transparency

In an outstanding example of the use of online technology and social media, the Lawrence Journal World did a twitter-view with Douglas County Clerk Jamie Shew about the way his office is using social media as a way to do better outreach.

Last week I emphasized the need for accessibility through technology for the Kansas State House and Senate, but the Douglas County Clerk was well on his way of advocating for greater outreach through social media as early as last year when he first began tweeting.

Now the, somewhat young, elected official is using the new world of technology in attempts to get more young people in Lawrence (home of the University of Kansas) to vote in the upcoming city elections.

"Recently, he and his staff members have started posting messages on Twitter reminding Douglas County voters that advance voting was open this week at the courthouse, 1100 Mass.

“Social media seems to be able to spread messages quickly across multiple domains,” Shew said.

His office also has been looking at ways to expand its communication reach, especially when his budget is limited.

“Governments have to start thinking outside the bricks and mortar of the courthouse to create contact points in the new information age,” he said."

I know of no previous twitter-views but I have to say this must be one of the first. Shew goes further to talk about his outreach through a full on interview back and forth between the LJWorld and Shew.

Most Notable:

"@dgcokselections: It is an additional tool for outreach, especially for mobilization of new generations of voters who communicate via social media.

@dgcokselections: It has been gradual as we test which venues are appropriate. Using Twitter to share info that is broadcast in more traditional methods.

@dgcokselections: We are really interested in developing a full scale approach by the 2010 elections when social media will have expanded even more.

@dgcokselections: This has been in conjunction with our expanded use of the Web site to get information out to the public like online sample ballots."

I applaud any elected official who is using new technologies to reach out to young people, indeed all constituents, in their district. It does us all a disservice when we can't connect with our elected members, but with further outreach on sites like Twitter, MySpace, and Facebook we all have a stronger connection to government. In the end it will grow civic engagement and hopefully civic pride.

The House and Senate have just opened a new YouTube channel designed to be a hub for members and their youtube videos communicating to the people.

I remember a time when members couldn't put video on their site unless it was hosted by the House servers! Ohhh boy those were the days, weren't they! With Congress back in session it seems the leadership is breaking out those swanky new franking rules and bringing forth the connectivity to the people.... particularly young people.

The swanky google map ain't too bad either. What's next?! Speaker tweeting more than just the blog's RSS feed? Oh I can only dream....

I want to say a special note of thanks to all of the people who worked these past few years at pushing our elected officials and the leadership toward moments like these. Without folks at the Sunlight Foundation and all the bloggers out there demanding connectivity and transparency online. Now if we can only get the state governments to do the same. Miles to go before we sleep, but victories like these sure make it easier to soldier on.

"Transparency is the process by which people have confidence that things are really gonna be different, that they will have that seat at the table."

So refreshing.

Go sit at the table and check it out.

I reported yesterday about our HUGE VICTORY in the update in Franking Rules which will enable our Representatives to be better connected to constituencies and help build bridges between government and the people by providing them with information where they spend much of their time... ie facebook, myspace, twitter, etc...

A good example the Feds could incorporate into their newly found freedoms is something CA SOS Debra Bowen has done with her new YouTube channel.

Bowen campaigned in California in the heart of the uncertainty battle with electronic voting machines saying she was running for two reasons "Florida and Ohio." With the impending voter suppression on the horizon and the actualized fears we've seen thus far, its only fair to assume that voting rights advocates will have their work cut out for them.

Even one of the greatest American Patriots of our time had problems voting:

But I digress... Bowen's video mentions a pet issue "transparency" and asks for UGC about why WE are voting this year. I would, actually, like to hear from young what their first time was like in their first election - if it is their first time, what has it been like registering and getting information about candidates at all levels of government? Further, do people expect there to be difficulties, and what do they plan to do if there are... I am imagining some great role playing videos.

First, submission to Bowen's request - I vote because I believe in the right to dance....

Why do you vote? I vote for my right to bug elected leaders on twitter....

Happy Friday!

For a long time we reported on the odd lack of youth outreach by the Clinton campaign, a strategy of inaction that ended only recently with the launch of HillBlazers, Clinton's data-capture operation masquerading as a youth outreach website. Now two disturbing events in the last week have brought the Clinton campaign's attitude towards young voters into sharp focus.

First, the Clinton campaign was caught planting audience questions at their townhall events using a student as their plant. This was revealed when Muriel Gallo-Chassenoff, an Iowa college student, came forward and told CNN that a Clinton advisor asked her change her question from a detailed, comparative one about the candidate energy plans, to a softball question that teed up some talking points on climate change:

The second incident came a few days later after the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson dinner. During her speech, Clinton stated that she wasn't interested in attacking her Democratic opponents, but apparently their supporters were fair game for her campaign aids:

At least two of Hillary Clinton’s upper-echelon advisers, Mandy Grunwald and Mark Penn, were decidedly unimpressed.

“Our people look like caucus-goers,” Grunwald said, “and his people look like they are 18. Penn said they look like Facebook.”

Penn added, “Only a few of their people look like they could vote in any state.”

For those who don't know, Mark Penn is one of the chief architects of the Clinton campaign.

Both these events are similar in that they reveal an utter lack of respect for the role of young people in our political process - whether that be in their ability to ask important and intelligent questions, or to be worthy of voting and participating in the process at all.

Worse, they reveal both a short-sightedness and lack of transparency that are detrimental to both the Democratic party and the progressive movement. That Penn would be so dismissive of young voters is utterly unacceptable (and should be a black mark for the campaign among young voters). Has he even read through the election results from 2004 and 2006 and seen what role young voters played in mitigating Kerry's loss, and propelling Democrats to victory in 2006? Has he viewed the demographic numbers and seen that by 2015, Millennials will be over 30% of the eligible electorate and that we are the future core of the progressive movement?

As a pollster, one would presume that he would be familiar with such figures, but it appears that he's more willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater and sacrifice a generation of progressive voters to undercut Obama's stand-out performance at the J-J Dinner (and I say this as someone who is not an Obama supporter). It is such shortsightedness that turned young voters away from the Democrats in the 80s, when Gen X helped elect Reagan, and early 90s (despite conventional wisdom, President Clinton only won 43% of the youth vote in 1992 - more young people voted for Perot and Bush combined than did Clinton).

Planting questions, while disrespectful to all the young voters at the event who no doubt had substantial queries they wanted answered, shows an even worse tendency towards the kinds of propagandism and lack of transparency that have been hallmarks of the Bush Administration. Young voters and the nation have been screaming for change, yet the Clinton campaign is embracing the very traits we want abolished from our government.

Despite this, I don't foresee Clinton losing her lead among young voters. This is just so much inside baseball to the race, and none but the most committed voters, who follow all of the inside baseball, will ever hear about this. Nevertheless, it's important to note, in the words of Muriel Gallo-Chassenoff, that "this is not random." More and more these seem like trends, not blips, and that's the most disturbing thing of all.