest extent possible.

B. Training: Comprehensive training and education programs for all government personnel should be available. Such training should result in government personnel who are knowledgeable about fulfilling obligations and requirements under Minnesota=s information policy laws and practices; and are able to use current technologies and technology applications to improve public access to information and services. In addition, incentives should be provided for collaborative efforts to make available comprehensive training and education programs for citizens. The object of this training is to result in citizens who are knowledgeable about their rights under Minnesota=s information policy laws and are able to use current technologies and technology applications to access public information and services.

C. Government On-line: North Star should be recognized as Minnesota government=s official electronic access point. The State of Minnesota should implement a government information locator and index system that is compatible with established standards for government documents, information and services. The public should be enabled and encouraged to communicate electronically with elected officials, policy makers in government to encourage active citizenship. An on-line clearinghouse that includes service models, best practices, and an index of government on-line activities should be developed through the North Star Project. Local government representatives should be involved in determining what information and services should be provided by local governments, and in establishing a local government model for delivering information and services via North Star.

D. Information Policy Organization and Enforcement: Government units should review current practices to ensure that procedures for public access to public information and services are fully and clearly articulated, whether those procedures involve paper or electronic dissemination. To simplify proper understanding and use, existing government information policy law should be codified into a single chapter or a series of related chapters of Minnesota statute. Alternative methods to the resolution of disputes in a simple and less expensive manner than through the courts, need to be established. A Joint Legislative Commission on Information Policy should be created to assume primary responsibility for the development of uniform public information policy, strip old statutes of the confusing mix of nomenclature, and work with new legislation to ensure consistent language and policy results.

E. Community Access: Additional funding should be made available for the development of technology-supported government information and service projects at the local level. To ensure that citizens in every community have access to public, on-line government information and services, terminals for general public use should be made available during locally determined times at community sites. Comprehensive and ongoing outreach program to inform citizens about information technologies and services should be established to help them realize the potential benefits that information technologies offer to individuals, organizations and communities. Such an outreach program would identify which government organizations serve as the liaisons to support local grass-roots initiatives for developing information technologies and telecommunications infrastructure; and help citizens identify and use various public and private assistance that is available for improving the community=s economic development opportunities through the use of technologies. The use of interactive regional teleconferencing, public access channels and public broadcast facilities should be encouraged, with emphasis given to the provision of access to government decisionmaking.

F. Additional Recommendations: Further recommendations were discussed at length by GIAC, and are also offered in this report. They address collaborative, multi-government efforts to share information; Universal Service; equitable access; the matter of costs associated with getting government information; and the notification of the public as to the public availability of information.

It is the hope of all members of the Government Information Access Council that the publication of Digital Democracy, Minnesota Citizens= Guide for Government Information Policy, provides guidance to elected officials in providing improved public access to government information, improves the democratic process and helps government become more efficient, effective and responsive to the public as it incorporates information technology into the daily conduct of business.

II. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION ACCESS COUNCIL PRINCIPLES

The recommendations that are forwarded in this report are based on the 12 guiding principles that were adopted by GIAC in January 1996. Those principles are:

1. Access to government information is a fundamental right of all citizens in a democracy.

2. Responsive provision of information access and the dissemination of government information are essential functions of government.

3. Public access to government information shall be free, and any charge for copies shall not exceed marginal cost.

4. All citizens, regardless of geographic, physical, cultural, socio-economic status or other barriers, shall have equitable and affordable access to government information.

5. The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and other information access policy laws must be complied with and enforced at all levels of government.

6. Privacy is a right that must be maintained and protected in the context of changing technology.

7. Government information shall exist in the public domain to the greatest extent possible.

8. Government shall ensure that government employees and citizens have the tools, applications, training and support for electronic access.

9. Interaction among citizens, governments, businesses and organizations shall be promoted through the use of information technology and networks.

10. Citizens shall be enabled and encouraged to be consumers and producers of electronic information and services.

11. The State shall ensure that all citizens of Minnesota have the benefits of Universal Service.

12. Effective competition in telecommunications services in Minnesota is an essential component of effective access and interactive use of government information and services in electronic form.

DIGITAL DEMOCRACY

Government Information Access Council

I. INTRODUCTION

In 1995, the Government Information Access Council (GIAC) developed principles to guide elected officials and other government officials in decisions that impact citizen access to government information. Those principles were the basis for the recommendations that follow.

It is significant to note that GIAC is made up of a diverse group of individuals who think and feel passionately about government and information in the emerging electronic age.

Their backgrounds, experiences and commitments mold their beliefs on the subject, and during the process of considering the issues that was apparent. GIAC members, as well as additional citizen members, formed four Work Groups: Citizens and their Government – Tools of Democracy, Regulation and Tax Policy, Information Access Principles, and Demonstration Projects, Equal Access and Outreach. These Work Groups were the springboard for the recommendations presented in this report. For a summary of the Work Group objectives and supplemental information generated by them, please turn to Appendix D.

Of particular importance is the identification of certain tools of democracy that can and should be made available as quickly as possible. The Minnesota Data Practices Act stands out as the foundation for assuring that government information is publicly accessible. In addition, GIAC enabling legislation identifies some types of specific information or data that is essential to allow citizens to participate fully in a democratic system of government, and the following list of tools include those and core information resources that are important to public understanding of government activities. These documents or publications are currently accessible in traditional format, and most have statewide application. Electronic dissemination and access is viewed as necessary to carry out the spirit of the GIAC legislation.

A. TOOLS OF DEMOCRACY

The following list identifies the particular documents, data or information that are considered the basic electronic tools of democracy:

(1) directories of government services and institutions; Minnesota Guidebook to State Agency Services; State of Minnesota Telephone Directory; Legislative Directories

(2) legislative and rulemaking information, including public information newsletters; bill text and summaries; bill status information; rule status information; meeting schedules; and the text of statutes and rules (including index and search tools); state register

(3) official documents, releases, speeches and other public information issued by the Governor=s Office and Constitutional Officers, such as Secretary of State with the best ultimate guide to secretary desks, Attorney General, State Treasurer=s Office, and the State Auditor=s Office

(4) the text of other government documents and publications such as the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals opinions and general judicial information; Ethical Practices Board, election finance and other reports; state budget information; local government documents like city codes, and county board minutes

Research by the staff of flexy finance innovative class of retail financial products. Providing empirical evidence suggesting that innovative financial products like these can help alleviate loss aversion and thus the low participation of households in risky asset markets.

In addition to https://gadcapital.com/easy-payday-loans/, government should be encouraged to offer services to the public electronically to improve convenience of access to those services. Examples include such services as applications for licenses such as driver=s or hunting licenses, the filing of tax returns or applications for employment.

B. VISION

The vision guiding the Government Information Access Council, as well the recommendations in this report, is an ideal of more open government and more participatory citizens. The two mutually encourage one another: open government–government that makes its information readily accessible to citizens– allows citizens to become more knowledgeable and therefore participatory; more participatory citizens demand that their government be more open, and therefore more efficient, effective and responsive. Get loang term loans fast by Going Here at their site.

All policy for access to and dissemination of government information and services must revolve around this philosophy; therefore, GIAC recommends that the following vision statement be formally adopted in statute as a guidepost for all future planning in this area:

A primary purpose of providing information access is open government.

We are at an evolving, chaotic and transitory time in history, and the lively discussions that have taken place through GIAC represent a healthy discourse that will help us as a state and as a nation take action with awareness. Our country is a patchwork of differing points of view, and finding consensus on topics is both important and challenging. As we travel through this difficult period, government is presented with issues that demand immediate decision making as well as ongoing adjustments as we learn their long-term impacts. Readers of this report can take assurance that the recommendations and principles stem from a vision about democracy, equity and efficiency, and that this is a dialogue that will continue far into the future. Read the Patient Information Leaflet if available from your pharmacist before you start taking valacyclovir and each time you get a refill online at https://www.ukmeds.co.uk/treatments/sexual-health/valtrex/. If you have any questions, ask your doctor or pharmacist. Take valacyclovir by mouth, with or without food, as directed by your doctor. Everyone is talking about solution for premature ejaculation, before you buy any product learn the facts here now. Drink plenty of fluids while taking this medication to lower the chance of side effects.

The dosage and length of treatment are based on your type of drug addiction, medical condition, and response to treatment. For treating chickenpox in children, the dosage is also based on weight. Most of the people mix up methamphetamine and Amphetamines, but this is understandable since they are similar in so many ways. Methamphetamine, “meth”, is manufactured in clandestine or “labs” illegally, using amphetamine as the parent drug. Amphetamine has been around for long but meth has received a lot of publicity over the recent years due to its addiction even though the two are very addictive. Methamphetamine usually breaks down and then metabolizes into amphetamine. Check this article here but a word of caution because this blog is gross.

At the University of Miami Hospital, Dr. Stephen Weber, an expert team of plastic surgeons employs the latest available surgical techniques to perform a wide range of plastic and reconstructive surgical procedures.

II. RECOMMENDATIONS

In its second year of meetings, the Government Information Access Council concentrated on refining, and then prioritizing, specific recommendations to the Legislature for improving public access to government information and for improving government efficiency, effectiveness and responsiveness through the use of information technology. In order to establish these priorities, members of the Priorities Committee generated and applied the following criteria:

& Will the recommendation improve and expand citizen access to government information?

& Will the recommendation improve government efficiency and effectiveness?

& Is the recommendation a foundational initiative, which must be established before other recommendations can be implemented?

& Will the recommendation clarify policy and principles that impact government information and services?

& Is the recommendation cost-effective?

Based on this criteria the following five recommendations were those categories in which most consensus was demonstrated. In the section following these five priorities, all other recommendations are discussed. Each of the recommendations in this section of the report have strong advocates within GIAC; recognizing that a simultaneous effort may disperse energy and resources too broadly, the Priorities Subcommittee of GIAC used a nominal group process to establish the criteria listed above to rank order the comprehensive array of recommendations. A summary of that process is available as Appendix C. Individual members of GIAC were offered the opportunity for comment to allow for the expressions of any concerns that may have been missed in the consensus building process. These comments are noted in Appendix G.

Recommendation Categories:

A. System Design

B. Training

C. Government On-line

D. Information Policy and Enforcement

E. Community Access

F. Additional Recommendations

A. System Design

New information technologies can eliminate barriers that sometimes exist between citizens and their government, as well as between government units themselves. If state and local governments make their public information and services available electronically, even more citizens will have ready access to the information and services, no matter what their geographic distance from the government unit that manages and maintains the information, no matter what time of day they want to access the information and services. Further, if government systems for delivering information and services are interoperable, new possibilities for improving efficiency and effectiveness arise.

To ensure that government units become more efficient and effective by taking full advantage of the possibilities offered by information technologies, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

  • 1. All new or redesigned electronic government systems containing public information and services should fully integrate electronic public access to the information and services.
      • 2. New or redesigned government systems should be interoperable to the greatest extent possible.
      • 1. Comprehensive training and education programs for all government personnel should be available. These programs should result in government personnel who are:
      • 2. Incentives should be provided for collaborative efforts between the private sector, libraries, educational programs and institutions, state and local government, non-profit organizations and other community groups to make available comprehensive training and education programs for citizens. These programs should result in citizens who are:
      • 1. North Star should be recognized as Minnesota government=s official electronic access point, and each agency should assist in enhancing and expanding the North Star functions.
    • B. TrainingIt is important to remember that information technologies are only a tool, almost meaningless in their own right. Without ongoing training and education programs for the people who collect, manage, generate and provide electronic information and services, and for the citizens who use and benefit from them, the information technologies that can improve our lives will never realize their potential. Government personnel, for example, must clearly understand what information and services are to be provided, and they must know the most efficient and effective way to provide them. Citizens must know what information and services are available, and they must know how to access them.

      To ensure that both government and citizens are able to take full advantage of these valuable resources, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

      a) knowledgeable about fulfilling obligations and requirements under Minnesota=s information policy laws and practices; andb) able to use current technologies and technology applications to improve public access to information and services.

      a) knowledgeable about their rights under Minnesota=s information policy laws; andb) able to use current technologies and technology applications to access public information and services.

      C. Government On-line

      Effective democracy requires ready public access to government information and services. Citizens need to have one clearly identified starting point from which to access all government information and services. Public government information and services must be well indexed, easily navigable, and presented in a uniform fashion. Further, citizens must be steadily informed on the issues being considered by elected officials, have forums for discussing the issues among themselves, and have clear, efficient ways to offer feedback and suggestions to decision-makers. Information technologies offer unprecedented opportunities to expand and improve this kind of citizen participation in government and its decision-making processes.

      To ensure that Minnesota advances with its global leadership position for on-line citizen participation in government, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

      • 2. The State of Minnesota should implement a government information locator and index system for government documents, information and services. This system should be compatible with all national and international standards for such systems.
      • 3. The public should be enabled and encouraged to submit comments and other correspondence electronically to elected officials, policy makers and government units at the state and local level.
      • 4. Active citizen participation and input should be encouraged in the official public decision-making process through the use of electronic interactive forums. In particular, all public decision-making bodies should be encouraged to provide electronic interactive forums as a part of the official public-input processes, and also to participate in electronic interactive forums hosted by groups outside of government.
      • 1. Government units should review current practices to ensure that procedures for public access to public information and services are fully and clearly articulated, whether those procedures involve paper or electronic dissemination.
    • D. Information Policy Organization and EnforcementUnderstanding of state information policy is a challenge for many that conduct business with or for the state. The various Minnesota statutes contain a confusing mix of nomenclature and this sometimes yields inconsistent policy results. Emerging technologies make information policy issues even more complex, and make comprehensive, long-range planning crucial. All policy, no matter how clear and well-planned, will sometimes give rise to disputes. Currently, the only way to resolve such disputes is through a cumbersome legal process.

      To ensure that public information policy is consistently and uniformly developed, applied and enforced and to establish an alternative dispute resolution process that is simple, quick, and non-litigious, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

      • 2. Existing information policy law should be codified into a single chapter or a series of related chapters of Minnesota statutes.
      • 3. To assist with the resolution of disputes in a simple and less expensive manner than through the courts, alternative methods need to be established. One example reviewed by GIAC was an independent Commissioner for Freedom of Information and Privacy. Such a commissioner would have sufficient authority and political independence to:
      • 4. A Joint legislative Commission on Information Policy should be created. The commission would assume primary responsibility for the development of uniform public information policy, stripping old statutes of the confusing mix of nomenclature, and working with new legislation to ensure consistent language and policy results.
      • 1. Additional funding should be made available to award grants, or matching grants in collaboration with the Regional Initiative Funds, for the development of technology-supported government information and service projects at the local level. Priority should be given to projects that provide 24-hour access.
    • a) ensure that government units comply with the access and data practices provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and other state information access and data practices laws, policies and procedures;b) inform and educate the public about Minnesota=s access and data practices laws, policies and procedures;

      c) resolve disputes about the enforcement of access and data practices laws, policies and procedures; and

      d) conduct research on access and data practices issues in order to provide advice and comment on proposed government legislation, systems, programs and policies.

      See Appendix E for more information on a model for a Minnesota Commissioner for Freedom of Information and Privacy, based on that of the Canadian province of British Columbia.

      E. Community Access

      The United States Advisory Council on the National Information Infrastructure concluded that the Aquickest, most efficient way@ to give every citizen access to the Information Superhighway by the year 2000 is Ato bring the Superhighway to the neighborhood–to schools, libraries, and community centers.@

      To ensure that local communities receive the support, encouragement and impetus they need to bring all levels of government information and services into their neighborhoods, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

      • 2. To ensure that citizens in every community have access to public, on-line government information and services, terminals for general public use should be made available during locally determined times at community sites (such as educational institutions, libraries, and county government centers) where electronic network connections are funded in part by state dollars.
      • 3. A comprehensive and ongoing outreach program to inform citizens about information technologies and services should be established. This outreach program should result in citizens who:
      • 4. The use of interactive regional teleconferencing, public access channels and public broadcast facilities should be encouraged and funded where appropriate. A major emphasis should be the provision of statewide access to legislative and executive deliberations, and regional or local access to local government deliberations.
    • a) realize the potential benefits that information technologies offer to individuals, organizations and communities;b) know what government organizations serve as the liaisons to support local grass-roots initiatives for developing information technologies and telecommunications infrastructure; and

      c) can identify and use various public and private assistance that is available for improving the community=s trade and economic development opportunities through the use of technologies.

      F. Additional Recommendations

      In addition to the highest priorities listed above, there are also a number of other recommendations that are very important to the realization of the vision.

      Additional Recommendation Categories:

      Collaborative, Multi-government Efforts

      Universal Service

      Equitable Access

      Cost

      Information Access Awareness

      1. Collaborative, Multi-government Efforts

      State and local governments collect and manage vast amounts of information. Until now, these efforts have been relatively isolated: government units did not necessarily cooperate with one another to collect or provide information and services. New information technologies, however, can eliminate these kinds of barriers between government units and provide opportunities for new collaborative efforts. An excellent basis for this work would be an electronic rulemaking information system used by state agencies with rulemaking authority.

      To ensure that all government units begin to take full advantage of the collaborative possibilities offered by information technologies, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

      a. Incentives should be provided for government units to continue and expand collaborative, multi-government efforts to improve efficiency and effectiveness when collecting and disseminating information and meeting requests for public information. Such collaborative efforts might include sharing databases and access points; obviously, this would be greatly assisted by a basis of interoperability.

      b. To promote public understanding of and participation in the state=s rule-making process through electronic access, a task force should be established to:

      1) review the existing rulemaking process in order to develop a proposal for an electronic rulemaking information system; and

      2) ensure electronic public access to that information system.

      2. Universal Service

      The term Universal Service was originally associated with electronic communications features provided by regular telephone service. As new technologies have emerged, the state has modified the definition of Universal Service to include new features such as touch-tone, 911 access, and single line service. This definition should periodically be reviewed and revised to reflect changing standards.

      To ensure that citizens of Minnesota can take advantage of all information technologies and the opportunities and advantages they provide, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

      a. Through adaptation of its methods and jurisdiction for regulation of telecommunications services, government should assure that Universal Service is achieved.

      b. In conjunction with the Federal Telecommunications Act, a fund designed to provide Universal Service should be researched and created.

      c. Consistent with the Federal Telecommunications Act, the Legislature should act to expand the definition of Universal Service, and periodically define the specific products, services and infrastructure requirements which constitute Universal Service.

      3. Equitable Access

      Information technologies can remove a variety of barriers which have until now made it difficult, if not impossible, for certain citizens to access vital government information and services. Barriers including physical limitations and language can be minimized when information and services are delivered electronically.

      To ensure that all citizens have equitable access to vital government information and services, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

      a. Following the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and any other existing applicable state or local government disabilities regulations, government units should be required to accommodate those with disability or impairment when developing on-line government information and service systems, and when providing public sites for access to those systems.

      b. A policy for providing electronic access to existing and future Minnesota government information and services in languages other than English (as requested) should be established, similar to the current Communication Services Act.

      c. In order to make it easier for businesses to interact with Minnesota state government, Minnesota state government procurement policies should be modified under a transition plan to an electronic commerce environment. The policies should closely parallel those of the federal government as dictated by the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994, and any subsequent federal procurement laws and regulations.

      d. Existing public access projects, such as Access Minnesota and METC grants, should continue to ensure that all Minnesota communities, both rural and urban, have equitable and reasonable access to public on-line government information and services. Communities with limited resources should be targeted for supplementary assistance in establishing public access sites.

      4. Cost

      The cost of accessing public government information and services can be an additional barrier to certain citizens. Many kinds of basic information must be made available at no cost, particularly if the information affects citizens= rights and responsibilities.

      To ensure that this barrier is minimized, if not eliminated, GIAC makes the following recommendations:

      a. The Legislature should establish in statute a definition for Amarginal cost@ (if it opts to replace the current term Aactual cost@) regarding fees assessed for copies or electronic transmission of government data. GIAC recommends that the Legislature adopt the definition of marginal cost articulated in the GIAC Principles (see footnote, Principle 3).

      b. The existing Acommercial value@ section of Minn. Stat. 13.03 should be reviewed in developing any new information access policy. GIAC recommends that all fees for copies and electronic access collected by government units be retained by the government unit to improve and accelerate public access to its information and services. Further, GIAC recommends that the Legislature retain the current practice of requiring government units who charge for value-added service to obtain specific permission from the Legislature.

      5. Information Access Awareness

      a. The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act should be amended to require agencies requesting public data from citizens to inform those citizens that the data being requested are public data under Minnesota law, and that anyone may access public data.

      IV. GUIDING PRINCIPLES

      These are the principles adopted by the Government Information Access Council in 1996.

      1. Access to government information is a fundamental right of all citizens in a democracy.

      1.1 Citizens can more effectively contribute to democratic, economic and social progress when they can access and use public information without restraint.

      1.2 Basic access rights include the equal and timely right to free inspection, to receive copies, and to access and use government information in all forms and media for any legal purpose.

      1.3 All Minnesota government data should be presumed to be public unless otherwise classified by statute.

      2. Responsive provision of information access and the dissemination of government information are essential functions of government.

      2.1 Creating, disseminating and providing access to information is a mission of government units and such activities should be funded by public dollars just as are any other essential government functions.

      2.2 Government has a duty to collect and disseminate information to further its public purpose only, not for its economic gain.

      2.3 To achieve convenient and cost-effective public access, intergovernmental coordination and organization of information–from creation to preservation–is essential.

      2.4 Government units shall support the essential functions of citizen assistance and education, and provision of information locator tools.

      2.5 Government shall acknowledge the ATools of Democracy@ as essential for citizens to actively participate in and understand government, and shall make those tools available in various media, including electronically, at no cost to the user.

      3. Public access to government information shall be free, and any charge for copies shall not exceed marginal cost.

      3.1 Inspection of public data in all media must be available free of charge. Copies shall be available for duplication or electronic transmission for free, or at a cost not to exceed the marginal cost of dissemination.

      3.2 Recovery of development costs or generation of revenue from information created or collected with public funds shall not occur without specific statutory authorization.

      4. All citizens, regardless of geographic, physical, cultural, socio-economic status or other barriers shall have equitable and affordable access to government information.

      4.1 Geographic and economic barriers to access shall be eliminated by making tax incentives and funding mechanisms available to citizens, government jurisdictions, private businesses and especially providers of content, connectivity and site access for linked community-business networks.

      4.2 Barriers to information access shall be eliminated in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

      4.3 Government information access barriers that are based on language and culture shall be eliminated by implementing, in accordance with federal and state laws, multilingual and multicultural components.

      4.4 The State shall ensure equitable and affordable access to government information through a variety of public-private funding mechanisms including tax incentives, low-interest loans, public appropriations, private foundations and charitable contributions with no bad credit loans online.

      5. The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and other information access policy laws must be complied with and enforced at all levels of government.

      5.1 Training of government personnel and citizen education regarding the rights granted under access and data practices laws is essential for compliance with those laws.

      5.2 Additional non-litigious mechanisms for effective enforcement of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and other access laws shall be developed and implemented.

      6. Privacy is a right that must be maintained and protected in the context of changing technology.

      6.1 The public=s right to know should be balanced with individuals, businesses and organizations right to privacy.

      6.2 Users of government information shall have a protectable privacy interest.

      7. Government information shall exist in the public domain to the greatest extent possible.

      7.1 Stewardship of government information, and the value of that information, is a function of government.

      7.2 Government shall protect the right of citizens to use public government information for any legal purpose and shall promote the use of public government information to meet public purposes.

      7.3 Use of government information should not be constrained by copyright or copyright-like controls except under limited circumstances.

      7.4 A government unit may exercise copyright on certain government information pursuant to criteria established by the Legislature.

      7.5 In no case should government=s exercise of copyright be used to deny public access for inspection or to receive copies of public government information.

      8. Government shall ensure that government employees and citizens have the tools, applications, training, and support for electronic access.

      8.1 The State shall provide training to government personnel across all levels of government on information access and service technologies, applications and policies which shall be supported by additional state appropriations.

      8.2 The State shall establish a variety of outreach and public relations programs statewide to educate and inform citizens on the value and use of emerging information access and service technologies used by the State.

      8.3 The State shall provide support to citizens who require assistance accessing government information and services electronically on a twenty-four-hours-per-day, seven-days-per-week basis.

      9. Interaction among citizens, governments, businesses and organizations shall be promoted through the use of information technology and networks.

      9.1 Government shall accelerate the provision of its services through technology and networks which encourage electronic interaction among citizens, businesses and organizations

      9.2 Publicly-supported, statewide electronic access to government information and services through multiple technologies and public access points is essential for information dissemination and efficient delivery of government services.

      9.3 A diversity of information sources in the public, private and non-profit sectors should be encouraged to provide the public with access to government information resources.

      9.4 The State shall establish timetables for statewide electronic public access to government information and services.

      9.5 Government shall support public and private on-line efforts to ensure the development of on-line public spaces for discussion of public issues, civic participation, and problem-solving.

      9.6 Government shall increase its use of electronic communication infrastructures and promote their use in the professional work of government staff.

      9.7 Demonstration projects and outreach efforts shall be promoted and/or developed by government at all levels.

      9.8 Government shall base its investment in the development and provision of electronic services on the long-term economic and social benefits of those investments.

      10. Citizens shall be enabled and encouraged to be consumers and producers of electronic information and services.

      10.1 State policies should encourage symmetry in the access and dissemination of information.

      10.2 State policies shall support individual and community economic vitality through effective and efficient electronic information and services.

      10.3 The State shall provide individuals, libraries, educational institutions, non-profits and businesses with tax incentives or other financial assistance to acquire and use equipment, applications, content, infrastructure, training and other tools to stimulate demand for electronic access to government information and services.

      10.4 The State should provide libraries and public and private educational institutions with ongoing financial assistance for recurring costs of electronic access to government information and services.

      11. The State shall ensure that all citizens of Minnesota have the benefits of Universal Service.

      11.1 The Legislature and Administration shall periodically define the specific products, services, and infrastructure requirements which constitute Universal Service.

      11.2 The State shall establish a fund to provide Universal Service. Support for such Universal Service Fund should be equitably assessed on all providers of telecommunications services.

      12. Effective competition in telecommunications services in Minnesota is an essential component of effective access and interactive use of government information and services in electronic form.

      12.1 The State shall continue to adapt its methods and jurisdiction for regulating providers of telecommunications services toward the point where effective competition in telecommunications services ensures reasonable cost telecommunications services throughout the state, and ensures development of telecommunications infrastructure throughout the state.

      12.2 Until such time as there is effective competition in telecommunications services throughout the state, the State shall have the legal power and the practical ability, within the construct of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, to intercede in the market so as to avoid or prevent pricing disparities among groups of customers and/or regions of the state, and to ensure development of the telecommunications infrastructure throughout the state.

      12.3 At such time as there is effective competition in telecommunications services throughout the state, the State=s oversight of the telecommunications services market shall be limited to the extent necessary to ensure Universal Service, interoperability of telecommunications systems, and consumer protection as is provided in other competitive markets.

      12.4 The State shall create a formal mechanism to coordinate policy formation and oversight with respect to appropriations, regulatory, and tax policy to ensure continuity and consistency among federal, state and local policies which affect telecommunications services.

    Using Electronic Communication for Political Discussions – By Steven Clift – 1996

    Using Electronic Communication for Political Discussions

    Draft 1.0 – June 15, 1996

    By Steven L. Clift,
    Copyright 1996, Steven Clift – See disclaimer about DRAFT below.

    1.  Take what you write seriously.
    2.  Don't take yourself too seriously.
    3.  Never post when you are upset.
    4.  Avoid one-on-one battles on public forums.  Take disputes
        "off-line" whenever possible.
    5.  Expect what you write to be around for you great 
        great grandchildren to read.
    6.  Think of your major postings as letters to the editor.  
    7.  Use your real identity and sign your posts.
    8.  Use correct spelling, punctuation, and capitalization.
    9.  Use humor and sarcasm cues - ;-) - Be careful.  Be clear.
    10.  Don't overuse acronyms.
    11.  Use private e-mail accounts for personal opinions to
         avoid problems at work.  
    12.  It is appropriate and encouraged that people in their official
         capacity use work e-mail to participate in public forms.
    13.  Don't expect to quickly change any minds in this medium.
    14.  Build your own personal "civic network."  Send public responses
         other's message and send short thank yous to individuals.
    15.  Avoid acidic, mean-spirited tones.  Don't expect that people
         who are jerks in person will be any better online.
    16.  Be careful when you post or respond - double check to make sure
         you are sending it where you want to. (public lists, individuals,
         CC: area)  
    17.  Write clear and concise subject lines.  
    18.  Maintain subject line integrity with responses.  Change the
         subject line if the topic shifts significantly.
    19.  Write in short paragraphs.  Use white space to improve effectiveness
         of communication.
    20.  Avoid lengthy signature sections on messages.
    21.  Make sure you correctly attribute quoted text.
    22.  Only include attributed quotes that are needed.  Do not include
         the entire message if you are posting a brief reaction of a
         general nature.
    23.  While you won't be judged online by many of the factors involved
         with in person discussion, you will be highly judged on what you
         write and style with which you write it. 
    24.  Most complaints about postings to online forums are based on 
         tone and style not the content of the messages.  Good content
         is easily obscured by poor tone and style.  Bad content is
         bad content regardless.
    25.  Developing charters, rules and guidelines for online forums that 
         cover political topics are often quite helpful.  
    26.  If one forum does not suit your interests move on to another.
    27.  "Lurk" on an active forums at least two to four weeks before
         posting your first message (or seek out the archives for a forum
         if one exists).
    28.  Carefully read all the information you receive when subscribing
         to a new forum.
    29.  Expect differences in how electronic communication manifests itself
         with different applications (e-lists, newsgroups, WWW-conferencing).
    30.  Never post unsubscribe requests to the entire list.  
    31.  Always save subscribe confirmation information. Consider creating
         a folder called "lists."  This will be very useful when your 
         you decide to leave the forum.
    32.  Be a good net citizen - unsubscribe from all e-lists before an 
         e-mail account closed.  Bounced message are the biggest time 
         waster for list managers.
    33.  If a discussion is not going the way you like, try to shift its
         direction.
    34.  More to come...
    
    Idea - these need to be placed into some sort of a 
    topical/functional order:
    
    General:
    
    To:
    
    Subject:
    
    Text:
    
    Signature:
    
    Responses and Interaction:
    
    Other:

    Please send in your suggestions! Special thanks to Mick Souder, list manager of MN-POLITICS and the rest of the Minnesota E-Democracy crew, from whom I have learned much about the nature of online political discussions.

    Copyright 1996, Steven Clift. This posting may be freely redistributed to individuals in its entirety. Redistribution of this document to public e-mail lists or publication requires the permission of the author.
    Version 1.0 – October 12, 1996


    Government Information Policy Issues and Questions – By Steven Clift – 1994

    I drafted this list while working for the State of Minnesota’s legislatively created Government Information Access Council way back in 1994 (Final GIAC report from 1997). Most of these questions are still relevant today. Back in the day this list of policy questions was circulated around the world. I posted it on some “Open Government” e-mail lists hosted by the then CCTA of the UK Government and recall a conversation where a civil servant thanked me for their timeliness as many of the questions were integrated into their early policy explorations. This in part planted a seed for the many UK government investments in e-democracy over the years.

    Appendix A:

    DRAFT:  FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT  (electronically released 11/15/94)

    Government Information Policy Issues and Questions

    This is an extensive draft list of policy issues and related questions that have been identified. Some of these policy questions may be easily resolved and others may take years to deal with appropriately.  The Government Information Access Council will need to determine which issues are of a _higher priority_ for emerging Working Groups to address and which issues will need to be considered by the Council and government over the long-term.

    Many of the policy questions are meant to inform the process, but do not necessarily need to become part of the recommended principles to the legislature. It should be stressed that the Minnesota Data Practices Act already addresses many of these questions in some way or another.  A short summary of principles in the Data Practices Act follows:

    1.  All government agencies must allow citizens to inspect (physically look at) public government data, free of charge.

    2. If a citizen requests copies of public government data, an agency may charge the actual costs associated with providing copies.  Costs must be reasonable.

    3. If a citizen asks for electronic transmission of copies of the data, and agency may charge for the actual costs of electronically transmitting the data.

    4.  If a citizen asks for copies of data that have “commercial value” and that the were developed at significant cost to an agency, the agency may, in addition to copying costs, charge an add-on fee to recover a reasonable portion of the development costs.

    5.  If the legislature has specifically authorized a fee for copies/electronic transmission, the agency may charge that fee.

    Part of the Council report to the legislature this session will likely highlight the high priority issues.  The Council, with legislative input, will then produce policy recommendations and principles as required by the legislation.  This policy process is designed to run parallel electronic access demonstration projects.  These demonstration projects will inform the policy process and provide the experience required to make important policy decisions.

    Please submit additional policy questions or comments to: Government Information Access Council Information Policy Office Minnesota Department of Administration 320 Centennial Office Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612)296-6451 – voice     (612)296-5800 – fax

    The numbered (x) sections come directly from the legislation, 15.95 Section 20, Subdivision 5.

    (1) the most effective and efficient means to make information available to the public in a manner that is designed primarily from the perspective of the citizen;

    – How will citizens be involved in the development of information services?

    – What new information technologies should be considered?

    – How will government use a variety of information delivery methods (paper,  Internet/computers, fax-back, telephone, public kiosks, etc.) to broaden convenient, user-friendly access?

    – How will electronic interaction between citizens and their government  develop (not  only with information services, but with government staff through such communication methods as electronic mail)?

    – What changes might be needed in the regulatory environment to facilitate access to   and distribution of government information?

    – How should a government unit balance the need to use emerging information  technologies with the use of generally accessible information technologies for information and service delivery?

    – How should government avoid access barriers related to the use of new technology?

    – What types of education efforts will be required to help citizens utilize emerging services?

    – What types of education efforts will required to reorientate public agencies and employees toward a belief that providing information to the public is part of their mission as a public agency?

    – What types of easy to use, intuitive, government information locator tools need to be developed?

    (2) how to provide the greatest possible public access that is demand driven to the widest possible array of public government data and information maintained by state or local governments, including open access through libraries, schools,   nonprofit organizations, businesses, and homes;

    – How will government units measure demand for information services?

    – How should government units plan for and organize their own information services?

    – What types of costs/benefits should be evaluated as part of providing greater public access?

    – How should different levels of government organizations coordinate and present  their information electronically?

    – What telecommunications and information networks exist or may exist for the provision of statewide “open access” through the sites listed above?

    – What types of public, private, and citizen investments will be required to make this a reality?

    – What regulatory reform will be needed to ensure competitive, statewide, reasonable cost telecommunication service for high-speed electronic access?

    – What kind of regulatory reform will be required to help the state’s public telecommunications network ensure basic access to government information in electronic form statewide?

    – How should the citizen interest or requests for public information be processed when they conflict with the priorities or mission of a government unit?

    – What steps must government take to make sure emerging services are available to those with disabilities?  What issues does the Americans with Disabilities Act raise?

    (3) what information should be made available free of charge directly from government agencies, in addition to information that is available for inspection free of charge under section 13.03, subdivision 3;

    (4) what information should be sold, either by government agencies or through private businesses, and what factors should determine the prices that government should charge to citizens for providing information directly, and to businesses who will resell information;

    QPlease see Data Practices Act summary above for context

    – Along with the “Tools of Democracy” section, what guidelines can be developed to assist government units in the pricing or free access to information services? Sub-points follow: – How should GIAC carry out their duties from the “Tools of Democracy” section?

    – When should an information service be fully subsidized by general taxpayers?

    – When should the customer of a public information service be charged for the  delivery of that service?

    – How should different types of government information (general mission-  related information like reports or brochures, information “tools of  democracy,” government transparency or inner-workings information, and *public* information on people or things) be treated from a principle or policy perspective?

    – In an on-line information environment, how does the notion of “electronic  inspection” affect public access from local or remote sites?

    – Should royalties be charged to businesses that resell government information?   Under what circumstances?  Can or should reuse be restricted?

    – Should businesses be charged for government information if used for commercial purposes? How much?  Or what should be the charge for electronic access?

    – Should taxpayers receive a “return” for investments in public information systems if the information in that system is used for non-governmental purposes?

    – Should the end use of government information for charging purposes be discerned or documented?  How is commercial use/value defined?

    – Should government information itself be sold by government for profit?

    – Should fees for more convenient delivery of government services and licenses be developed?

    – How are advanced interoperable telecommunications networks presenting new policy challenges?

    – Which information delivery costs will likely be transactional based versus flat-fee  priced from the perspective of the government unit? (cost to provide X units of information versus cost to ensure X capacity for delivery)

    – How will trends in telecommunications and Internet pricing affect longer-term information and service delivery plans?  How will these same trends impact the citizens ability to gain affordable access to information resources?

    – If a government units loses revenue from the current sale of information services (commercial value, special statutory fee, data pricing exemption) , how should that revenue be replaced? What affect would this have on the state budget?

    (5) how government can encourage the creation of new private business endeavors by making digital information available for the purpose of distributing enhanced government information services to citizens;

    – How will businesses, community networks, and others likely repackage, enhance,  or provide links to government information services?

    – How should the State encourage private and community on-line networks to provide direct access to Internet-based on-line information services?

    – What types of government information should be promoted for the creation of new business endeavors?

    – What are current Minnesota information industries doing to provide their own services and products in electronic form?  How will these private services interact with the public sector?

    – How might tax policy facilitate the growth or development of private information businesses?

    – How might tax policy improve the availability or access to government information services?

    (6) what changes need to be made in governmental operations to assure that more government information is readily available to citizens, whether provided directly by government agencies or provided through private businesses;

    (10) what technological changes governmental agencies need to make to facilitate electronic provision of governmental information, either directly to citizens, or to private businesses who will distribute the information;

    – What types of training and education do government units and staff need to integrate electronic “store-fronts” and information transmission into their operations?

    – What public finance and resource reallocation requirements will be required to  support electronic public access systems and access points?

    – What kinds of issues need to be addressed in government to ease resistance, temper inadequate planning or prevent information system security risks?

    – What statewide information resource management policies and standards need to be developed in the area of electronic access and service delivery?

    – How will federal work on the Government Information Locator System (GILS) impact the provision of Minnesota government information in electronic form?

    – How will the use of Internet applications like Gopher, the World-Wide-Web, and e-mail by other levels of government and commercial services affect the expectations of our citizens?

    – What types of competitive/collaborative pressures may develop among levels and jurisdictions of government? (state, local, and federal)

    – How should long-term electronic archiving issues be addressed? Where should key policy documents in electronic form be placed for research and historical analysis?

    – How can government use information networks (like the Internet) as a resource for their own information needs?  How will this use impact their interest in providing information to the public electronically?

    – What needs to be done to ensure that all citizens, at differing levels of educational attainment, literateness, economic status, access to institutions, can receive quick and supportive electronic access to government information and services?

    – What role will state agency libraries have in the organization of agency information products and external Internet information resources relevant to the work of the agency?

    – How will agency public information offices be involved in the development and dissemination of government information in electronic form?

    – How might contributions by private corporations, foundations, or the Federal government be used to aid these general efforts?

    – As information flows in and out of government increase, how should liability issues surrounding accuracy, timeliness, and officialness be approached so as to not constrain the usefulness of the emerging communications power?

    (7) whether digital information should be made available on an exclusive or nonexclusive basis, and how different types of information should be treated differently for this purpose;

    – Should a government information service be provided by a sole supplier(government or business)?

    – Are there types of public digital information that should be provided on an exclusive basis?  Which should be non-exclusive?

    – What types of arrangements should be made to promote access to government information services through commercial information services, libraries, community networks (like Free-Nets), and others on a non- exclusive basis?

    – Are there kinds of public information that should be made available through public access terminals located at government units, but not through remote sites?

    – How should the use of digital information on state issued licenses or identity cards for non-government purposes be viewed?

    – Should digital information delivery be treated differently than other forms (paper,  microfilm, photographic)?

    – If an exclusive provider system is used, how should government ensure that all the information they wish to see disseminated to the public is available at a reasonable cost?

    (8) how the state and other governmental units can protect their intellectual property rights, while making government data available to the public as required in chapter 13;

    – Should government agencies be allowed to claim intellectual property rights for government data beyond the current authority to do so for software programs and components of programs?

    – What types of government information should/should never qualify as intellectual property?

    – What intellectual property rights do government units hold?  Do governmental units currently express those rights?

    – Does adoption of intellectual claims by agencies conflict with the presumption of public data in the Data Practices Act?

    – If government claims of intellectual property are allowed, what methods for contesting claims should be established?  Court- based/non-court hearing? What about public access to public data that may at one point (in its final form) be claimed as intellectual property?

    (9) the impact of data collection and dissemination practices on privacy rights of individuals;

    – A lot of *public* information about individuals is held by government, should the method of access (electronic, on-site inspection, etc.) affect the core policy around whether it should be public or private?

    – Will improved access and searching methods raise public concern over the use of public information on individuals? Or how has it already?

    – What methods will individuals have to correct mistakes about them contained in  government data?

    – Will individuals have the ability to securely view private information held about them from remote sites?

    – How is the use of information technology increasing the amount of public information stored or available on individuals?  The demand for creative uses of that information?

    – How might the increased ability to compile and utilize data for multiple purposes affect privacy?   How can the private sector use of personal information inform us of current uses and trends?

    – What types of new government information might unknowingly be developed from the use of electronic information services? (transactional information, document retrieval information)

    – How should encryption technologies be utilized when private or even public information flow through open networks?

    – How should “fair information practice principles” be applied in the area of public information on individuals?

    – How should citizens be made aware of government practices and use of public information on individuals?

    – Should citizens have the right to determine access public information held about them?  Should businesses have the right to determine access to public information held about them? How will the use of government numbering systems (i.e. drivers license, social security numbers) outside of government impact individual privacy?

    – How should the issue of “single-card” identification for multiple government purposes be addressed?  What are the current trends?  How should issues surrounding non-government use of digital government information kept on magnetic stripes be addressed?

    – How should the responsibility for protecting individual privacy be distributed? (on the individual, government unit, private sector)

    – In general, what should Minnesota’s public policy be on the social implications that are a result of decisions on information collection and dissemination be?

    Q(10) is included with (6) above.

    (11) how to avoid duplicating services available from private providers, except as necessary to achieve goals set in subdivision 7.

    – What types of government information services are currently available from private providers?

    – How can government encourage public-private collaborations to provide the greatest access to the greatest number of people? When should an information service based on government data not be provided by government?

    – When should a base floor of access to government information be introduced to ensure that “tools of democracy” are available?

    – What level of sophistication (search tools, indexing, etc.) should be developed for the dissemination of government information in electronic form?

    – How much “value” should government add, if private providers all ready provide a valued-added service? (basic competition versus actual duplication)

    Please submit additional policy questions or comments to:

    Government Information Access Council Information Policy Office Minnesota Department of Administration 320 Centennial Office Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612)296-6451 – voice     (612)296-5800 – fax

    Transnational and Intergovernmental Electronic Communication: Policy Questions and Implications of the Emerging Global Information Network – by Steven Clift – 1993

    Transnational and Intergovernmental Electronic Communication: Policy Questions and Implications of the Emerging Global Information Network

    By Steven L. Clift

    Global Survival and Sustainable Infrastructure Graduate Course Institute for Future Studies, Stockholm, Sweden Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota

    Fall 1993

    Note: It is now almost 1996. I currently coordinate the North Star Government Online project for the State of Minnesota and now find myself involved in projects that are addressing a number of the questions that I had raised back in 1993. With the development of the GOVNEWS initiative (http://ftp.sterling.com/govnews/) I thought now might be a good time to make this paper available online again. – Steven Clift

    Note 2:  It is now 2002. All of my current articles are available at: http://www.publicus.net   When it comes to inter-governmental communication online, it is amazing how far we have come and how far we have yet to go.

    Note 3: It is now 2009 and there is still lots here that is relevant.

    Introduction

    It could be said that for the governments of the world to prepare now for the effects of the current information and communications revolution, would have been like the government preparing a program to deal with airport noise problems before the jet engine was built. With the development of each new technology and applications to use those technologies the way our societies operate and allocate resources shift. We also had the metal roof repair clearwater fl technology for our home maintenance. The changes that occur often have positive and negative results. The opinion someone has about those changes may also vary from person to person. Also, the infusion of new technologies and their effects is not static and the development of different technologies or adaptations by others in society often alter the original results.

    The survival or strength of an institution depends on its ability to read and understand how the changing world around them might affect their work and purpose in society. Government organizations from national legislatures to local social service agencies operate in a complex and increasingly globalized economic and political system and are not immune from these shifts, especially as they relate to the use of information technologies in their work.

    This paper will examine the development of intergovernmental and transnational data networks and explore the potential policy implications and challenges government institutions may face as a result. It will summarize some of the technological aspects of inter- networking, present examples of current application and efforts by governments, and explore some of the potential policy implications. It will conclude with proposals on how government can capture the positive benefits of electronic communication, and prepare itself to deal with the policy issues and potential downfalls as they emerge.

    This paper centers on those countries that have developed more sophisticated information infrastructures and does not address these issues from the perspective of a developing nation.(1)

    Information Technology and Networking

    Over the last few decades governments around the world have invested billions of dollars into the research and development of new technology including high performance computing, communication devices, and data transmission networks. Examples include the High- Performance Computing and Communications (HPCC) and National Research and Education Network (NREN) in the United States, the European Strategic Programme for Research and Development in Information Technologies (ESPRIT), the European Nervous System (components of which address transnational electronic communication and will be presented later) and Japan’s New Information Processing Technology project of the Ministry of International Trade & Industry (MITI).

    The following statement from the paper “Information Networks and New Technologies: Opportunities and Policy Implications for 1990’s” from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) sums up the general public purpose developed for most of these initiatives:

    Information technology (IT) developments, originally driven by defence and space needs, are increasingly geared to meet commercial and industrial demand. It is now recognized as indispensable to many economic activities, and industry experts consider broader IT production and use as a basis for further economic and social development…. The Allison torque converters has become a strategic tool in the contemporary economic and political environment, as well as for the opening up of new markets and patterns of demand.(2)

    Except for the mentioning the use IT as a strategic political tool, most government support of research and development in this sector has been geared toward building a competitive national industry, improving the collaboration of scientists and researchers, and in higher education. The benefits of IT have been conceptualized by these various projects in functionary terms or by sectors of the economy. The development of technological capacity is not generally presented as a means to improve processes. However, the creation of basic and more advanced applications helps explain how IT is becoming a tool that changes the way organizations work and communicate.

    The OECD report is one of the few reports that presents the public sector as one of the beneficiaries of its own investment in IT research and development. It was not until the late summer of 1993, with the release of the Clinton Administration’s National Performance Review, that the notion of IT causing changes in the way government delivers services and makes decisions received high profile attention. It was estimated that Federal government investment in and the use of IT could save billions dollars over a number of years. How this will change the way government functions will be important to watch. Most of the literature on the effects of information technology and systems on organizations examine businesses and not government. Businesses now can have a big impact in our society, many people are smart enough to open businesses offering services for our own health just like TranquilMe who can offer you the best services for a relaxing and life changing experience. Business man always think of a great deals on how the business industry as well as the people can make a win win situation. While general observations can be drawn from that literature (group work across geographical distances, flattening of hierarchies, etc.) the public nature of government work and general lack of a firms profit motive and sale of products provides for enough of a difference to demand more study of IT impacts on public sector processes. This paper should bring out a number of those areas requiring research.

    Networking

    The current use of IT applications and the development of networking standards over the last decade has brought us to a point where local area computer networks can be linked to other computer networks via routers and high speed data backbone network connections. The “Open Systems” standards (OSI), the Government Open Systems Interconnet Profile (GOSIP), and TCP/IP Internet protocols are all contributing to a general government acceptance of the concept that government agencies need to move from proprietary computer systems to systems that can be networked and communicate with other systems based on a general set of operating standards. This is occurring, however slowly, at all levels of government in most countries that have highly developed information infrastructures. Countries that do not have developed infrastructures will likely use these protocols as they develop based on normal distribution patterns of technologies to the developing world.

    Within the United States four or five states are considered leaders in the promotion of Open Systems for use by state government. The draft National Association of State Information Resource Executives (NASIRE) titled, “Serving the Citizenry through Opening the Enterprise,” it states that “the fact that standards are agreed upon by national or international organizations has little to do with adoption and use by an enterprise or a community of enterprises.” While many information resource offices have been policy advocates of Open Systems the actual movement in State agencies has been slow. The report argues:

    If, instead of setting our goal to achieve Open Systems, we sought to open the enterprise and interconnect it to the world, we would have defined a practical goal. Also, as we look at “states” or “governments” as an enterprise, we are challenged to rethink “the organization” within which interconnectivity is required.(3)

    This statement is a sign that government entities are, from their experience, moving toward Open Systems without integrating it into the work of their public mission or business plan.

    A November 1993 report by Anderson Consulting titled, “Open Systems in Minnesota State Government: A Readiness Assessment” summarizes this State’s readiness for Open Systems:

    ¥ Minnesota is in the very early stages of readiness for open systems.

    ¥ Understanding and commitment to open systems have not significantly penetrated the State’s technology community. Most activity has been at the policy level. Policy progress has yet to be translated into concrete actions to move away from proprietary information technology toward open systems environments.

    ¥ Key enablers driving the State toward open systems are the needs to: 1)share data across the enterprise, 2) cut costs, 3) cooperate for service delivery, and 4) respond to market forces and federal mandates.

    ¥ The barriers to implementing open system environments in Minnesota state government are formidable, but not insurmountable. Those barriers are: Lack of knowledge, training and skill base, Perceived lack of industrial strength products in the marketplace, Lack of open systems champion, and Large installed base of proprietary legacy systems, Government fragmentation and fiefdoms, and Conversion cost.(4)

    While Open Systems goes beyond the TCP/IP Internet connections, the State of Minnesota will have invested $25 million dollars in a state-wide high speed data network by late next year that will among other things provide for extensive Internet access, the next challenge is to migrate the hundreds of government systems to that network. We are already seeing government use of electronic mail over the Internet and a few State agencies and the State Legislature have put menu driven information on the Internet through an application called “Gopher.” This information is available to anyone in the world who is interested in looking at it.

    Given the time it will take for most governments in different countries and levels within those countries to be inter-networked, this paper will begin exploring the possible interactions of governments based on current examples and efforts at a smaller scale. How will the various government institutions shape this environment for their benefit? What will the characteristics of this networked world be? What types of applications will they develop for it in the carrying out of their missions?

    Applications

    While more advanced applications and tools are being developed for the Internet on a regular basis the most commonly mentioned uses for these networks include electronic mail, file transfer, electronic data interchange (EDI), and remote access to databases and information. Once an organization adopts a basic level of connectivity it is unlikely that they will retreat from that. It could be compared with throwing away your fax machine because the process for sending a fax confused you at first. It is also predicted in the future that this will be the platform for the development of a digital information infrastructure that will include voice, video, and high speed transfer of extermely large quantities of data.

    One of the most important communication tools used on electronic information networks are those that allow collaboration or automated communication among groups of people. There are thousands of electronic mail forums or lists that allow an individual to “broadcast” a message to those subscribed to that list. The parameters and openness of these forums vary. Some may involve only ten individuals on a private list or thousands on a public list. Some lists are moderated, some allow anyone to post, some only deliver an information service from the list owner. This allows for the creation of “affinity networks.” The OECD report describes the characteristics of these networks:

    Such “affinity” networks may result in national and international networks. In principle, it would then be possible to receive and exchange information presented in whatever form in real time, from a large number of intelligent stations (human and PC and/or intelligent work stations), on whatever subject, worldwide, coupled with feedback at the local or global level. Such PA Marketing could be used to sense or act on all types of parameters (economic, social, environmental, etc.) when designing, producing and marketing goods and services or any other activity or process.(5)

    Current Efforts, Examples and Analysis

    The European Community

    One of the most advanced policy documents on transnational data exchange between governments comes from the European Community. It is titled “Proposal for a Council Decision on a series of guidelines for trans- European data communications networks between administrations.” What stands out about the creation of an IDA programme (interchange of data between administrations) in European Community is the existence of an articulated purpose. Greater data sharing and communication will “enable national administrations and the Community institutions and bodies to meet their new responsibilities” and contribute to the “effective management of the Community area without frontiers.”(6) This situation includes a supranational organization in the inter-networking among nation states which has special characteristics not present elsewhere.

    This case illustrates how supranational institutions like those in the European Community view the potential usefulness of moving toward open and integrated information systems. It could also be viewed as a way for the EC institutions to strategically place themselves in the middle of information flows between the member states and assist them in the management of “common agricultural, environment, education, and health policies.”

    Many vaporists who can purchase here are familiar with using a glass bong or bubbler to cool down and moisturize their smoke and filter out minute particles. Some of them are combining the benefits of vaporizing with a water filtration device.

    The EC is also a central organizing point that will invest resources in building applications to manage and add value to the electronic communication that occurs between governments. In the United States there is a need for more intergovernmental coordination, but the incentives for Federal agencies to create communication systems that may lead to a decentralization of their decision-making process and that may require them to share power with those included in their information flows make it less likely that Federal agencies will take the lead without management acceptence or political leadership. A new report released in December 1993 by the voluntary inter-agency Working Group on Government- wide Electronic Mail, titled “A Unified Federal Government Electronic Mail Users’ Support Environment” represents a movement by primarily government information technologists to move move forward. The report states, “Regardless of the approach chosen [specific IT applications and services], the Federal Government needs to see that our American society is plunging headlong into the world of electronic information flows, and that an insular, each-agency-for- itself approach will be detrimental to the Nation.”(7)

    The EC contributions in this area, including efforts to create tools for language translation, will likely enhance their power and ability to manage the affairs of an integrated market. The use of Open System protocols by the EC also means that transborder data flows will not only expand from the EC at some point to the other nations of Europe as the report mentions, but to the entire world. It should be pointed out that Open Systems does not mean unrestricted access or non-secure communication. The tools and forums that the EC creates to improve communication between governments at all levels within the EC may result in the flow of information and ideas to governmental agencies in other countries dealing with similar issues.

    Local Government

    In the United States the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, and the International City/County Management Association among others, have created a service called Local Exchange. While it is not accessible through the Internet, subscribers from local governments all across the United States dial in with their computer and modem to share information on topics of interest to local governments. Their services include the creation of computer conferences geared to exchange information on specific issues, electronic mail, a database called “Local Government Solutions” that contains “one-page description of thousands of recent, successfully implemented problem-solving city and county programs, complete with names and numbers for follow-up information,” and abstracts of articles from more than 400 local government publications.(8)

    With a fee based service like this, one of the incentives for people to participate relates directly back to the work they are doing with their local government. When they are able to improve their work, they will be more likely to exchange information that is useful to others in the service. This service also posts “Federal legislative alerts” which illustrates how governments may use the medium to organize themselves politically along lines of common interest.

    As local governments begin gaining Internet connectivity these types of exchanges will occur more frequently between local governments in different countries. Will this allow new or innovative ideas to spread to various localities in a fraction of the time that it occurred in past? For example had local governments been inter-networked when the idea for the new German packaging laws emerged, where the manufacturer is essentially responsible for the packaging after the consumption of the product, would there have been local governments in the United States that would have adopted that policy early instead of waiting to determine the success of the German initiative. What implications does this have for industries that try and prevent regulatory ideas in one part of the world from gaining credibility in parts of the world? And moving beyond the use of this medium by local government staff, will local elected officials use it on a regular basis to communicate with each other and with their constituents? Will the range of interest groups from the local to international level use this medium to organize local political activity or attempt to set the local public agendas?

    Legislatures and Parliaments

    The United States Congress will complete a fiber optic network for the Capitol Hill complex within the next year that will allow for high speed data transmission and complete Internet connectivity. A report by the Congressional Research Service titled, “Congressional Reorganization: Options for Change,” states that the full impact of using advanced information technologies will not be known until they are used as universally as word processing is today.” Within this very political environment “developing such an advanced infrastructure will require a degree of cooperation and collaboration between congressional offices that is, so far, unprecedented.”(9)

    Both the U.S. House of Representative and U.S. Senate have moved forward in the last few years with the research and database tools available electronically and a large portion of staff can now send and receive electronic mail to and from the Internet. The infrastructure envisioned by Stephen Gould of the CRS includes moving most of the printed information used by Congressional offices to electronic format, including bills, committee reports, etc., use of “groupware” software to “streamline congressional work processes,” and the use of video conferencing. It could be argued to explicitly plan for a system such as this, and deal explicitly with the political ramifications would be extremely difficult. It seems more likely that technology will advance within the walls of Congress and they will structurally respond to technology and not use IT as a tool to force reform.

    In terms of more basic inter-networking the House Representatives launched a project to test electronic mail from constituents in about 6 member offices. Legislative institutions and staff are already overloaded with information and they operate to manage and control the information flow and do not desire to increase it. The pilot project requires that the people who want to send electronic mail must write to the Members office first and register in their system to verify that they live in the district. Unlike the White House which accepts electronic mail messages from anywhere and has a relatively high volume, this project has not generated high volumes of correspondence. In fact, many have been disappointed by the low volume of traffic. (This should change over the years as more of the public begins to use electronic mail services.) It could be argued that the qualities of electronic correspondence do not lend itself to the generation of high volumes of mail from one individual to a single office and the lack of residency in district may make the ease at which an incoming message can be deleted enough of a deterrence to prevent abuse of such a system. (The White House has set up a system that auto- responds to message to verify receipt and it is printed out and responded through normal postal channels.)

    As Congressional staff have more experience and training on the Internet they will see it more as a staff resource tool. This is beginning to happen. The use of electronic mail forums will allow them to link into the currently established research networks that are involved with the issues they are assigned to. When they have a need to find information quickly and the databases provided to them do not return useful information, many will find posting a basic question to scores of experts in that field through one electronic mail address an attractive option. This same idea can be applied to legislatures and parliaments at both national and regional levels in all countries. Over time active staff on these networks will become aware of each other and new lists and forums will be created to suit their needs and perhaps create international networks of legislative staff.

    The questions that can be raised in this are are many. How will this affect how the public agenda is set in a legislative body? Will increased communication result in a coalescing of political forces with similar ideologies or agendas across nations? And will this lead to the conceptual globalization of public problems and proposed solutions?

    Policy Implications and Analysis

    The paper will now examine a few overarching policy implications and factors that are important in the context of electronic communication and inter- networking.

    Human Networks

    With all the discussion of computers, data networks, and databases it is easy to lose sight of the fact that these networks are based on the interaction of people. The application of more advanced information technology allows the individual to expand their presence into other social, political, and economic circles that was not possible before at such a relatively low cost. Within an individuals organizational context the information and knowledge that a person has to contribute is most often transferred through human interaction.(10) So the electronic networks that a person is tied to are a foundation and information and input source and become represented by the actions and policy positions of an individual in their organization. The existence of a database may assist in making specific information available when needed, but time for the person to analyze and convert the information into applicable knowledge is important.

    The various “affinity networks” can also be viewed in social terms. Like various groups in any society, there are norms, values, and rules that people operate by. It is often the case that people new to the medium of electronic communication conceptualize the receiver of their communication as a machine and not a person. With experience and an understanding that longer-term relationships with people are being built, a person will get the sense that this is a human network. And while people will be less likely evaluated on their physical characteristics or age, they will be scrutinized on their use of language and writing style, their ability to construct rational arguments or questions, personality quirks, or lack of substance that can be perceived easily in many situations.

    Hierarchies

    One of the commonly stated effects of electronic communication and its ability to break through other communication and bureaucratic barriers , is that it flattens hierarchies that can lead to a decentralization of power. This has been most observed as IT has spread through corporations:

    By its very nature, electronic mail blasts aside typical corporate hierarchies because the messages are undifferentiated – there is no fancy letterhead…. [it] “has produced a new social fabric for the R&D community that cuts across corporations and the hierarchy of organizations that creates a new kind of accessibility. It is easier to send e-mail to very important people, people whom you would never consider calling or writing.”(11)11

    These lessons apply to interaction within a government agency and beyond. Not only will people within an organization gain new ways to access information that used to flow from the top of the organization, they will also be able to compare their own status and work effort to others they have built connections with in other government organizations. Information control is one of the prime sources of power a bureaucratic agency has. If the organization cannot maintain control over their information, their relationships with other government agencies will likely shift. These shifts are considered by many to be positive and it is argued by many that it will lead to a more efficient public sector.

    Policy Development

    As described earlier, information networks will change the way policy is developed. There are advantages to having the world at your finger tips, but that does not necessarily mean you will utilize those networks. For organizations and people to capture the potential in this area they need to rethink and plan for how they will use this resource and integrate it into their work. The problems of information overload, sifting through useless information, and the need for training will all need to be dealt with. Also, as we have observed with the prevalence of the fax machine, rapid communication does not necessarily bring about better policy. It may actually reduce the time people have to digest information and to create workable knowledge for use in determining policy directions. As the public sector has more experience with this type of communication we will have a better sense of how to address these issues or at least gain a better sense of our limits.

    The use of electronic communication is often a good channel through which to better define the issues, but it does not necessarily bring you toward a solution. Over time weaker arguments (or granted, those with fewer in-house research resources) may become apparent. However, the relatively low cost of basic electronic mail may actually allow smaller voices to be heard. This may lead to the raising of more policy questions and require more work to be done to bring a policy issue to a point where policy makers at a certain site feel comfortable making a decision. One addendum to the inclusion of smaller voices is that strong economic and political interests will adapt to this technology as well and attempt to use it to their benefit.

    The Media and Political Importance

    The role of the media is very important in public policy. The use of IT has also revolutionized the way news flows around the globe. What will happen when more and more governments go straight to the people with their press releases in an attempt to inform the public or to influence public opinion? The Clinton Administration releases speeches and important documents electronically and NATO has a press release service on the Internet as well. The fact that the leader of the United States puts releases out for public consumption may spur more national governments and opposition parties to do the same.

    Over the last year the number of articles in the popular press on the Internet, the National Information Infrastructure, etc. has numbered over a thousand. The year before it was about fifty. What happens when the Internet moves from being covered as a thing, to a respectable gauge from which of public feeling or interest can be determined? When will fifty people protest an issue electronically to a government entity become equated with fifty or say ten people physically picketing a government office? How will policy makers and government staff approach the Internet if it becomes a source for story ideas about what government is doing, not just related to technology? How will they react when they are quoted in their local paper from a message they posted to a public electronic mail list? And how will the media react when the public and government officials send their comments and opinions about stories directly to the reporters electronically?

    Role of Government

    The role of government in the economy and society is geared toward the promotion of economic growth through the market system and addressing issues related to social and educational development. The general trend in market countries is to move from more coercive regulation toward more non-coercive education of the consumer that will spur industrial and social changes driven by consumer demand. The predominant role for many government organizations is to compile and produce information for others to make decisions from. The expense involved with publishing and broadcasting often limits the amount of awareness a government organization can build from released information.

    For example, a government might collect data on when an industrial plant has violated pollution standards. Through the use of IT, information may be readily available to the public and retransmitted by concerned local citizens to environmental groups across the country and used to put pressure on other offices in the corporation. This might influence the company to deal more seriously with their pollution problems or risk consumer backlash. Good thing there’s regenerative thermal oxidizers which is designed to be highly energy efficient systems that achieve high levels of VOC destruction to keep processes well below required DRE emission levels. Another example might be an international government organization that deals with human rights. They might not have the power to place sanctions on a country for human rights abuse, but they would be able to inform the humans rights and trade offices of the member countries on a regular basis and spur a coordinated response. This also raises the possibility that governments and citizens of different countries might become more deeply involved in monitoring and reacting to the domestic activities within other countries in areas beyond the normal pervue of foreign policy.

    Conclusion

    The overview of the policy implications and current efforts in the use of information technology networks sought to bring out some of the issues government will need to deal with. While improving the governments use of information technology and promoting increased inter- networking is important, the essential ingredient is the creation of a purpose for improved communication. Government organizations need to prepare for increased communications and where appropriate restructure their organizations and information flows to take advantage of the benefits of inter-networking.

    To help this process along a few suggestions include:

    ¥ Collecting evidence and anecdotal stories about how the government has been made more efficient, effective, or that services provided to the public improved because of ideas imported from elsewhere.

    ¥ Setting up a few pilot initiatives that use current technologies to link government workers based on common interests between nations.

    ¥ The redirection of some of the public resources geared toward the R&D in technology toward the development and testing of applications in government.

    ¥ Create incentives for government workers to scan the global information networks for ideas on how to improve their work and their agency’s delivery of services and incentives for employees to share information and knowledge electronically.

    ¥ And create a role for the United Nations, UNESCO, the International Telecommunications Union, the OECD, and other international organizations to assist in the creation of government “affinity” groups based on potential areas of collaboration and to work to build the value of these forums for the participants through electronic group facilitation.

    With projects like these and the ability of people and the ability of institutions interested in these issues to communicate through the established internetworking, it will be possible to capture the lessons for the public sector. In the near future perhaps we will see the creation on an international “affinity” group of people, advocates within the public sector, who are interested in developing initiatives to ensure that government moves forward in the application of electronic communication to improve its work.

    Footnotes
    =========

    1 A good source of information on the issues facing the developing world see Global Communication and International Relations (1993), written by Howard Fredrick.

    2 OECD “Information Networks and New Technologies: Opportunites and Policy Implications for the 1990s,” Information Computer Communications Policy #30. (1992) p. 23 Note: I sent a general research request to a number of people on the Internet and asked if anyone had the e- mail address for Dieter Kimbel who wrote most of this article. After being referred to someone at the International Telecommunications Union who used to work at the OECD, I was given Dieter Kimbels e-mail address and have had correspondence in reference to my original research request.

    3 NASIRE Report, “Serving the Citizenry through Opening the Enterprise.” Draft, August 1993. p. 1-4 This draft report was developed by the Open Systems Subcommittee of the Information Policy Committee of the NASIRE.

    4 Anderson Consulting, “Open Systems in Minnesota State Government: A Readiness Assessment” (November 1993) p. 3

    5 OECD “Information Networks and New Technologies: Opportunites and Policy Implications for the 1990s,” Information Computer Communications Policy #30. (1992) p. 33

    6 European Commission, “Proposal for a Counncil Decision on aseries of guidelines for trans-European data communications networks between administration.” (March 1993) p. 8 Note: After I electronically released a draft of this paper on the Internet, I received a few comments back that were more skeptical of the European Communities actual implementation in this area. The general consensus was that it will take some time before the various government bureaucracies start major electronic communication among member states.

    7 Working Group on Government-wide Electronic Mail, Integrated Services Panel. “Final Report: A Unified Federal Government Electronic Mail Users’ Support Environment.” Part I, near end. (December 1993)

    8 Public Technology Inc. “Local Exchange.” – flyer and information packet

    9 Gould, Stephen. “Employing Information Technology to Facilitate the Conduct of Congressional Business.” Chapter 9 from Congressional Reorganizations: Options for Change. (Sept. 1992) p. 62

    10 Grosser, Kerry. “Human Networks in Organizational Information Processing.” Annual Review of Information Science and Technology p. 349-50

    11 Tekla, Perry and John Adam. “E-mail pervasive and persuasive.” IEEE Spectrum. (October 1992) p. 28 . The subquote is attributed to Lucky at AT&T Bell Laboratories.

    Bibliography
    ============

    Anderson Consulting, “Open Systems in Minnesota State Government: A Readiness Assessment” (November 1993) p. 3

    European Commission, “Proposal for a Counncil Decision on aseries of guidelines for trans-European data communications networks between administration.” (March 1993)

    Gould, Stephen. “Employing Information Technology to Facilitate the Conduct of Congressional Business.” Chapter 9 from Congressional Reorganizations: Options for Change. (Sept. 1992)

    Grosser, Kerry. “Human Networks in Organizational Information Processing.” Annual Review of Information Science and Technology

    NASIRE Report, “Serving the Citizenry through Opening the Enterprise.” Draft, (August 1993).

    Public Technology Inc. “Local Exchange.” – flyer and information packet

    OECD “Information Networks and New Technologies: Opportunites and Policy Implications for the 1990s,” Information Computer Communications Policy #30. (1992)

    Tekla, Perry and John Adam. “E-mail pervasive and persuasive.” IEEE Spectrum. (October 1992)