(Cross Posted from The Open House Project)
Whose responsibility is it to publish information about the government?
The media?
While the profit motive and journalism standards both shape our traditional TV and press media’s coverage of Congress, they don’t guarantee the comprehensive coverage that is necessary for a democracy powered by knowledge. In fact, it could even be argued that the selectively administered attentions of the traditional media polarize more than they inform. Members of Congress are forced to grasp at control of the media narrative—often playing to controversy and inflammation—focusing more on the capricious national spotlight than on legislative realities. Our traditional media play an important role in our society, exposing stories that need to be told, but providing us broad access to our government just isn’t their job. (There are a few notable exceptions to this, for example the Washington Post’s Votes Database.)
The government?
While the national government does a great job of presenting some information, new technologies are emerging that will allow much more meaningful access to political information online. They are unlikely to integrate these tools on their own, however. Our national government tends to evolve as a responsive institution, acting as a result of public pressure, or of changing conditions. This makes sense. An institution relying on precedent, tradition, and consensus, designed to represent the interests of the country as a whole, is unlikely to make complex reforms suddenly, unless a compelling need arises.
Congress members, staff, committees and their staff, and even legislative support agencies all have well defined activities and motivations, and don’t answer to the needs of the country as a whole.
For example, some Congress members may post information about their schedules, but are most likely to do so out only of a perceived benefit. Until public attitudes shift and explicitly lay value on transparency reform, only staunch transparency advocates are likely to disclose more than is legally required.
Similarly, some committees are webcasting their hearings online, and some have transcripts and testimony available, while some do not. Committee websites will continue to reflect the dispositions of the chairs and ranking members and their often partisan goals, until there is either public demand or legislation dictating disclosure levels.
The Government Printing Office and THOMAS are the best examples of providing broad access to public information. These are both huge databases of government information, however, that cannot be expected to adopt new technology suddenly. Even incremental reform concerning document formats requires great coordination, having an effect across government departments and agencies, as they seek to update old technology and standardize their tools.
The internet community?
Reform of government web use will likely be powered from the outside. Since Congress and the Media ultimately answer to looming elections and ratings, adapting new technology and creating tools for political information falls first to people working through the internet; people working on blogs, wikis, mashups, databases, video technologies, and collaborative projects (like this one).
Having Congress publish information voluntarily is certainly a step in the right direction, but we should remember that permanent and reliable reform will come from procedural reforms (like House Rules changes) and also from the new projects whose huge potential gives small reforms huge consequences. Providing access to lobbyist disclosure information, House video feeds, and accreditation for non-traditional journalists will all probably be attained eventually through the obvious potential of projects like Maplight.org, PoliticsTV and MetaVid, and bloggers providing quality reporting.
When it isn’t anyone’s responsibility to create broad access to the government, it becomes everyone’s responsibility. As new tools change what we can do with political information, let’s hope Congress remains open to living up to their potential.