Internet, Law & Politics 2007 - User contributions [en]

Main Page

2007-05-11T19:57:13Z

Cconley: /* Event Responses */

<div style="float:right">
__TOC__
</div>
<center><big>'''Internet, Law, & Politics'''</big>

Spring Semester 2007, Prof. John Palfrey</center>

'''[[Official Syllabus]]'''

News & Updates:
* The '''final essay''' will be due on May 11, 2007 (the last day of exams).
* Post von Hippel questions (4/17) [[Von Hippel questions | here]]
* [[Themes]] of the Course (4/24)

== Group Projects ==

{| width=100% cellpadding=3 cellspacing=5
|valign=top width="50%"|
[[Debate 1]]: "Resolved: The Internet enables citizens to have a greater voice in politics and is, on balance, already a tremendous force for strengthening participatory democracies around the world."

[[Debate 2]]: "Resolved: E-Government is a lot like Al Goreâs âreinventing governmentâ initiative when he was Vice-President: sounds like something that governments should obviously do, but no one much cares and the impact on society, after lots of effort, is negligible. Thereâs no special magic to governing in a digital age."
|valign=top|
[[Debate 3]]: "Resolved: United States technology companies should stay out of regimes that force them to sacrifice the civil liberties of citizens as the cost of doing business in those states."

[[Debate 4]]: "Resolved: The outcome of the digital intellectual property crisis is crucial to whether or not the use of the Internet ultimately has a positive impact in terms of strengthening democracies."
|}

== Class Notes ==
* [[Politics and Network Effects]] (Feb. 13, 2007)
* [[Municipal WiFi]] (Mar. 13, 2007)
* [[Politics and Digital Business]]: A Conversation on Regulation and Self-regulation (Apr. 10, 2007)

== Internet, Law, & Politics in the News ==

* Hello class. In response to the Zittrain article's discussion about how pornography helped fuel the internet boom, I refer you all to this article from Macworld[http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/05/02/pornhd/index.php?lsrc=mwrss] discussing how pornography played a role in VHS winning out over Beta and how pornography may contribute to Blu-ray winning out over HD-DVD. Notice that the article states that the pornography industry is a $57 billion industry. - Scott Lesowitz
* [http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyId=16&articleId=9011204&intsrc=hm_topic Embattled Edwards Blogger Quits Campaign], ''Computerworld,'' Feb. 13, 2007.
* [http://www.ft.com/cms/s/b46f5a58-aa2e-11db-83b0-0000779e2340.html On free copies, Benkler, and open books]: "Yochai Benkler is a prominent academic. His widely praised book about the network economy, The Wealth of Networks, was published by Yale Press â a publisher not known for its radicalism. Yet with his publisherâs approval Benklerâs book is available for free online under a Creative Commons license. Instead of paying $40 one can simply download the book. Its sales are reportedly in the top rank of academic books. Benkler is delighted with the additional 20,000 readers who have downloaded it."
* In case there's anybody that has not seen it, this is [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE a cool video] that explains the power of Web 2.0.
* [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/19/AR2007021900934.html Blogger as Lobbyist?] "if you're not for net neutrality, then the blogs will kick your" rear. The grass-roots groups that strongly favor it are relatively small but very noisy, she said, "and you just don't want to have to deal with that."
* [http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,69234-0.html Wi-Fi Cloud Covers Rural Oregon] "While cities around the country are battling over plans to offer free or cheap internet access, this lonely terrain is served by what is billed as the world's largest hotspot, a wireless cloud that stretches over 700 square miles of landscape so dry and desolate it could have been lifted from a cowboy tune."
* [http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2007_03.php#005176 Free Speech Battle Over Online Parody of âColbert Reportâ]: MoveOn and Brave New Films reacted by filing suit against Viacom for illegal takedown of YouTube Video. Here is the link to watch [http://falsiness.org/ "Stop the Falsiness"] video
*[http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6154930.html 'Web Giants' seek US Government resolution to Debate 3] - includes lots of good links relevant to today's debate.
*[http://www.lefigaro.fr/presidentielle-web/20070321.FIG000000371_o_est_l_e_egalite_.html OÃ¹ est l'e-Ã©galitÃ©? (Where is e-equality?)], ''Le Figaro'', 21 March 2007: French election laws mandate that equal air time must be given to all presidential candidates (twelve at last count) by traditional television and radio outlets. This very short article raises the question as to where such campaign equality can be found on the Internet. ''See also'' [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6525083.stm this BBC article]: the rules for Internet debates are more lax than those for TV debates under French election law, but Sarkozy refused to take advantage of this and declined an invitation to participate in an online debate that would include only four out of twelve candidates.
*Here comes another piece of news about Google in China. It's not directly related to human rights or civil liberties, but might be an interesting issue in terms of is Google really keeping it's "don't be evil" promise in China. Go back to the topic of third debate, if international corporations like Google practice the princile "be responsive to local situation" in this way, they may sacrifice more than Chinese citizen's civil liberties. Also, this event also intrigues nationalism attitude toward foreign Internet companies, which may in a long run affect their credibilities - "Are they coming to China really to help improve our liberties as they claimed, or just to steal our moeny?" http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/11178/53/. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-04-09-google-sogou_N.htm
*Will American candidates take a cue from their French counterparts in devising web campaigns?[http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSL1240935420070412?feedType=RSS U.S. Experts Eye French Election's Web Campaigning], April 12, 2007. American campaign strategists note that" 'In some ways, the Sarkozy site is more advanced than most of the typical American political sites, particularly in the use of video" and that Segolene Royal's site was "inspiring" in its use as a network/grassroots campaign. ''See also'' [http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/13/news/paris.php?page=1 French Election Strategies Leave Americans Scratching Their Heads] April 13, 2007. [http://www.sarkozy.fr/home/ Official Site of Nicolas Sarkozy] [http://www.desirsdavenir.org/index_s.html Official Site of Segolene Royal]
*Yahoo got sued for helping identify Chinese dissidents under the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Torture Victims Protection Act. Full story: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/19/technology/19yahoo.html?ex=1334635200&en=ab9e062372ade430&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

== Other Interesting Topics ==

*I just found out that there will be a discussion on "Can the internet save democracy?" at Berkman Center on Feb 14, 2007, at 6 PM which subject might be in line with our course. More information can be found on http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/home/

* Beyond Broadcast 2007: From Participatory Culture to Participatory Democracy, will be held on Saturday, February 24 at MIT. Info: http://www.beyondbroadcast.net/blog/

* Reuters: pronounced ''Royters'' - love, [http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sg2118.doc.htm ''Bahn Gi-moon'']

* The Internet is a [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtOoQFa5ug8 Series of Tubes]...awesome video. You can listen to Senator Stevens unaccompanied [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE&mode=related&search= here].

*[http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/mg19125691.800;jsessionid=OPEGCJHNALIL?DCMP=ILC-OpenHouse&nsref=mg19125691.800INT I Saw the Best Minds of My Generation Destroyed by Google] (very) short story set in the near future

== Related Events ==

* [[Steve Schultze on the Convergence of Pop Culture and Political Action as it Creates a New, Networked Form of Participatory Democracy]]
* [[Beyond Broadcast 2007]]: From Participatory Culture to Participatory Democracy
* [[APALSA event]]
* [[Targeting the Youth Vote]]

==Event Responses==

Scott's Response to the Institute of Politics Event: http://perspectives.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=138638&forum_id=4

Amanda's Response to [[The Information Society and Democratic Process]]: A Take on the French Elections

Responses to [[Beyond Broadcast 2007]] by Renat and Chris

Beyond Broadcast 2007

2007-05-11T19:55:25Z

Cconley: /* Chris's Comments */

== Renat's Comments ==

Insights

* "Naked democracy": The basic idea is that most people don't participate in the democratic process on a regular basis. Going to a local school or library to vote every two or four years has become a milestone participatory event. "Naked democracy" is a vision of the democratic process where participation in decision-making becomes an everyday occurrence ("voting from one's bedroom").
** As we discussed in class, the Internet (via blogging, wikis, etc.) enables and promotes naked democracy. Could it also be be making traditional milestone events like voting appear relatively less important?
** Naked democracy is relatively easy to achieve in small groups (e.g., college co-ops), where everyone is familiar with the issues and has a direct stake in the outcome. Blogging etc may be restoring a "small village" feel to the complex and large system in the US.

* Second Life: I attended the conference in SL as I wanted to see what all the hype was about
** My overall impression is that the virtual conference was little more than a webcast + IRC. Several people expressed interest in doing something more radical with SL's capabilities, but it's unclear what else could have been done.
** SL is just like RL. A couple of robot-looking participants notwithstanding, everyone looked normal (some people designed their avatars to look like them in real life). Everyone "sat" in virtual chairs and looked at the virtual screen. Is there more to SL?

== Chris's Comments ==

I participated in the [http://www.beyondbroadcast.net/wiki07/index.php?title=Working_Groups#Participatory_Policy_-_Held_in_The_Whitaker_Building_.28Bldg._56.29.2C_Room_191 Participatory Policy] working group. The group discussion evolved along several lines:

# What is the right way to promote legislative outcomes that favor participatory culture and democracy? Much of the discussion was on the effectiveness of [http://www.savetheinternet.org SaveTheInternet.org] and its applicability to other movements, including those not directly involving the Internet.
# What tools are available for participatory policymaking? Two of the tools mentioned were [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia] and [http://www.opencongress.org OpenCongress], both of which currently seem to serve as aggregators for existing policy information. This certainly serves a valuable person, but it did not mesh with my idea of "participatory policy" - I was expecting more of a discussion on how wikis and other tools enable collaborative efforts to write policies, and the appropriateness and feasibility of implementing procedural rules on forums of that sort.
# How does participatory policymaking alter the current democratic regime? One argument was that it is tantamount to direct democracy, removing legislative power from elected representatives and vesting it in the citizenry. Another perspective was that participatory policymaking had more relevances to questions of authority and legitimacy than power; in other words, policies derived from citizen participation are not binding on governments, but departures from those policies require explanations and may result in democratic backlash. The latter appears to be a more workable method of encouraging participation in policymaking without devolving everything to a plebiscite.
# Is there an appropriate structure for participatory online policymaking? One of the major concerns is that there is a real connection between procedure and substance; thus, there are likely to be meta-debates about the appropriateness of, say, Robert's Rules of Order in structuring ongoing policy debates. Are peer ratings and reputation systems appropriate to structure community discourse?
# What preconditions are necessary for participatory policy? The primary requirement seems to be an engaged electorate and a clear expectation that the government will respond to the emergent policies; this presents something of a chicken-and-egg problem, as participatory policy is also identified as a solution to current civic apathy and criticisms of remote governance. Is it sufficient to trust that the communicative powers of the web will draw increasing interest to political discussions? If not, how can other mechanisms be deployed to attract this interest in the first instance? If critical mass can be reached, there was general consensus that the process would become self-sustaining, but there were no clear methods for reaching that point.

Beyond Broadcast 2007

2007-05-11T19:54:03Z

Cconley: /* Chris's Comments */

== Renat's Comments ==

Insights

* "Naked democracy": The basic idea is that most people don't participate in the democratic process on a regular basis. Going to a local school or library to vote every two or four years has become a milestone participatory event. "Naked democracy" is a vision of the democratic process where participation in decision-making becomes an everyday occurrence ("voting from one's bedroom").
** As we discussed in class, the Internet (via blogging, wikis, etc.) enables and promotes naked democracy. Could it also be be making traditional milestone events like voting appear relatively less important?
** Naked democracy is relatively easy to achieve in small groups (e.g., college co-ops), where everyone is familiar with the issues and has a direct stake in the outcome. Blogging etc may be restoring a "small village" feel to the complex and large system in the US.

* Second Life: I attended the conference in SL as I wanted to see what all the hype was about
** My overall impression is that the virtual conference was little more than a webcast + IRC. Several people expressed interest in doing something more radical with SL's capabilities, but it's unclear what else could have been done.
** SL is just like RL. A couple of robot-looking participants notwithstanding, everyone looked normal (some people designed their avatars to look like them in real life). Everyone "sat" in virtual chairs and looked at the virtual screen. Is there more to SL?

== Chris's Comments ==

I participated in the [http://www.beyondbroadcast.net/wiki07/index.php?title=Working_Groups#Participatory_Policy_-_Held_in_The_Whitaker_Building_.28Bldg._56.29.2C_Room_191 Participatory Policy] working group. The group discussion evolved along several lines:

# What is the right way to promote legislative outcomes that favor participatory culture and democracy? Much of the discussion was on the effectiveness of [http://www.savetheinternet.org SaveTheInternet.org] and its applicability to other movements, including those not directly involving the Internet.
# What tools are available for participatory policymaking? Two of the tools mentioned were [http://www.opencongress.org OpenCongress] and [http:/www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia], both of which currently seem to serve as aggregators for existing policy information. This certainly serves a valuable person, but it did not mesh with my idea of "participatory policy" - I was expecting more of a discussion on how wikis and other tools enable collaborative efforts to write policies, and the appropriateness and feasibility of implementing procedural rules on forums of that sort.
# How does participatory policymaking alter the current democratic regime? One argument was that it is tantamount to direct democracy, removing legislative power from elected representatives and vesting it in the citizenry. Another perspective was that participatory policymaking had more relevances to questions of authority and legitimacy than power; in other words, policies derived from citizen participation are not binding on governments, but departures from those policies require explanations and may result in democratic backlash. The latter appears to be a more workable method of encouraging participation in policymaking without devolving everything to a plebiscite.
# Is there an appropriate structure for participatory online policymaking? One of the major concerns is that there is a real connection between procedure and substance; thus, there are likely to be meta-debates about the appropriateness of, say, Robert's Rules of Order in structuring ongoing policy debates. Are peer ratings and reputation systems appropriate to structure community discourse?
# What preconditions are necessary for participatory policy? The primary requirement seems to be an engaged electorate and a clear expectation that the government will respond to the emergent policies; this presents something of a chicken-and-egg problem, as participatory policy is also identified as a solution to current civic apathy and criticisms of remote governance. Is it sufficient to trust that the communicative powers of the web will draw increasing interest to political discussions? If not, how can other mechanisms be deployed to attract this interest in the first instance? If critical mass can be reached, there was general consensus that the process would become self-sustaining, but there were no clear methods for reaching that point.

Beyond Broadcast 2007

2007-05-11T19:53:46Z

Cconley:

== Renat's Comments ==

Insights

* "Naked democracy": The basic idea is that most people don't participate in the democratic process on a regular basis. Going to a local school or library to vote every two or four years has become a milestone participatory event. "Naked democracy" is a vision of the democratic process where participation in decision-making becomes an everyday occurrence ("voting from one's bedroom").
** As we discussed in class, the Internet (via blogging, wikis, etc.) enables and promotes naked democracy. Could it also be be making traditional milestone events like voting appear relatively less important?
** Naked democracy is relatively easy to achieve in small groups (e.g., college co-ops), where everyone is familiar with the issues and has a direct stake in the outcome. Blogging etc may be restoring a "small village" feel to the complex and large system in the US.

* Second Life: I attended the conference in SL as I wanted to see what all the hype was about
** My overall impression is that the virtual conference was little more than a webcast + IRC. Several people expressed interest in doing something more radical with SL's capabilities, but it's unclear what else could have been done.
** SL is just like RL. A couple of robot-looking participants notwithstanding, everyone looked normal (some people designed their avatars to look like them in real life). Everyone "sat" in virtual chairs and looked at the virtual screen. Is there more to SL?

== Chris's Comments ==

I participated in the [http://www.beyondbroadcast.net/wiki07/index.php?title=Working_Groups#Participatory_Policy_-_Held_in_The_Whitaker_Building_.28Bldg._56.29.2C_Room_191 Participatory Policy] working group. The group discussion evolved along several lines:

# What is the right way to promote legislative outcomes that favor participatory culture and democracy? Much of the discussion was on the effectiveness of [http://www.savetheinternet.org SaveTheInternet.org] and its applicability to other movements, including those not directly involving the Internet.

# What tools are available for participatory policymaking? Two of the tools mentioned were [http://www.opencongress.org OpenCongress] and [http:/www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia], both of which currently seem to serve as aggregators for existing policy information. This certainly serves a valuable person, but it did not mesh with my idea of "participatory policy" - I was expecting more of a discussion on how wikis and other tools enable collaborative efforts to write policies, and the appropriateness and feasibility of implementing procedural rules on forums of that sort.

# How does participatory policymaking alter the current democratic regime? One argument was that it is tantamount to direct democracy, removing legislative power from elected representatives and vesting it in the citizenry. Another perspective was that participatory policymaking had more relevances to questions of authority and legitimacy than power; in other words, policies derived from citizen participation are not binding on governments, but departures from those policies require explanations and may result in democratic backlash. The latter appears to be a more workable method of encouraging participation in policymaking without devolving everything to a plebiscite.

# Is there an appropriate structure for participatory online policymaking? One of the major concerns is that there is a real connection between procedure and substance; thus, there are likely to be meta-debates about the appropriateness of, say, Robert's Rules of Order in structuring ongoing policy debates. Are peer ratings and reputation systems appropriate to structure community discourse?

# What preconditions are necessary for participatory policy? The primary requirement seems to be an engaged electorate and a clear expectation that the government will respond to the emergent policies; this presents something of a chicken-and-egg problem, as participatory policy is also identified as a solution to current civic apathy and criticisms of remote governance. Is it sufficient to trust that the communicative powers of the web will draw increasing interest to political discussions? If not, how can other mechanisms be deployed to attract this interest in the first instance? If critical mass can be reached, there was general consensus that the process would become self-sustaining, but there were no clear methods for reaching that point.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-11T19:23:51Z

Cconley:

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggest that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives."
[http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf ESRC Final Report on Representation in the Internet Age], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Each of these arenas requires more than "business as usual" from the government, demanding an understanding of the possibilities enabled by ICTs and a willingness to reconceptualize the nature of government.

Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties and to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Critics of e-government note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). In some cases, "outsourcing" these functions is merely a utilitarian choice based on the efficiency of private enterprise; in other situations, particularly those involving transparency, making data available in raw form rather than contextualizing it may be necessary for the effort to achieve legitmacy rather than being subject to internal manipulation.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet and its accessibility to all citizens.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens. Likewise, the intensity of ongoing debates over Internet regulation and governance suggest that decisions in these arenas may have long-term impacts on the development of the Internet and thus on society as a whole.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

=== Scale ===

A final criticism of e-government is scale. Many of the notable successes in e-government to date have occurred on a relatively small scale, in smaller nations such as Estonia or South Korea or in cities and towns. Large-scale e-government initiatives, particularly those encouraging greater citizen participation, may face different challenges than the same initiative might face on a smaller scale, such as the difficulty of processing a substantially greater amount of citizen input. This suggests that e-government may not be transformative at all but may merely reflect an incremental change in the inherently more direct modus of local governments.

There are several possible responses to this criticism. First, it strikes too broadly: even if some e-government initiatives are difficult to scale up, it does not follow that all such initiatives are. In fact, in many cases increasing the scale may increase the effectiveness of e-government initiatives intended to promote transparency and efficiency, since these traits are most easily lost at higher levels.

More to the point, some initiatives are "difficult" to scale to larger governments because larger governments are locked into a preconceived model of citizen interaction. Federal agencies are accustomed to interacting with large public interest groups through notice-and-comment rulemaking; using the same mechanism to interact with individual citizen input may well not be efficient, but it does not justify rejecting the entire idea of individual input. Instead, consideration needs to be given to whether mechanisms such as reputation systems can be refined to enable citizen input in a manner that is usable by the agency (and, of course, are not susceptible to gaming).

At a minimum, this suggests that e-government requires careful analysis of the role that scale plays in the success of e-government initiatives; the national government may not be able to adopt every innovation from local governments, but needs to assess its portability to the federal realm.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

=== Tampere, Finland ===

"The City of Tampere in Finland has become internationally known for its e-government activities." [http://www.governanceinternational.org/english/interview2.html] Tampere's embrace of Internet technologies such as online forums as a supplement to traditional forms of interaction between citizens and government is admirable in itself, but what stands out is its embrace of innovative uses of technology to alter the relationship between citizens and government and its dedication to ensuring access to all of its citizens.

==== "Real World SimCity(tm)" ====

One of Tampere's successful e-government initiatives was a "real world SimCity" which encouraged citizens to try their hand at urban planning to accommodate an anticipated influx of immigrants. Citizen-players used multimedia technologies to simulate the effects of locating the immigrants in various locations within the town, forcing players to consider and balance the effects of a given plan on traffic, local parks, tax revenue, and various other factors. [http://www.ici.ro/ici/revista/sic2000_4/art05.htm City of Tampere: Turning Civic Participation into Reality via the Internet] (Unfortunately, the town planning game appears to be no longer available.)

This effort succeeded on multiple levels. 330 planning suggestions were submitted to the government, allowing the planning commission to evaluate both the concrete suggestions as alternatives and to use the suggestions to ascertain the importance that citizens placed on relevant factors such as park space and traffic. Citizens, meanwhile, became more connected with the government, appreciating the complexities and tradeoffs involved in urban planning in a manner difficult to communicate with offline planning maps.

==== Expanding Access ====

Tampere has also focused on expanding access to Internet services. There are two local initiatives focused on ensuring maximum access for all residents:

* The [http://www.tampere.fi/kirjasto/nettinysse/english.htm "Netti-Nysse"] ("Internet Bus") is an effort to support Tampere residents attempting to get online. The Netti-Nysse is essentially a mobile Internet training center which is scheduled by small groups for a set of four informal training sessions on computers and the Internet. It focuses primarily on underserved populations, demonstrating the material available on the Internet and providing information about free access points and continuing training throughout the town.

* [http://www.etupa.fi/ eTupa] is a company designed to support Tampere's growing base of Internet users. It provides consulting services for citizens considering the purchase of a PC, making recommendations about the most suitable computer for the person's needs. It also provides technical support, including on-site support. eTupa was founded as a government-subsidized entity and has since transitioned into a fully private enterprise, though most services except hardware repair and on-site assistance remain free.

==== Long-Term Goals ====

"Supporting peopleâs computer literacy plays an essential part in building the information society but it is still not enough. Giving people meaningful content and the opportunities to use computers are also needed. In Tampere, the information society is being developed through wide and good cooperation thanks to the eTampere project.

"What eTampere and Netti-Nysse are aiming at, is mostly evoking discussion, creating co-operation and showing the need for novel practices in an inclusive information society. It is our goal to help people to see the possibilities and then make their own choices concerning their role in the information society." [http://www.tampere.fi/kirjasto/nettinysse/english.htm]

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== E-government and New Models of Democracy ==

Most of the suggestions above involve ways in which e-government can improve an existing model of government that is built, at least in part, on the concept of representational democracy. Some advocates of e-government, however, suggest that ICTs present opportunities to alter that fundamental nature, however, shifting towards alternate forms of democracy or even postdemocratic governance.

One model of governance enabled by ICTs is direct democracy. Prior to the information age, direct democracy was impracticable in most circumstances; voting necessarily occurred at regular intervals rather than on a continuous basis. ICTs make continuous citizen action a possibility (at least for those citizens with access to the Internet, emphasizing the potential importance of initiatives directed towards establishing universal access), trivializing the effort required to aggregate the collective preferences of the electorate, and thus enabling continuous votes. Direct democracy could conceptually provide the sole mechanism of governance; more likely, it would form a hybrid with representative democracy (or, to be more precise, alter the current balance between direct and representative democracy seen in many governments - see Elizabeth Garrett, ''The Promises and Perils of Hybrid Democracy'', 59 OKLA L.R. 227 (2006)), with citizen participation limited to specific policy topics or to initiatives intended to override legislative decisions, perhaps requiring a supermajority.

Citing many of the same difficulties addressed by those supporting this Resolution, many commentators instead focus on the model of Internet-enabled deliberative democracy as a model for modern governance. (See generally Beth Simone Noveck, ''Designing Deliberative Democracy in Cyberspace'', [http://www.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/scitech/volume91/noveck.pdf 9 B.U. J. SCI. & TECH. L. 1] (2003).) Tools such as [http://www.smalltime.com/unchat.html Unchat] enable online deliberative forums, implementing such features as moderation, "speed bumps" encouraging true deliberation, and multi-channel communications to facilitate effective group participation in the deliberative process.

Finally, Dean, Anderson, and Lovink, and to a lesser extent Rossiter, suggest that ICTs could lead to a dismantling of the existing democratic order. Dean, Anderson, and Lovink in particular suggest the possibility of a "postdemocratic governance," where nation-states have been supplanted by other entities as the dominant government institutions.

Criticisms of these alternatives to existing models of democratic governance are prevalent, from doubts as to the effectiveness of deliberative democracy (see Cass R. Sunstein, ''Group Judgments: Statistical Means, Deliberation, and Information'', 80 N.Y.U. L.R. 962 (2005)), to concerns that direct democracy leads to distinctly suboptimal outcomes (as [[Arguments_in_Support_of_the_Resolution#Direct_Democracy:_A_Bad_Idea | argued by our opponents in this debate]]), to alarm at the idea of corporate interests obtaining even greater control over the civic sphere. We do not, however, need to argue that any of these outcomes are necessarily beneficial. In fact, the assumption that all of these alterations to the current democratic balance are harmful itself would highlight the fact that good e-government requires ensuring that ICT initiatives are deployed to maximize the effectiveness of representative democracy without putting that very institution at risk.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed, and thereby to positively impact government and society. Doing so, however requires that governments take a hard look at the current relationship between citizens and government, identify areas where ICT allows this relationship to change, and implement those changes that create net social benefit. The willingness to reconsider long-standing notions of civic behavior and proper governance, and to alter the status quo, is precisely the "special magic" that is necessary for government in a digital age.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-11T05:21:46Z

Cconley: /* Tampere, Finland */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggest that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives."
[http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf ESRC Final Report on Representation in the Internet Age], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Each of these arenas requires more than "business as usual" from the government, demanding an understanding of the possibilities enabled by ICTs and a willingness to reconceptualize the nature of government.

Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties and to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Critics of e-government note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). In some cases, "outsourcing" these functions is merely a utilitarian choice based on the efficiency of private enterprise; in other situations, particularly those involving transparency, making data available in raw form rather than contextualizing it may be necessary for the effort to achieve legitmacy rather than being subject to internal manipulation.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet and its accessibility to all citizens.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens. Likewise, the intensity of ongoing debates over Internet regulation and governance suggest that decisions in these arenas may have long-term impacts on the development of the Internet and thus on society as a whole.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

=== Scale ===

A final criticism of e-government is scale. Many of the notable successes in e-government to date have occurred on a relatively small scale, in smaller nations such as Estonia or South Korea or in cities and towns. Large-scale e-government initiatives, particularly those encouraging greater citizen participation, may face different challenges than the same initiative might face on a smaller scale, such as the difficulty of processing a substantially greater amount of citizen input. This suggests that e-government may not be transformative at all but may merely reflect an incremental change in the inherently more direct modus of local governments.

There are several possible responses to this criticism. First, it strikes too broadly: even if some e-government initiatives are difficult to scale up, it does not follow that all such initiatives are. In fact, in many cases increasing the scale may increase the effectiveness of e-government initiatives intended to promote transparency and efficiency, since these traits are most easily lost at higher levels.

More to the point, some initiatives are "difficult" to scale to larger governments because larger governments are locked into a preconceived model of citizen interaction. Federal agencies are accustomed to interacting with large public interest groups through notice-and-comment rulemaking; using the same mechanism to interact with individual citizen input may well not be efficient, but it does not justify rejecting the entire idea of individual input. Instead, consideration needs to be given to whether mechanisms such as reputation systems can be refined to enable citizen input in a manner that is usable by the agency (and, of course, are not susceptible to gaming).

At a minimum, this suggests that e-government requires careful analysis of the role that scale plays in the success of e-government initiatives; the national government may not be able to adopt every innovation from local governments, but needs to assess its portability to the federal realm.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

=== Tampere, Finland ===

"The City of Tampere in Finland has become internationally known for its e-government activities." [http://www.governanceinternational.org/english/interview2.html] Tampere's embrace of Internet technologies such as online forums as a supplement to traditional forms of interaction between citizens and government is admirable in itself, but what stands out is its embrace of innovative uses of technology to alter the relationship between citizens and government and its dedication to ensuring access to all of its citizens.

==== "Real World SimCity(tm)" ====

One of Tampere's successful e-government initiatives was a "real world SimCity" which encouraged citizens to try their hand at urban planning to accommodate an anticipated influx of immigrants. Citizen-players used multimedia technologies to simulate the effects of locating the immigrants in various locations within the town, forcing players to consider and balance the effects of a given plan on traffic, local parks, tax revenue, and various other factors. [http://www.ici.ro/ici/revista/sic2000_4/art05.htm City of Tampere: Turning Civic Participation into Reality via the Internet] (Unfortunately, the town planning game appears to be no longer available.)

This effort succeeded on multiple levels. 330 planning suggestions were submitted to the government, allowing the planning commission to evaluate both the concrete suggestions as alternatives and to use the suggestions to ascertain the importance that citizens placed on relevant factors such as park space and traffic. Citizens, meanwhile, became more connected with the government, appreciating the complexities and tradeoffs involved in urban planning in a manner difficult to communicate with offline planning maps.

==== Expanding Access ====

Tampere has also focused on expanding access to Internet services. There are two local initiatives focused on ensuring maximum access for all residents:

* The [http://www.tampere.fi/kirjasto/nettinysse/english.htm "Netti-Nysse"] ("Internet Bus") is an effort to support Tampere residents attempting to get online. The Netti-Nysse is essentially a mobile Internet training center which is scheduled by small groups for a set of four informal training sessions on computers and the Internet. It focuses primarily on underserved populations, demonstrating the material available on the Internet and providing information about free access points and continuing training throughout the town.

* [http://www.etupa.fi/ eTupa] is a company designed to support Tampere's growing base of Internet users. It provides consulting services for citizens considering the purchase of a PC, making recommendations about the most suitable computer for the person's needs. It also provides technical support, including on-site support. eTupa was founded as a government-subsidized entity and has since transitioned into a fully private enterprise, though most services except hardware repair and on-site assistance remain free.

==== Long-Term Goals ====

"Supporting peopleâs computer literacy plays an essential part in building the information society but it is still not enough. Giving people meaningful content and the opportunities to use computers are also needed. In Tampere, the information society is being developed through wide and good cooperation thanks to the eTampere project.

"What eTampere and Netti-Nysse are aiming at, is mostly evoking discussion, creating co-operation and showing the need for novel practices in an inclusive information society. It is our goal to help people to see the possibilities and then make their own choices concerning their role in the information society." [http://www.tampere.fi/kirjasto/nettinysse/english.htm]

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-11T05:03:23Z

Cconley: /* Challenges to e-Government */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggest that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives."
[http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf ESRC Final Report on Representation in the Internet Age], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Each of these arenas requires more than "business as usual" from the government, demanding an understanding of the possibilities enabled by ICTs and a willingness to reconceptualize the nature of government.

Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties and to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Critics of e-government note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). In some cases, "outsourcing" these functions is merely a utilitarian choice based on the efficiency of private enterprise; in other situations, particularly those involving transparency, making data available in raw form rather than contextualizing it may be necessary for the effort to achieve legitmacy rather than being subject to internal manipulation.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet and its accessibility to all citizens.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens. Likewise, the intensity of ongoing debates over Internet regulation and governance suggest that decisions in these arenas may have long-term impacts on the development of the Internet and thus on society as a whole.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

=== Scale ===

A final criticism of e-government is scale. Many of the notable successes in e-government to date have occurred on a relatively small scale, in smaller nations such as Estonia or South Korea or in cities and towns. Large-scale e-government initiatives, particularly those encouraging greater citizen participation, may face different challenges than the same initiative might face on a smaller scale, such as the difficulty of processing a substantially greater amount of citizen input. This suggests that e-government may not be transformative at all but may merely reflect an incremental change in the inherently more direct modus of local governments.

There are several possible responses to this criticism. First, it strikes too broadly: even if some e-government initiatives are difficult to scale up, it does not follow that all such initiatives are. In fact, in many cases increasing the scale may increase the effectiveness of e-government initiatives intended to promote transparency and efficiency, since these traits are most easily lost at higher levels.

More to the point, some initiatives are "difficult" to scale to larger governments because larger governments are locked into a preconceived model of citizen interaction. Federal agencies are accustomed to interacting with large public interest groups through notice-and-comment rulemaking; using the same mechanism to interact with individual citizen input may well not be efficient, but it does not justify rejecting the entire idea of individual input. Instead, consideration needs to be given to whether mechanisms such as reputation systems can be refined to enable citizen input in a manner that is usable by the agency (and, of course, are not susceptible to gaming).

At a minimum, this suggests that e-government requires careful analysis of the role that scale plays in the success of e-government initiatives; the national government may not be able to adopt every innovation from local governments, but needs to assess its portability to the federal realm.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

=== Tampere, Finland ===

"The City of Tampere in Finland has become internationally known for its e-government activities." [http://www.governanceinternational.org/english/interview2.html] Tampere's embrace of Internet technologies such as online forums as a supplement to traditional forms of interaction between citizens and government is admirable in itself, but where it truly shines is its embrace of innovative uses of technology to alter the relationship between citizens and government and its dedication to ensuring access to all of its citizens.

==== "Real World SimCity(tm)" ====

One of Tampere's successful e-government initiatives was a "real world SimCity" which encouraged citizens to try their hand at urban planning to accommodate an anticipated influx of immigrants. Citizen-players used multimedia technologies to simulate the effects of locating the immigrants in various locations within the town, forcing players to consider and balance the effects of a given plan on traffic, local parks, tax revenue, and various other factors. [http://www.ici.ro/ici/revista/sic2000_4/art05.htm City of Tampere: Turning Civic Participation into Reality via the Internet] (Unfortunately, the town planning game appears to be no longer available.)

This effort succeeded on multiple levels. 330 planning suggestions were submitted to the government, allowing the planning commission to evaluate both the concrete suggestions as alternatives and to use the suggestions to ascertain the importance that citizens placed on relevant factors such as park space and traffic. Citizens, meanwhile, became more connected with the government, appreciating the complexities and tradeoffs involved in urban planning in a manner difficult to communicate with offline planning maps.

==== Expanding Access ====

Tampere has also focused on expanding access to Internet services. There are two local initiatives focused on ensuring maximum access for all residents:

* The [http://www.tampere.fi/kirjasto/nettinysse/english.htm "Netti-Nysse"] ("Internet Bus") is an effort to support Tampere residents attempting to get online. The Netti-Nysse is essentially a mobile Internet training center which is scheduled by small groups for a set of four informal training sessions on computers and the Internet. It focuses primarily on underserved populations, demonstrating the material available on the Internet and providing information about free access points and continuing training throughout the town.

* [http://www.etupa.fi/ eTupa] is a company designed to support Tampere's growing base of Internet users. It provides consulting services for citizens considering the purchase of a PC, making recommendations about the most suitable computer for the person's needs. It also provides technical support, including on-site support. eTupa was founded as a government-subsidized entity and has since transitioned into a fully private enterprise, though most services except hardware repair and on-site assistance remain free.

==== Long-Term Goals ====

"Supporting peopleâs computer literacy plays an essential part in building the information society but it is still not enough. Giving people meaningful content and the opportunities to use computers are also needed. In Tampere, the information society is being developed through wide and good cooperation thanks to the eTampere project.

"What eTampere and Netti-Nysse are aiming at, is mostly evoking discussion, creating co-operation and showing the need for novel practices in an inclusive information society. It is our goal to help people to see the possibilities and then make their own choices concerning their role in the information society." [http://www.tampere.fi/kirjasto/nettinysse/english.htm]

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-11T04:44:23Z

Cconley: /* e-Government Success Stories */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggest that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives."
[http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf ESRC Final Report on Representation in the Internet Age], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Each of these arenas requires more than "business as usual" from the government, demanding an understanding of the possibilities enabled by ICTs and a willingness to reconceptualize the nature of government.

Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties and to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Critics of e-government note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). In some cases, "outsourcing" these functions is merely a utilitarian choice based on the efficiency of private enterprise; in other situations, particularly those involving transparency, making data available in raw form rather than contextualizing it may be necessary for the effort to achieve legitmacy rather than being subject to internal manipulation.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet and its accessibility to all citizens.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens. Likewise, the intensity of ongoing debates over Internet regulation and governance suggest that decisions in these arenas may have long-term impacts on the development of the Internet and thus on society as a whole.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

=== Tampere, Finland ===

"The City of Tampere in Finland has become internationally known for its e-government activities." [http://www.governanceinternational.org/english/interview2.html] Tampere's embrace of Internet technologies such as online forums as a supplement to traditional forms of interaction between citizens and government is admirable in itself, but where it truly shines is its embrace of innovative uses of technology to alter the relationship between citizens and government and its dedication to ensuring access to all of its citizens.

==== "Real World SimCity(tm)" ====

One of Tampere's successful e-government initiatives was a "real world SimCity" which encouraged citizens to try their hand at urban planning to accommodate an anticipated influx of immigrants. Citizen-players used multimedia technologies to simulate the effects of locating the immigrants in various locations within the town, forcing players to consider and balance the effects of a given plan on traffic, local parks, tax revenue, and various other factors. [http://www.ici.ro/ici/revista/sic2000_4/art05.htm City of Tampere: Turning Civic Participation into Reality via the Internet] (Unfortunately, the town planning game appears to be no longer available.)

This effort succeeded on multiple levels. 330 planning suggestions were submitted to the government, allowing the planning commission to evaluate both the concrete suggestions as alternatives and to use the suggestions to ascertain the importance that citizens placed on relevant factors such as park space and traffic. Citizens, meanwhile, became more connected with the government, appreciating the complexities and tradeoffs involved in urban planning in a manner difficult to communicate with offline planning maps.

==== Expanding Access ====

Tampere has also focused on expanding access to Internet services. There are two local initiatives focused on ensuring maximum access for all residents:

* The [http://www.tampere.fi/kirjasto/nettinysse/english.htm "Netti-Nysse"] ("Internet Bus") is an effort to support Tampere residents attempting to get online. The Netti-Nysse is essentially a mobile Internet training center which is scheduled by small groups for a set of four informal training sessions on computers and the Internet. It focuses primarily on underserved populations, demonstrating the material available on the Internet and providing information about free access points and continuing training throughout the town.

* [http://www.etupa.fi/ eTupa] is a company designed to support Tampere's growing base of Internet users. It provides consulting services for citizens considering the purchase of a PC, making recommendations about the most suitable computer for the person's needs. It also provides technical support, including on-site support. eTupa was founded as a government-subsidized entity and has since transitioned into a fully private enterprise, though most services except hardware repair and on-site assistance remain free.

==== Long-Term Goals ====

"Supporting peopleâs computer literacy plays an essential part in building the information society but it is still not enough. Giving people meaningful content and the opportunities to use computers are also needed. In Tampere, the information society is being developed through wide and good cooperation thanks to the eTampere project.

"What eTampere and Netti-Nysse are aiming at, is mostly evoking discussion, creating co-operation and showing the need for novel practices in an inclusive information society. It is our goal to help people to see the possibilities and then make their own choices concerning their role in the information society." [http://www.tampere.fi/kirjasto/nettinysse/english.htm]

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-11T03:59:17Z

Cconley: /* The Promise of e-Government */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggest that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives."
[http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf ESRC Final Report on Representation in the Internet Age], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Each of these arenas requires more than "business as usual" from the government, demanding an understanding of the possibilities enabled by ICTs and a willingness to reconceptualize the nature of government.

Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties and to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Critics of e-government note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). In some cases, "outsourcing" these functions is merely a utilitarian choice based on the efficiency of private enterprise; in other situations, particularly those involving transparency, making data available in raw form rather than contextualizing it may be necessary for the effort to achieve legitmacy rather than being subject to internal manipulation.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet and its accessibility to all citizens.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens. Likewise, the intensity of ongoing debates over Internet regulation and governance suggest that decisions in these arenas may have long-term impacts on the development of the Internet and thus on society as a whole.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-11T03:58:49Z

Cconley: /* The Promise of e-Government */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggest that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives."
[http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf ESRC Final Report on Representation in the Internet Age], , p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Each of these arenas requires more than "business as usual" from the government, demanding an understanding of the possibilities enabled by ICTs and a willingness to reconceptualize the nature of government.

Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties and to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Critics of e-government note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). In some cases, "outsourcing" these functions is merely a utilitarian choice based on the efficiency of private enterprise; in other situations, particularly those involving transparency, making data available in raw form rather than contextualizing it may be necessary for the effort to achieve legitmacy rather than being subject to internal manipulation.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet and its accessibility to all citizens.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens. Likewise, the intensity of ongoing debates over Internet regulation and governance suggest that decisions in these arenas may have long-term impacts on the development of the Internet and thus on society as a whole.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-11T03:57:44Z

Cconley: /* The Promise of e-Government */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggest that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives."
[http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Each of these arenas requires more than "business as usual" from the government, demanding an understanding of the possibilities enabled by ICTs and a willingness to reconceptualize the nature of government.

Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties and to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Critics of e-government note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). In some cases, "outsourcing" these functions is merely a utilitarian choice based on the efficiency of private enterprise; in other situations, particularly those involving transparency, making data available in raw form rather than contextualizing it may be necessary for the effort to achieve legitmacy rather than being subject to internal manipulation.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet and its accessibility to all citizens.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens. Likewise, the intensity of ongoing debates over Internet regulation and governance suggest that decisions in these arenas may have long-term impacts on the development of the Internet and thus on society as a whole.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-10T16:55:17Z

Cconley:

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties, and in may require the government to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Our opponents note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). At the same time, e-government requires that collaborative efforts do not jeopardize civil rights, particularly the right to privacy. That proviso should not bar joint projects that provide tremendous public benefits without requiring the government to internalize all aspects of e-government.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-10T01:59:58Z

Cconley: /* Universal Access */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== Introduction ==

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties, and in may require the government to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Our opponents note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). At the same time, e-government requires that collaborative efforts do not jeopardize civil rights, particularly the right to privacy. That proviso should not bar joint projects that provide tremendous public benefits without requiring the government to internalize all aspects of e-government.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

Governments face different challenges in delivering access to citizens. Remote rural areas remain the greatest challenge, but there are several proposed models of delivering access in such locations, ranging from [http://www.technewsworld.com/story/57152.html Broadband over Power Lines] to [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6506193.stm "Wi-Fi buses"]; e-government requires an evaluation of innovative solutions like these to provide greater access to all citizens.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-10T01:56:00Z

Cconley: /* Engaging with Private Parties */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== Introduction ==

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties, and in may require the government to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Our opponents note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties. Firms such as [http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/29/google.records.ap/ Google] have expressed strong interest in working with governments to make information and government services available on the Internet.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). At the same time, e-government requires that collaborative efforts do not jeopardize civil rights, particularly the right to privacy. That proviso should not bar joint projects that provide tremendous public benefits without requiring the government to internalize all aspects of e-government.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-10T01:18:43Z

Cconley: /* Engaging with Private Parties */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== Introduction ==

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties, and in may require the government to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Our opponents note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). At the same time, e-government requires that collaborative efforts do not jeopardize civil rights, particularly the right to privacy. That proviso should not bar joint projects that provide tremendous public benefits without requiring the government to internalize all aspects of e-government.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-10T01:16:48Z

Cconley: typo patrol

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== Introduction ==

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularised basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The development of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties, and in may require the government to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administrative agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act highlights the need for accountability within government as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill, providing transparency within government as well as to citizens.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itself.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-government must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ultimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Our opponents note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, a private initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the traditionally internal process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). Similarly, e-government requires ensuring that collaborative efforts do not jeopardize civil rights, particularly the right to privacy.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-government activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of services should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that democratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implementation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses received are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ President's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparency -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to information will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constituents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidian happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of government records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constituents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming. Moreover, third party efforts should not be seen as a "failure" of e-government, but as the trend of the future; the Internet enables greater collaboration between public and private entities, and e-government mandates utilizing this potential to enhance the public welfare wherever possible.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-10T01:08:39Z

Cconley: /* The Promise of e-Government */

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== Introduction ==

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance. Fulfilling these promises will require governments to utilize the Internet to collaborate meaningfully with private parties, and in may require the government to take a more hands-on role in ensuring universal access to the benefits of the information age.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administratve agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

In addition, the internal use of ICT services may well enhance the government's ability to govern effectively. The use of standard-issue software tools to track changes could avoid situations where changes in legislation are unnoticed until after the legislation is passed, such as the [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 insertion of language into the USA PATRIOT Act enabling the Attorney General to fire and replace U.S. Attorneys]. Such tools not only foster accountability within and outside of government; they also prevent mistakes, enabling legislators to do their jobs more efficiently and effectively.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauhorization of the Patriot Act highlights the need for accoutability within governmen as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

=== Engaging with Private Parties ===

Our opponents note that, to date, the most radical "e-government" initiatives have been undertaken by third parties, primarily non-profit organizations. This is true. It also illustrates one potential form of e-government: leveraging the collaborative power of the Internet to jointly produce public goods with private parties.

Possibilities for collaboration exist at all potential levels of e-government. The IRS, for example, provides mechanisms for third party software developers to create e-filing tools, enabling a far more efficient mechanism for tax preparation and submission. OpenCongress, an initiative to promote government transparency, [http://www.opencongress.org/about#about_information relies on government-generated data]. The [http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/ Community Patent Project] involves private parties in the process of granting patents.

Part of good e-government, then, is determining how best to use the Internet to collaborate with private parties, while ensuring that such collaborations serve public ends (such as the IRS's mandate that private software developers offer [http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html free online filing for low-income taxpayers]). Similarly, e-government requires ensuring that collaborative efforts do not jeopardize civil rights, particularly the right to privacy.

=== Universal Access ===

The Internet is a tremendous tool for commercial and personal growth. We suggest that it is becoming an important aspect of civic involvement as well. A major part of e-government is not merely in generating content and services available online but in acting to ensure the optimal growth and utilization of the Internet.

Policy issues concerning Internet connectivity, such as "last-mile" access and the "net neutrality" debate, require a deeper understanding of the potential of the Internet itself, particularly the manner in which it challenges existing paradigms (in particular, consider the works of Professors Benkler and von Hippel suggesting that the Internet can radically alter existing commercial paradigms). Actually reaping the benefits of e-government initiatives requires making policy decisions that encourage universal access to such initiatives.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-05-09T23:12:09Z

Cconley:

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== Introduction ==

We believe our opponents have greatly underestimated the potential impact of the internet and other communications technologies on the nature of government. They argue that government will remain essentially the same, with perhaps some improvements in information dissemination. We argue that information technology will dramatically change what people expect from their governments (much as it has in the private sector), and this phenomenon will be a driving factor behind the development of truly transformative e-government.

Our opponents appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as primarily a new way to conduct business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not yet radically changed our world. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process.

As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward form of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

We believe that the "customers" of e-government services will impact efficiency in a way similar to the effect seen in the private sector. As more/better/faster services become available, customers begin expecting that level of service -- and government will either have to meet those expectations, or explain why it has not done so. Agencies that decline to move forward with improved e-government services voluntarily will inevitably face mounting pressure to do so. Administratve agencies are not subject to the direct political pressure faced by the elected branches, but they do face managerial pressures from the Executive and budget pressures from the Legislative -- and will therefore ultimately have to respond to the demands of their users.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauhorization of the Patriot Act highlights the need for accoutability within governmen as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill.

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

The European Union's [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm Information Society] is a government body tasked with coordinating the e-government efforts of EU member nations, with an eye toward providing integrated services where possible.

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

===== Value Added Functionality =====

As our oponents note, much of what can currently be done on government web sites is merely an online version of transactions that previously took place offline. But in many cases, the online medium may offer distinct advantages over traditional methods -- particularly in cases where citizens are particupateing in a dialog with government agencies. [insert agency notice and comment material -- CCR]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Themes

2007-04-24T20:51:41Z

Cconley:

Internet Law and Politics, 2007
Themes of the Course

* The puzzle of this course is to figure out how information and communications technologies -- including but not limited to Internet per se -- are changing the way that democracies work, the way campaigns are run, and the manner in which citizens communicate with one another and interact with their states. What are the most important of the changes that the use of these technologies is bringing about? Do we consider these changes to be desirable or undesirable? If you accept the premise that the use of these technologies does matter in this context, what could be done to ensure that we maximize the desirable and mitigate the undesirable? Are the changes most fundamental from the viewpoint of participatory democracy; economic democracy; semiotic democracy; or some other viewpoint altogether?

* We should acknowledge at the outset that we're inquiring into issues that are still playing themselves out; the terrain is unsettled. The scholarly field studying these topics is still emerging. Empirical evidence is awfully hard to come by. The fault lines in the relevant debates are becoming clear, but there's no consensus as to likely outcome or impact. Our frame of reference should be skeptical, if hopeful.

* As with any neutral technology, Internet and other digital communications tools fundamentally can be used for good or for ill. It's not about the technologies themselves; it's about how people choose to use the technologies. A lot turns on who is making the decisions about how they can be used. Does the citizen decide, or does the state or the technology company or the market or her peers decide for her?

* As we study and participate in this breaking story, we need to keep asking: can people really use Internet in a way that affects democracies in a *meaningful* way, or is it just cool and edgy and marginal? We saw this debate in each segment of the course: in the participatory democracy context, if Howard Dean's campaign is the paradigmatic "success" of online campaigning, but he didn't make it past the first few primaries, how meaningful can it really be (isn't it all about raising money, whether or not online, to run persuasive 30 second TV spots, really)? Does e-government really change anything, other than how efficiently you can get your driver's license renewed? If every city provided lower-cost wifi, would we really be any better off in terms of civic engagement or bridging the digital divide or other social aims? Are enough people making mash-ups that it represents a shift in control over our cultures (and is it just elites in wealthy countries who have wifi and lovely Macs with too much time on their hands talking to one another)? Is von Hippel wrong that user-centric innovation is a big deal and here to stay, or does that only work when the example is kite-surfing or other fringe (also elite) activities?

* Sometimes the changes wrought by citizens' use of these new technologies is troubling. For instance, Cass Sunstein's Daily Me argument represents a worry worth monitoring. clay Shirky's power law argument draws our attention to the extent to which we are recreating traditional power relationships from the offline world in the new ordering of the online world. Some scholars argue that this framing of the debate is totally missing the point (Dean, Lovink, Anderson, Rossiter, et al.).

* The fundamental, and most promising, change is about how people can use these tools to change the relationship between individuals and institutions.

* An individual can have more autonomy via Internet and related digital tools than ever before. This change has the power to change politics. It has already changed business in a democratizing fashion (see e.g., eBay; the open source movement; and perhaps more fundamentally, von Hippel & Benkler).

* Often the way this change is manifested is via quickly and easily formed groups. Lightweight collaboration is a critical part of what's different here. We can become members of many different groups quickly and easily and can leverage our collective power more easily than before, with vastly lower transaction costs involved. (Facebook groups are a good example of this dynamic -- almost instantly, groups can express and harness broad opinion; but shouldn't we meanwhile worry about the "Herdict," as Jonathan Zittrain does in his forthcoming book, "The Future of the Internet -- and How to Stop It"? Are the crowds really so very wise? Can you get recourse if harmed by the crowd?)

* The ability for individual citizens and activists to tell the narrative of political events directly -- whether using blogs, wikis, or SMS text messages blasted to zillions of cell phones -- is a big part of the change. Intermediaries, whether the state or big corporations, still have a role and can still dominate the discourse if they try hard enough, but individuals, and groups of individuals that form around ideas or campaigns, are fast gaining influence and power. This change might map to a new kind of "semiotic democracy," or might be seen in more classic terms as part of the participatory democracy story.

* States that do not wish for the individual to have more autonomy, or more power relative to the institution of the state, have ways to push back. Censorship and surveillance, including using private intermediaries, are the surest signs of this push-back. Often, the state needs to rely upon private parties to carry out this push-back. Those private parties might well be based in another part of the world, bringing up complicated questions of international law and politics.

* Private parties sometimes do not like these changes either. Intellectual property, defamation law, computer security provisions are invoked to protect the power of private institutions. Some of these changes invoke legal norms (and thus depend on government support); others may be purely technological, or even social, as in the RIAA's (failed?) attempt to counteract the social norm of the acceptability of file sharing.

* It may not be the case that we want the power to shift wholly away from institutions to individuals. We may seek a balance between autonomy of the individual and the power of institutions. The state and private corporations, for instance, serve important functions in modern society. Most of us would not choose to bring them down. But in the shifting sands of power that are taking place on the Internet, we should be aware that our decisions involve resetting this power balance.

* How much difference can the law make in the outcome of this narrative? If you adopt Lessig's view of what counts as "law," the answer is quite a bit. If you limit the frame to "East Coast Code," (i.e., what legislators pass or regulators enforce), the answer is sometimes a lot and sometimes not much. In certain contexts, the law doesn't have all that much impact; in others, the law is quite important.

* How and when is this all going down? This story is playing out right now, all around us, on a global basis. There will be no single constitutional moment for cyberspace. These are decisions being made constantly, all the time, by very many actors -- including each of us. In the readings by Goldsmith and Wu, as well as the final chapter of Benkler, these institutional battles are described differently, but with the same core premise: there's a quiet battle going on right now, between institutional players as well as individuals, for who will control the Internet and how it is used now and in future.

* There are many ways to get it wrong: too much autonomy for too many individuals or loosely formed groups could result in tyranny of a majority or chaos; too much power retained in the hands of institutions could thwart the innovation and other positive changes afoot online. If we can figure out how to get it right, the net effect could be a very good thing for democracies.

** Benkler argues that the institutional ecology of the Internet is path-dependent, implying that at least some of the choices we make now may have permanent effects. Thus, it may be necessary - in evaluating different sides of various issues - to determine which side is (more) likely to have injurious long-term effects if proven wrong. Does the California initiative system suggest that "too much autonomy" is self-correcting (given widespread disapproval) or that it is harder to fix than it might seem? Conversely, are states simply postponing the inevitable in attempting to regulate (rather than ban) the Internet, or are changes as a result (like filtering technologies embedded at the center rather than at the edges) likely to have permanent effects?

* So, where do you come down? For me, in a grand sense, the potential benefits in terms of strengthening democracies outweigh the potential harms. The clearest example of this promise, to me, is Global Voices. People can use the Internet to empower themselves and others, and to empower loosely organized groups, to have greater voice -- and, in turn, relative impact -- in political and cultural contexts than ever before. In the cyberlaw literature, the arguments for why this matters are set out most explicitly in Benkler, Wealth of Networks; Lessig, Free Culture; and in the work of Jack Balkin and Terry Fisher (broadly, the literature of semiotic democracy).

Von Hippel questions

2007-04-17T21:07:48Z

Cconley:

Questions for Prof. von Hippel, Apr. 17 class:

*In some instances, manufacturers produce a product with the expectation a user will modify parts of it. For example, Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) software packages such as UG NX and TeamCenter Engineering are built with a suite of tools available that all (or almost all) users find necessary. These programs also allow a high degree of user customization to tailor the product to the particular application. Individual users can re-work sections of code to customize the application. While this is similar in some aspects to open source development, it differs in that the UG kernel is still proprietary and a particular userâs innovations are not generally shared with others (partially because they are so user specific). Additionally, the manufacturer provides some level of support to aid users in customizing portions of the code.
**To what extent are the positive aspects of user innovation realized in this model and to what extent are they limited?
**Are there other (existing or potential) applications of user/manufacturer cooperation on innovation?
*** Microsoft's [http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/default.mspx Shared Source Initiative] is essentially a hybrid (or, more accurately, a trio of hybrids) of proprietary and open-source licensing and intellectual property models. It is clearly an attempt to enable and leverage user-driven innovation without completely relinquishing IP and related rights. Is this the best of both worlds? Or do the limitations in the Shared Source weaken some of the incentives for user innovation, both market and non-market?

*Prof. von Hippel discusses the tendency of some users to reveal their innovations freely to the public. Although there are numerous examples of free revealing, I wonder how significant, on average, these innovations are. It seems that some of the innovations that are most significant to the market at large are often created and protected by large companies--I'm thinking here about medications, major software applications, etc. There seems to be a big difference between marginal modifications of library software and the new Windows platform. Chapter 6 offers some possible motivations to reveal innovations, but to what extent can we really expect innovators to reveal fundamental innovations that might enjoy large market share? As an empirical matter, how often does a freely revealed user innovation actually capture a larger market share than more protected innovations? Aren't user innovations more significant at making improvements at the margins?

* The IP law is generally used, inter alia, to foster innovation in a system where the manufacturere is the center of the innovation development (by assuring that the cost e.g. R&D of those manufacturers will be recovered). Thus, the idea of user-centered innovation from his book means a different IP system - less restrictive but more flexible and more freely?

*Prof. von Hippel: In chapter 8 you address a number of policy concerns that constrain user innovation. Your general recommendation is that user innovation needs to be considered as a part of social welfare. You dedicate a paragraph to "Control over Distribution Channels" that is basically speaking to the policy issue of 'net neutrality.' You argue that ownership of content and infrastructure should be separated (I assume through legislation?) but those who would argue the other side would likewise claim that social welfare is at stake and that innovation of infrastructure would be harmed by such separation. Why is the chilling effect on user innovation of applications at the ends more significant than the effect on innovation of the infrastructure? Is there a balance to be struck and would mandating a separation of ownership really achieve it

* Can we characterize manufacturers as "users" of end-user input and innovation? How can we encourage manufacturers to distribute their own innovations in taking advantage of the user community? Do they lack the incentives typically associated with users, especially lead users? Does IP law threaten to inhibit the spread of these innovations?

Von Hippel questions

2007-04-17T20:45:35Z

Cconley:

Von Hippel questions

2007-04-17T20:41:34Z

Cconley:

Talk:Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-13T21:52:21Z

Cconley:

Other topics of note to possibly add:

From [http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/06/231232&from=rss Slashdot]:

''<i>''Well, that would be a start, but I still don't think that it obviates the sort of version-control system that the GP is talking about.

Just think: if you were working on a big software or documentation project, would you want your QA process to involve nothing but some guy standing up and reading the source code out loud? No way -- everyone would be asleep or bored to tears (well, unless it was Perl, then they'd probably be waiting for his face to just fall off).

There's a reason that change management is a big issue, in addition to peer review and transparency. In fact, they compliment each other. When you can produce a list of what each person has changed, you have a basis for what you want to concentrate your reviewing efforts on.

Now, change-management isn't a cureall -- anyone in software knows that just because something hasn't changed, doesn't mean it's not buggy. You could change something that causes something that hasn't been changed to break, or you could just discover a bug later; either of those things are possible with laws as well as software. Unless you also have some way of tracking dependencies within the bills (cross references, etc.), it might be possible to "break" the law (make it internally inconsistent) with a minor change somewhere else. So that would still require full readings.

Still, it's ridiculous that there isn't something in place right now, to prevent some staffer from just sneaking language into a bill that's a surefire pass, without anyone noticing until it gets printed up in the Congressional Record.

On the whole, maybe Congress needs to hire some QA people? I mean, it's obvious they have a "client satisfaction" (voters) issue, and that the "deliverables" (laws) really suck ... maybe it's because they're pushing half-baked, half-assed stuff out the door to the "users" (citizens)?''</i>''

The broad suggestion here is that there are advantages to treating legislative code much like software code, notably the need for quality assurance procedures to ensure that the system doesn't generate "bugs" like this one. Worth integrating into our piece? Not sure, just wanted to flag here.

----

Bridging the Digital Divide

* One way of bridging the divide is to broaden access to the Internet, as has been attempted in Philly and other places.
** Can this be successful?
** How? Does Philly (or some part of Philly) present a workable model?
** Are there certain characteristics, e.g. smaller size, that make this more realistic? Is it better to focus on outlying areas anyhow?
** Is this even really addressing the digital divide? Does it, as critics suggest, merely subsidize internet access for those with wireless laptops while doing little to help those without?
*** Is conditioning initiatives to address the digital divide on the profitability of the initial program good? Does it suggest that addressing the digital divide was a secondary motivation at best?
** How does the Philly Wireless case compare with [http://www.olpc.net/ One Laptop Per Child] ?
* Another is to make sure that the advantages and efficiency gains obtained from the use of new technology is distributed to everyone, not only those with Internet access
** e.g. use of cell phones, etc. rather than "traditional" Internet access
** MiniTel?
** Developing tools to ensure that e.g. online forms can be printed and distributed via traditional means
*** Or enabling easy transition between online and offline, e.g. scannable forms

Talk:Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-13T21:05:43Z

Cconley: Digital Divide

Other topics of note to possibly add:

From [http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/06/231232&from=rss Slashdot]:

''<i>''Well, that would be a start, but I still don't think that it obviates the sort of version-control system that the GP is talking about.

Just think: if you were working on a big software or documentation project, would you want your QA process to involve nothing but some guy standing up and reading the source code out loud? No way -- everyone would be asleep or bored to tears (well, unless it was Perl, then they'd probably be waiting for his face to just fall off).

There's a reason that change management is a big issue, in addition to peer review and transparency. In fact, they compliment each other. When you can produce a list of what each person has changed, you have a basis for what you want to concentrate your reviewing efforts on.

Now, change-management isn't a cureall -- anyone in software knows that just because something hasn't changed, doesn't mean it's not buggy. You could change something that causes something that hasn't been changed to break, or you could just discover a bug later; either of those things are possible with laws as well as software. Unless you also have some way of tracking dependencies within the bills (cross references, etc.), it might be possible to "break" the law (make it internally inconsistent) with a minor change somewhere else. So that would still require full readings.

Still, it's ridiculous that there isn't something in place right now, to prevent some staffer from just sneaking language into a bill that's a surefire pass, without anyone noticing until it gets printed up in the Congressional Record.

On the whole, maybe Congress needs to hire some QA people? I mean, it's obvious they have a "client satisfaction" (voters) issue, and that the "deliverables" (laws) really suck ... maybe it's because they're pushing half-baked, half-assed stuff out the door to the "users" (citizens)?''</i>''

The broad suggestion here is that there are advantages to treating legislative code much like software code, notably the need for quality assurance procedures to ensure that the system doesn't generate "bugs" like this one. Worth integrating into our piece? Not sure, just wanted to flag here.

----

Bridging the Digital Divide

* One way of bridging the divide is to broaden access to the Internet, as has been attempted in Philly and other places.
** Can this be successful?
** How? Does Philly (or some part of Philly) present a workable model?
** Are there certain characteristics, e.g. smaller size, that make this more realistic? Is it better to focus on outlying areas anyhow?
** Is this even really addressing the digital divide? Does it, as critics suggest, merely subsidize internet access for those with wireless laptops while doing little to help those without?
*** Is conditioning initiatives to address the digital divide on the profitability of the initial program good? Does it suggest that addressing the digital divide was a secondary motivation at best?
** How does the Philly Wireless case compare with [http://www.olpc.net/ One Laptop Per Child] ?
* Another is to make sure that the advantages and efficiency gains obtained from the use of new technology is distributed to everyone, not only those with Internet access
** e.g. use of cell phones, etc. rather than "traditional" Internet access
** Developing tools to ensure that e.g. online forms can be printed and distributed via traditional means
*** Or enabling easy transition between online and offline, e.g. scannable forms

Talk:Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-07T08:55:50Z

Cconley:

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-07T08:52:06Z

Cconley: /* Increasing Transparency */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

The use of ICT can further impact the way in which legislation is written and adopted. A recent article in [http://www.slate.com/id/2161260 Slate] about changes "slipped into" the reauhorization of the Patriot Act highlights the need for accoutability within governmen as well as to the public. Simple e-Government initiatives such as the use of electronic documents and version control in legislative documents could prevent this sort of behavior by automatically notifying interested legislators of changes to draft versions of a proposed bill.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T21:52:50Z

Cconley: /* Challenges to e-Government */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T19:42:46Z

Cconley: /* Improving Delivery of Services */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

==== State and Local Governments ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

Massachusetts' web site includes a link for [http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=mg2onlineservices&L=1&L0=Home&f=Home_more&sid=massgov2#top online services] including information and links related to education, housing, business, tax, and many other government services of interest to the public.

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T19:40:22Z

Cconley: /* Improving Delivery of Services */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T19:40:06Z

Cconley: /* Coordinating Web Presence */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

[http://www.usa.gov/ USA.gov] is a single portal that collects many of the web-based services and e-Government initiatives operated by the federal government. By bringing together a wide range of online services and modes of communicating with government, USA.gov hope to "make[] it easy for the public to get U.S. government information and services on the web. USA.gov also serves as the catalyst for a growing electronic government." [http://www.usa.gov/About.shtml]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T19:36:53Z

Cconley: /* The Potential of e-Government */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

In addition to the demonstrated success above, there are a vast number of new initiatives that expand e-Government in many different directions. The following lists just a few current efforts to utilize ICT to improve government.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T19:35:09Z

Cconley: /* Access */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively. See, for example, [http://www.citizencalling.com/ Citizen Calling], a pilot program testing the effectiveness of using cell phones and text messaging to connect young people with the UK Parliament.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T18:58:55Z

Cconley: /* Participation */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/ Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary interim report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T18:57:06Z

Cconley: /* Participation */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

As the [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary Digital Dialogues] [http://www.digitaldialogues.org.uk/interimreport/executivesummary executive report] notes: "Scepticism amongst the public about the value of engagement in the policy process can be addressed as it begins by clearly setting out the potential for influence over outcomes. This must be matched by commitment to feedback processes at the end of an engagement exercise."

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T17:33:21Z

Cconley: /* Increasing Citizen Involvement */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

==== U.S. ====

[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main Regulations.gov] publishes pending agency regulations and permits the public to submit comments directly. While this is merely an Internet implementation of the prior process of commentary, the increased ease of public participation in the process is remarkable.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T17:27:09Z

Cconley: /* Canada */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T17:20:40Z

Cconley: /* Promoting Government Transparancy */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Increasing Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T17:18:27Z

Cconley: /* Conclusions */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Despite these concerns, the potential of e-government is enormous. Within a representative democracy, e-government has the potential to tighten ties between elected representatives and their constituents, creating incentives for the former to be more responsive and the latter to be more involved. Furthermore, e-government presents the possibility (whether or not desirable) of adding elements of direct democracy into our representative system.

The goal of e-government, put simply, is to remove barriers between the government and the governed; to the extent that it is successful in doing so, it is likely to positively impact government and society.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T17:09:07Z

Cconley: /* Access */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

ICT has, in many instances, the potential to decrease rather than increase disparities in access to information. By understanding the means by which information is actually distributed to the public - whether via telephone, the Internet, text messages, or the printed press - interested persons can determine how best to make information available to everyone. In some instances, email with local newspapers may be more efficient than a general website; in others, content suited to distribution via cell phone may be practical where traditional websites are not. This is not to say that ICT can solve every problem of access to information, but it can address many if used creatively.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T17:04:37Z

Cconley: /* Promoting Government Transparancy */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

==== Transparancy Grants ====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

==== Other Projects ====

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances and voting records of sitting members.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T17:03:51Z

Cconley: /* Increasing Transparency */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

Another goal of e-Government is to increase transparency in government by exposing far more information about internal deliberations, voting patterns, and consequences of government activity to the public. This transparency can be generated within government, by making the text or even podcasts of internal debates available on the Internet; it can come from without, as organizations collaborate with the public to identify, post, and comment on information about government members and actions. In the latter sense, the press serves as a model example for exposing government corruption, excess, and progress; ICTs allow "citizen journalists" to multiply the resources dedicated to investigating and improving government.

The transformative effects of "e-government" in this sense are less governmental and more political. The goal of transparency is to ensure that politicians are accountable to their constituents for their actions, to reveal the extent to which special interests and other organized groups influence legislation, and to increase public trust in democracy and the government.
There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T16:55:38Z

Cconley: /* e-Government Success Stories */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances, voting records, and other information about sitting MPs and Lords.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T16:55:14Z

Cconley: /* e-Government Success Stories */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances, voting records, and other information about sitting MPs and Lords.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

----
== The Potential of e-Government ==

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T16:15:50Z

Cconley: /* Structure */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances, voting records, and other information about sitting MPs and Lords.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

It is worth noting that demcratic government does not exist in a vacuum and is not the sole body interested in e-government. The [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ Hansard Society] and the [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] provide two examples of non-governmental entities investing considerable effort into researching and advocating for e-government. As long as government in a given country is in practice democratic, external and internal pressures have the potential to force institutional change to make e-government feasible.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

----

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T16:05:49Z

Cconley: /* Challenges to e-Government */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances, voting records, and other information about sitting MPs and Lords.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Access ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it reinforces existing political and social divides by providing benefits only to a select group. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

=== Structure ===

As the supporters of the Resolution note, e-government is not a panacea that will magically fix government. E-government is, at best, a tool that enables dramatic and even transformative improvements in the processes of governance and democracy; simply moving from a paper-based world to a computer-based world in no way ensures these improvements. In fact, ICT-based initiatives can simply entrench bureacracies further, reducing or even eliminating existing means of access and accountability; they can be used as another outlet for government-controlled content rather than accurate, transparent information; they can even be used as a tool for surveillance and monitoring rather than dialogue between citizens and government.

These concerns do not suggest that e-government is pointless, or that its effects are limited because it can only be deployed and utilized in situations where governance and democracy already work well. Rathern, as Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts suggest, the challenge for e-government advocates is to "steer a delicate path between utopian and dystopian pathways to maximize the benefits of the information age." [http://www.governmentontheweb.org/downloads/papers/APSA_2000.pdf] Effective e-government must be tied to specific goals of increasing efficiency, improving transparency, and enhancing communications; moreover, the projects must be enacted within the context of the existing governmental regime, or the government itself must be smoothly adjusted to be better positioned to take advantage of the possibilities of e-government.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

----

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T03:55:15Z

Cconley: /* Apathy */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances, voting records, and other information about sitting MPs and Lords.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Participation ===

As with any democratic endeavor, e-government will be successful only if all interested parties buy in to its tenets. The challenge of forming both an informed, active civil society and a responsive, accountable government is a perpetual issue, and e-government projects that fail to provide sufficient incentives for participation are unlikely to succeed.

Fortunately, e-government has a somewhat unique set of incentives to offer. For citizens, the chance to be truly informed and involved in the political system has the potential to counteract apathy and disconnectedness. For politicians, the communicative opportunities of the Internet and other ICTs provide an invaluable, and possibly essential, tool to maintain a connection with their constituents in any pursuit of (re)election. The key to effective e-government is to channel all of these impulses to ensure that all parties are willing to participate in the project at hand.

=== Accessibility ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it both reinforces existing political and social divides. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

----

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T03:49:11Z

Cconley: /* Increasing Citizen Involvement */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances, voting records, and other information about sitting MPs and Lords.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Apathy ===

=== Accessibility ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it both reinforces existing political and social divides. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

----

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-06T03:48:25Z

Cconley: /* Efforts to Increase Citizen Involvement in Governance */

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances, voting records, and other information about sitting MPs and Lords.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Apathy ===

=== Accessibility ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it both reinforces existing political and social divides. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

----

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Increasing Citizen Involvement ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== United States ====

==== Canada ====

[http://www.parl.gc.ca/disability/ The Canadian Pension Plan Online Consultation with Canadians] "represented the first interactive website by a parliamentary committee in Canada and was regarded by all concerned as a success" in engaging citizens in the development of the Canadian Pension Plan Disability Program. "Those people involved in developing and implementing this initiative believe it was successful because it engaged citizens as partners in the decision making process." [[http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/publications/FD4.pdf]

==== Europe ====

European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

The BBC's [http://www.bbc.co.uk/ican/ iCan] project is aimed at individuals who are dissatisfied with mainstream politics but nonetheless care about political issues. It combines information provided by the BBC, information shared by users, and tools to encourage and enable civic involvement and coordinate activities with others.

[http://www.yougov.com/ YouGov] is a rare commercial site focused on increasing communication between government and the public and fostering debate on political issues. For a given issue, the site permits users to submit long responses to open-ended questions; these responses are parsed by computers and mapped to a range of submitted responses, leading to a series of propositions. In a second phase, respondents can consider arguments for and against the various propositions prior to making a final poll response. In this manner, the site encourages deliberative engagement with the issue at hand rather than the quick responses that often plague e-polls.

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.

Arguments in Support of the Resolution

2007-03-05T21:12:52Z

Cconley:

We do not argue that e-government has no value. Rather, we argue that e-government's value is limited.

Our main arguments are that there has been little interest by the public in e-government initiatives that have been launched; the amount of true deliberation and dialogue between citizens and government has been low; politicians have been reluctant to show true candor in formats such as blogs; e-government is disproportionately benefiting highly experienced internet users; users of e-government initiatives have been skeptical as to how much the government has valued their input; and there is evidence of government not valuing the citizen input they receive.

In the end, e-government might provide slightly better access to information or even governnment officials. But this marginal increase in access is likley ineffectual. Even if we ingore that few citizens are interested in substantive interaction, those citizens who are will simply have a slightly easier time doing so.

Quick Link to [[Arguments Opposed to the Resolution]]

==The Hansard Society: Digital Dialogues==

The Hansard Society issued a report on e-government in Britain called "Digital Dialogues." [http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/assets/Digital_Dialogues_Phase_One.pdf] The report included six case studies of governmental use of information and communications technology (ICT). The six case studies were: online surveys conducted by the Department for Education and Skills, Minister of Parliament and Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs David Miliband's blog [http://www.davidmiliband.defra.gov.uk/blogs/ministerial_blog/default.aspx], the Department of Work and Pensions' online forum, Department for Communities and Local Government online forum, a webchat conducted by the Department for Communities and Local Government (only local leaders could participate, but anyone could view the chat), and the Food Standard Agency's online forum (forum was open to the public, but was specifically targeted to caterers). The case studies provide strong evidence to the limited impact of e-government.

''Limited Interest''

The amount of people who actively participated in the government's ICT projects was very small.
* In a two month period, only 18 registrants posted a total of 44 messages to The Department of Work and Pensions' online forum.
* Over a 14 week period, only 101 participants posted a total of 152 messages to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs forum.
* Over a two month period, only 32 registrants posted a total of 46 messages to the Food Standard Agency's online forum. Note that participation was this low despite the forum being promoted in the trade press.

Such limited participation suggests that e-government is not producing significant amounts of dialogue between government and citizens and that people have limited interest in taking the time to participate in a dialogue with government (even if people indicate a theoretical desire to have such a dialogue in a survey).

'''A Lack of Meaningful Dialogue'''

Complaints were common among participants in the "Digital Dialogues" case studies of a lack of meaningful dialogue between government agents and citizens.
* Users of David Miliband's blog complained that MP Miliband did not respond to comments posted by users. "Digital Dialogues" states: "The Minister rarely interacts with the comments made in response to his posts, and does not visit other blogs to comment."
* In the case of the Department for Work and Pensions forum, no members of the pertinent policy team participated. Instead a consultation coordinator participated. According to "Digital Dialogues," this consultation coordinator "did not have the necessary depth of policy knowledge required to respond directly to participants' questions and views." Additionally, the coordinator's participation was "irregular." In participant feedback surveys, the participants were disappointed by the low levels of involvement by actual policy experts.
* The Department for Work and Pensions forum was setup to receive input from Britons in preparation for a green paper (policy paper) on welfare reform. The green paper included '''no''' material from citizen posters to the forum.
* In the case of the Department for Communities and Local Government online forum, users stated that deliberation between users was more visible than deliberation between users and government officials.
* A notable American blog by a United States politician (and therefore, not part of "Digital Dialogues") is that of Senator Russ Feingold [http://feingold.senate.gov/news/blog.html]. Feingold's blog is rarely updated and the senator's blog posts do not include comments from users (thus, no back and forth deliberation between the government official and citizens).

'''Politician Blogs: True Insight or Occasional Campaign Speech?'''

Two noteworthy blogs, Senator Russ Feingold's and MP David Miliband's, demonstrate how blogs written by politicians are not providing an outlet for truly insightful material. In the case of David Miliband's blog, bloggers reported to "Digital Dialogues" that Miliband's blog was too "on-message." We looked at both Miliband and Feingold's blogs and found little material that was truly insightful. There was little material that was anything more controversial than what would appear in a campaign speech; neither politician has taken the opportunity not afforded by mainstream media to make detailed arguments about an issue; the arguments tended to be superficial. Note such self congratulatory posts/sound bites as this one from David Miliband: "Around 40,000 farmers should now have received full payments for their 2006 Single Payment, and we are at an advanced stage in our preparations to start making partial payments to farmers with claims over 1000 Euros over the next two to three weeks. This is the RPA doing its job and there remains a lot more work to do, but management and employees have worked hard to deliver on the timetable I announced in my statement to the House of Commons, and I am grateful to them."

Russ Feingold's blog contains a lot of material about his opposition to the Iraq War. However, such a position is not controversial anymore. Additionally much of the material on the blog about Iraq looks like it could be derived from transcripts from Feingold arguing with Mary Matalin [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Matalin] on CNN. The material consists largely of sound bites rather than flowing and insightful arguments.

Additionally, unlike MP Miliband, Senator Feingold updates his blog only about once a month.

http://www.davidmiliband.defra.gov.uk/images/blog/banner.jpg

David Miliband: Face of a mediocre blogger

'''More Access for Only the Few?'''

The Hansard Society collected data on the citizens who participated in the various e-government projects. This data suggests that the citizens who participate in e-government initiatives are disproportionately computer savvy. The Pew Research Center study indicated that people who are highly internet savvy are wealthier, younger, and more likely to be white. There is a risk that large groups of the population will be shut out of any benefits of e-government, and may find themselves with less of a voice.
* 60% of participants on David Miliband's blog have their own blog or personal website. In the U.S., the Pew Research Center study indicated that 31% of Americans accessed political news prior to the 2006 election and 8% of this group posted to a blog (we assume that internet usage rates are similar in Britain). Thus, only 2.48% of Americans posted to a blog. However, 60% of the people who visited Mr. Miliband's blog '''ran''' their own blog or webpage; presumably the number of such people is significantly lower than the number of people who merely have posted to a blog. The people who visited Mr. Miliband's site were indeed part of an exclusive group of internet users.
* 98% of participants of David Miliband's blog are regular users of the internet; 66% of these users stated that they are "[a]lways on" the internet.
* Every single user of the Food Standards Agency forum described himself or herself as a "frequent" internet user.
* Some of the Food Standards Agency forum users thought that the low levels of participation might have been a result of many small catering businesses not having the necessary hardware to access the forum.

'''Skepticism that Government is Listening -- They May Be Right'''

A common theme expressed by participants of the various e-government initiatives was skepticism that their input actually made a difference. For example, in the case of the DCLG forum, "Digital Dialogues" reports that "a large segment [of users] voiced suspicion that their views would not reach ministers and not be addressed." This skepticism has at times been validated: as indicated above, The Department for Work and Pensions did not include any user input in their policy paper.

==OpenCongress==

OpenCongress[http://www.opencongress.org/] allows users to access the text of bills before Congress and read news coverage and commentary associated with the bill. On the surface, this sounds like a great way to increase the transparency of Congress and ensure a better informed citizenry. However, Open Congress has serious flaws.

'''Lack of Interest'''

Similar to the e-government examples in Britain from "Digital Dialogues," it is difficult to argue that OpenCongress is making a big difference when there is such little interest in the site among the public. As of the writing of this wiki, the most hits received by any bill was 1,418. That was the only bill to receive over 1,000 hits. Additionally, the number of hits does not measure how many people actually viewed the text of the bill. It merely is the number of people who went to the bill's main page. It it doubtful that such low amounts of user interest is creating much of a difference. People have been able to ignore C-SPAN for years.

'''Poor Commentary'''

I clicked on the bill that generated the 1,418 hits: H.R. 861, a bill that would ease gun control laws.[http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h861/show] There were only four blog posts about H.R. 861. Furthermore, of these four posts, only one of the four had anything remotely insightful to say about the bill.[http://felonsforguncontrol.wordpress.com/2007/02/26/hr-861/] However, this post was short and made merely one point in support of the law. The main commentary from OpenCongress about the bill was this: "This is just what we need. The nationalization of Floridaâs 'Castle Law.' Yes, indeed, now you too may have the right to shoot to kill anyone you donât like the look of when you open your front door. A tip of the too-small Kevlar helmet to the amazing ChiDyke." This quote speaks for itself; we do not need to add any additional commentary.

==Barriers to Citizen Participation in E-rulemaking==

Based on empirical research, some law scholars have skeptical views about the impacts of e-rulemaking on ordinary citizens and analyze the barriers to citizen participation.

'''Technical Barriers'''

Even with the development of the "Regulations.gov" portal[http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main] and other forms of e-rulemaking, a high level of technical sophistication is necessary to understand and participate in regulatory proceedings.

* One study shows that even graduate students at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government on average could find only half of the dockets for the DOT and the EPA rulemakings which a professor instructed to locate (See Cary Coglianese,Citizen Participation in Rulemaking: Past, Present, and Future, 55 Duke L.J. 943 (2006)).

The digital divide might impede the benefits of e-government especially in developing countries. If the IT infrastracture is poor and the number of people who can access the e-government is limited, low-tech solutions might fit in with the existing infrastracture.

* The iGovernment Working Paper[http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/NISPAcee/UNPAN015488.pdf] points out that most e-government projects in developing countries fail with 35% as total failures and 50% as partial failures.

'''Knowledge-based Barriers'''

The most useful comments for rulemaking usually come from organized interest groups, which would have contributed without the Internet anyway.
Most comments from ordinary citizens, if any, are not original or sophisticated because they tend to lack enough knowledge about such regulations.

*One study shows that "in 99% percent of dockets, the e-filing option does not seem to cause an increase in individual or interest group participation" with regard to the FCC proceedings during specified time (See John M. de Figueiredo, E-Rulemaking: Bringing Data to Theory at the Federal Communications Commission, 55 Duke L.J. 957). Prof. Figueiredo also points out that an increase in filings does not necessarily mean an increase in individual interest because organized interest groups can make it seem that individuals are participating in filings.

'''Motivational Barriers'''

Even if some citizens have knowledge and opinions about specific regulations, little motivation exists for them to actually get involved with policy process. As the Internet provides a lot of other opportunities (e.g.,entertainment), spending time on rulemaking might be considered as opportunity costs. They might also feel that their one comment would unlikely to have any impact on the government.

'''Privacy and Security Barriers'''

People might avoid getting involved with electric process because of privacy protection concerns.

* According to "Global E-Government, 2006" report[http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf], only 26% of government websites have some form of privacy policy on their site, and 14% have a visible security policy. (Only 20% prohibit the commercial marketing on visitor information; 3% prohibit cookies, 18% prohibit sharing personal information, and 22% share information with law enforcement agents.)

==Supply and Demand==

Despite the lofty e-governance goals entertained by scholars, information technology is unlikely to transform the way governments govern. Although some believe e-government could radically increase democracy, democracy itself constrains the potential for e-governance. The fact is, people don't want radical change; they (and government) just want to do the same things they used to--only more quickly and efficiently.

'''What Citizens Want'''

*One study analyzed the results of several surveys conducted by national and local governments around the world. The surveys generally asked what citizens were looking for from e-government. Among the highlights:

**renewing drivers' licenses
**gathering information on state parks
**obtaining hunting and fishing licenses
**registering and voting online
See Meghan E. Cook, ''What Citizens Want from E-Government''[http://www.internetcaucus.org/books/egov2001/pdf/citizen.pdf]:

Whatever the merits of online voting may be, it is probably the least likely service to be offered in the forseeable future, and is certainly not the kind of meaningful interaction some scholars hope for. Learning more about important policy issues and communicating with representatives were not on the top of the list.

Additionally, it is doubtful how much of an effect online voting would have in participation. In Switzerland, mail-in voting was introduced that would allow people to easily vote from home. The result? '''Voting rates went down.''' See Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, ''Freakonomics'', Revised and Expanded Edition, HarperCollins Publishers, pp. 224-225

Individualized interaction is not what government is looking for either.

*As mentioned above, one citizen blogger complained: "The Minister rarely interacts with the comments made in response to his posts, and does not visit other blogs to comment."
**Nor should he. It would be a remarkable waste of time to have a high-ranking offical do so. Unfiltered interaction between private individuals and government simply isn't practical--it's why we don't live in a direct democracy.
**That's not to say that people's opinions don't matter. In aggregate they do: most representives take notice when they receive thousands of letters--they treat it as a poll of the relevant electorate. With the rise e-government, now they get feedback by email(which, on the bright side, makes the canned response cheaper to send).

'''E-government Act--an exercise in not giving the people what they don't want?'''
*The E-government Act was intended to bring the U.S. government into the twenty-first century,[http://www.cio.com/archive/030103/union.html] and in many respects, has been successful.
**It allowed agencies to interact with their constituencies more efficiently and eliminated a fair amount of paperwork.
*But who saw the benefits of those changes?
**For example, the federal courts were required to update their operations by instituting electronic document filing systems and by giving courts the option to make PACER free to its users. Although that change may make our lives easier, it's hardly a victory for representative democracy. PACER allows access to cases that were readily available in law libraries.
*Congress did, however, attempt to make it easier for average citizens to interact with their new e-government, by spending $15,000,000 on a centralized federal government internet portal.
**Yet many people have never used, or even heard of, the site.

In short, Congress was right to focus the E-government Act on pragmatic goals. Technology can make interactions with government easier, but it will probably not cause citizens to interact more often--or in a more meaningful way--than they already do.

==Accountability==

There is scholarly work that indicates that e-government is having mixed effects on government accountability. See Wilson Wong & Eric Welch, ''Does E-Government Promote Accountability?'', 17 Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 275 (2004).

'''Power of E-Government Often Exagerated'''

In a study of 14 countries, Wong & Welch do find that accountability increased between 1997-2000 (we note that this conclusion may be a result of the difficulty in separating the effects of the internet generally and e-government specifically, since the level of both activities within a country are likely correlated, and both the internet and e-government expanded widely from 1997 to 2000). However, Wong & Welch concluded that e-government may be responsible for increased gaps in accountability levels between countries. Wong & Welch note that the role the bureaucracy plays in a society affects the influence of e-government: if a country is either dominated by the bureaucracy or has little to no civil service, the effects of e-government are more minimal, and could even be detrimental. The problem with e-government is that the government runs it. Governments (especially autocratic regimes) can block the dissemination of politically harmful material. In addition, "[t]here is a danger that...e-government may simply be used as an additional channel for more political propaganda and political control rather than real accountability enhancement." (290) The reality is that e-government is limited by the structure and culture of government and it is unrealistic to expect e-government to drive major change. "Introducing e-government without the corresponding institutional reform of the civil service system and organizational reform of the agencies may only lead to limited success in enhancing accountability. The effect of technology on organizational change should therefore never be overstated. It is simply a myth that e-government will automatically and dramatically change the accountability nature of public organizations." (291)

'''Too Much Power to the Bureaucracy?'''

* Wong & Welch note that in all countries, there is the risk that if an agency creates a website full of information, this will reduce the need of bureaucrats to interact with people. This can lead to bureaucrats further insulating themselves from the public.
* There is the risk that the use of modern technology will increase the power and influence of the non-elected bureaucrats.
* Additionally, ICT can be used by government in ways that appear harmful to democracy. The most blatant of this could be monitoring citizens' internet use to monitor their political activities. While the U.S. is not in danger of turning into China any time soon, it is disconcerting that agencies in the United States continue to use cookies in violation of the law.

http://www.fcw.com/images/bestof2006/01_23_06.jpg

'''Privacy Concerns'''

E-government poses serious threats to privacy on at least two fronts, see Maeve McDonagh, 10 Int'l J.L. & Info. Tech 327:
* government use of collected data
* third parties unauthorized use of collected information
** The information security breaches at the Department of Veterans' Affairs and other government agencies illustrate the risks of centralizing large amounts of personal information in a portable, easily accessable form

==Efficiency of Public Service==

Dr D.C. Misra[http://topics.developmentgateway.org/egovernment/rc/filedownload.do~itemId=1084787?itemId=1084787] points out that efficient public service delivery has not yet been implemented despite of huge investments and concludes that "the future of e-government may be quite sobering after the initial hype surrounding it settles down."

'''Computer Literacy within the Government'''

* Although it is essential that policy makers are trained in technological developments, some reports show that few of them have even the most basic understanding of technology.
* Electronizing information itself doesn't necessarily mean efficient decision-making in government. Decision-making in government has not significantly improved because appropriate management information systems have not been put in place.

'''Huge Costs and Overloaded Government Websites'''

* There have been huge investments in e-government.
** US: $65 billion
** UK: Â£14 billion
* The result of such costs is, however, only an explosion of government websites which are organized in a way far from citizen-centric. Governments and citizens are flooded with too much unorganized information.
** US: 368 million pages (top-level domain)
** UK: 9.28 million pages

'''Insufficient Monitoring of E-government Investments'''

* Effective monitoring is necessary in order to prevent unproductive investments and keep efficiency. But that has not been the case in many projects.
** Half of 200 pilot projects for online services in India worked only for a handful people.
** $23.5 million online university project in UK attracted only 900 students.
** $22 million e-voting project in Uganda did not work when elections were held in 2001.

'''High Failure Rates at High Costs'''

* Despite the startling costs of e-government initatives, one study suggests that 60% of projects fail in meeting their budget, functionality, or timeliness goals. United Nations, E-Government at the Crossroads[http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan012733.pdf]
* In developing countries, the success rate could be much worse: one study suggests that "only 15% of e-government projects could be said to be successful while 35% were total failures." Singh & Sahu, ''Delivering Social Justic, Equality and Growth to All Citizens Through E-Governance''[http://www.public-policy.unimelb.edu.au/egovernance/papers/32_Singh.pdf]

==E-Government and Underlying Social Conditions==

E-Government cannot correct--and may exacerbate--underlying social problems.
* Because of disparities in internet access and technological ability, e-government may aggrevate existing inequalities in the United States, and especially in developing countries.[http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dltr/articles/2003dltr0009.html]
* E-government is incredibly costly to implement and may cause some developing countries to divert resources from other priorites, despite the fact that such changes would only benefit the relativley small number of people who are technologically capable.[www.iseing.org/emcis/emcis2005/pdfs/how&20can%20egov%20transform%20society.pdf]
* E-Government may not promote democracy--it may simply reinforce the current form of government.
** One study suggests that, according to statistical surveys, countires with "high levels of satisfaction with democracy are where e-government is less likley to develop."[http://www.public-policy.unimelv.edu.au/egovernance/papers/05_Bishop.pdf] E-government might simply make bureaucracies more efficient and propaganda cheaper to produce. If people are already satisfied with government, as they are in most democracies, e-government may not add much to the status quo. ''See'', Altman[http://www.puc.cl/icp/webcp/papers/altman_irpa.pdf]

Arguments Opposed to the Resolution

2007-03-05T21:12:13Z

Cconley:

We believe our opponents have taken an unnecessarily narrow view of the potential impact of e-government. They appear to ignore (or take for granted) the vast improvements that have already taken place within the governmentâs internal information infrastructure and in the general availability and accessibility of information and services to the public.

It is true that there are some significant problems that will need to be addressed in order to achieve efficient and effective e-government, but the existence of such problems â many of which are not unique to government e-development â are hardly proof positive that they cannot be solved.

The very fact that the problems are being recognized and analyzed demonstrates that e-government efforts have moved beyond the initial âhypeâ stage and have reached the necessary realization that truly transformative e-government can only be achieved through a significant change in the way government conceives of itself and its relationship with the public. But this is exactly what the public will increasingly demand as online technology becomes more accessible and integral to daily life.

Quick Link to [[Arguments in Support of the Resolution]]

== The Promise of e-Government ==

The opposition portrays e-government as an incremental change to business as usual. Admittedly, e-government has not radically changed our world - yet. Its potential for doing so is substantial, however, as it opens up new avenues for both the elected and the electorate to increase their role in the democratic process. As one report phrases the current state:

"So far the dominant trend amongst parliamentarians and in parliaments in adapting to the internet has been a relatively limited modernisation approach, largely trying to maintain existing practices and relations but in new formats.... Yet, in the longer term, the possible failure of this modernisation without democratisation approach provides opportunities for innovators. We would suggeste that the potential remains ... for ICTs to provide:
# More continuous representation - As our survey confirmed, most people have very little attachment to the political system apart from casting a vote every few years. ICTs offer a means to engage people at least directly in debate and dialogue on a more regularisesd basis.
# More informed policymakers - Most policy consultations are conducted with the usual suspects on a relatively narrow range of interests. Yet ... within [MPs'] own constituencies there are untapped polic experts who have ground level experience of government policy. The develoment of online networks of expertise may be one way of reaching such expertise.
# A more informed public - The emergence of an online third force sector providing greater information on parliament and its representatives may assist the public's knowledge or at least stimulate some public debate about the role of parliaments and representatives." [http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/papers/ESRC_Representation_in_the_Internet_age_final_report.pdf], p. 10.

There are many ways in which e-government can produce dramatic changes in the way our government operates. For purposes of this debate, we will focus on three specific arenas in which e-government initiatives promise change: improving the government's efficiency and effectiveness in forming policy and delivering services, increasing transparency to ensure accountability, and enabling a greater public role in the processes of governance.

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Perhaps the most straightforward method of e-government is the use of information and communication technologies to improve the delivery of services to citizens or the efficiency of internal governmental processes. Existing examples of this abound; every state government uses automated methods to track payroll, monitor tax revenues, and the like.

In some cases, these improvements are merely incremental, and do not suggest a radical shift in the role of government. In other instances, the Internet and other technologies have the potential to radically reduce or even eliminate the role of the government in certain affairs, which can dramatically change incentives. Internet voter registration and e-voting, while not without its own concerns, has the strong likelihood of increasing voter "turnout." Online registrations for small businesses, allowing automatic approval without time-consuming trips to deal with paperwork, make independent operators far more self-sufficient.

Information technology can promote effectiveness in methods that extend well beyond increased efficiency stemming from faster communications. The NYPD have embraced ICT for sharing information between departments and boroughs and for effectively utilizing the data that is collected. [http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/chfdept/compstat-process.html]

Government processes can also address accountability deficits in ways that are less apparent. In particular, the recordkeeping implicit in electronic dialogues and documents can eliminate the possibility of "anonymous" alterations to proposed legislation, prevents late alterations to major legislation from passing through without notice, and generally imposes a degree of accountability on any alteration to proposed legislation. The lack of anonymity within legislative proceedings improves both internal efficiency and accountability by identifying the originators of specific changes to legislation.

=== Increasing Transparency ===

There are many ongoing projects that seek to increase transparency in government at many levels.

* [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ They Work For You] is "a non-partisan website run by a charity which aims to make it easy for people to keep tabs on their elected and unelected representatives in Parliament, and other assemblies." The website serves as a repository for information about the UK Parliament, including information about the stances, voting records, and other information about sitting MPs and Lords.

=== Promoting Citizen Involvement ===

At the simplest level, e-government has the possibility of increasing citizen engagement in politics simply by providing improved delivery of government services and increased transparency and accountability. By ensuring that government is in fact responsive to the needs of its citizens, e-government has the potential to alter the attitude of citizens towards government and thus encourage civic involvement.

The potential for civic involvement through e-government extends far deeper, however. By facilitating various forms of communication between members of government and private citizens, e-government enables citizens to become directly involved in government efforts, by commenting on or suggesting changes to proposed legislation or by otherwise participating in the act of policymaking and service delivery itseslf.

For example, many of the sections of [http://www.theyworkforyou.com They Work For You] permit user responses to government debates or statements. Furthermore, users are polled as to whether the official government response to a written question provides a satisfactory answer, suggesting a tool by which citizens can identify and chastise vague answers. [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-02-26a.111260.h#c9353] On a more formal level, the [http://www.familycourtsforum.net/ Family Courts Forum] site was set up explicitly to solicit public input on the topic of "openness and privacy in the family courts."

The challenge here is twofold. First, e-goverment must encourage citizens to be more active in contributing to the democratic dialogue. Second, e-government must ensure that the government actually considers and acts upon input received directly from citizens. This is the ltimate goal of e-government in many respects, but it also presents the greatest challenges. Given the evidence that e-government is beginning to function in other domains, there is reason for optimism that it will expend in this direction over time.

== Challenges to e-Government ==

=== Apathy ===

=== Accessibility ===

The second, and more specific, challenge to e-government is that it both reinforces existing political and social divides. Those with the technical savvy and political interest to thoroughly engage in e-govvernment activities are allegedly able to further their own political agenda, while those who lack access to the necessary resources are further disenfranchised.

It is worth noting that these issues are hardly unique to e-government or even to government in general. The solution to a disparity in access to modern communication technologies is to remedy the disparity. Digital democracy requires a digital electorate; that the marked disparity in wealth present in the current world limits the benefits of e-government does not demonstrate that those benefits do not exist and cannot be apportioned in a reasonable fashion if and when distributive solutions are found.

Moreover, many of the benefits of e-government are not directly tied to continuous universal access. Increasing governmental transparency and enhanced delivery of servies should benefit all citizens, not merely those with Internet access. Even mechanisms for increased citizen participation in government can be utilized to benefit a broad range of citizens if the input received is considered by elected representatives on the basis of its impact on the nation as a whole; online polls or discussion boards pose no particular threat so long as the demographics of participants are known and taken into account.

----

== e-Government Success Stories ==

Although there have been some disappointing experiments in e-government, even mistakes provide valuable information for the development of successful "e-Government 2.0" programs. Some countries have already taken advantage of the growing knowledge about e-government best practices to develop highly innovative systems -- which have already changed the way citizens of these countries interact with their government. Such programs provide a hint of the profound changes e-government will inevitably bring about in the future. Below, we provide an overview of just few of such programs.

=== South Korea ===

South Korea's e-government program ranked first in the [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf 2006 Global E-Government Report] based on a survey of conducted by The Center for Public Policy at Brown. [http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index.asp?layout=rich_story&doc_id=9269&title=South+Korea+ranks+first+in+e-government&channelid=4&categoryid=30].
The study found that the South Korean program had an "impressive level of organization and offer a wealth of information and services," and that it "offers an abundance of features while remaining user-friendly for its visitors." [http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06int.pdf]

==== Online Services ====

The [https://www.egov.go.kr/main?a=AH010MainApp main government portal], for example, offers easy access to over 500 government services fully executable online. Other departmental pages offer a wide range of e-services, from paying taxes to searching for lost relatives in North Korea.

===== For Citizens =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations and certificates
* Information services to search for legislative/administrative notices and relevant laws
* Payment services including tax refunds and social welfare payments
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== For Businesses =====
* Civil services including various permits/authorizations, formal objections, diverse reports and complaints.
* Electronic transaction services including procurements, bids and so on
* Payment services for various taxes and public charges
* Opportunity to participate in government administration by requesting public hearings and casting electronic votes.

===== Government-to-Government =====
* Information sharing among agencies in terms of documents and knowledge management.
* Exchange of opinions among agencies by distribution electronic documents
* Support for electronic approval and video conferencing for efficient decision-making
* Database sharing among agencies to enhance the efficiency of work procedures

==== Custom Experience ====
Highly customizable, with a majority allowing the user to manage his or her own activities. In addition, most sites offer PDA or wireless access, and nearly all allow visitors to sign up for e-mail updates.

==== Interactive Features ====

Interactive features available for users â virtually every site contains a prominent guestbook or forum as well as the option to petition the particular department.

=== Estonia ===

Estonia has embraced the concept of e-Government at many levels, recognizing the vast potential that the Internet and other forms of technology offer in improving the functionality of government and increasing political accountability and citizen participation at multiple levels.

* The [http://www.riik.ee/ State Web Center] is a repository for links to the official web sites of various governmental institutions as well as "almost all the official documents" produced by the government.

* The [https://www.eesti.ee/ Kodanikuportaal] (Citizenâs Portal) allows Estonian citizens to enter and confirm data in the various national databases, fill out application forms, and sign and send documents, allowing government to operate more efficiently and more accurately.

* The [http://www.eesti.ee/eng/?style=2 Teabeportaal] (Information Portal) provides information about government services, ranging from planned power outages to contact information for a wide range of governmental entities.

* The Estonian Cabinet has committed to paperless sessions using a web-based document system, increasing efficiency and making the process of legislative alteration far more transparent. Furthermore, Cabinet votes are conducted electronically, allowing members not physically present to vote on any issue. [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* [http://tom.riik.ee/ TÃ¤na Otsustan Mina] ("I Decide Today") is a model for community participation in the legislative process. Draft bills and amendments are placed on the forum and citizens are permitted to post comments, questions, and suggestions. Ideas that gain substantial support will be reviewed by competent bodies. According to the government website, "[a]pproximately 5% of all ideas are used as amendments to bills." [http://www.vm.ee/estonia/kat_175/pea_175/2972.html]

* The [http://www.ega.ee/ E-Governance Academy] is "a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, founded for the creation and transfer of knowledge concerning e-governance, e-democracy and the development of civil society."

----

=== Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness ===

Many of the early shortcomings of government efforts resulted from a lack of coordination and strategic planning. Governments seeking to make improvements have been developing integrated e-government programs, similar to the South Korean model, to provide information and services useful to the public.

==== "Transformational Government" Initiative in the UK ====

Recognizing that a strategic technology plan was necessary for the United Kingdom to implement technology "decisively and effectively" across government to meet its national objectives, Prime Minister Tony Blair commissioned the development of a unified e-government strategy for the UK: ''Transformational Government -- Enabled by Technology'' "to seize the opportunity provided by technology to transform the business of government." The project was initiated in 2005.

[http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp Index of Tranformational Government Program Information]

===== Strategy =====

A formal [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/strategy/contents/ Strategic Plan] was released in July 2005.

In particular, the strategy was directed to provide overall technology leadership in three key areas:

# The transformation of public services for the benefit of citizens, businesses, taxpayers and front-line staff.
# The efficiency of the corporate services and infrastructure of government organisations, thus freeing resources for the front-line.
# The steps necessary to achieve the effective delivery of technology for government.

The strategic plan required three key transformations:

# Services enabled by IT must be designed around the citizen or business, not the provider, and provided through modern, co-ordinated delivery channels. This will improve the customer experience, achieve better policy outcomes, reduce paperwork burdens and improve efficiency by reducing duplication and routine processing, leveraging delivery capacity and streamlining processes.
# Government must move to a shared services culture - in the front-office, in the back-office, in information and in infrastructure - and release efficiencies by standardisation, simplification and sharing.
# There must be broadening and deepening of government's professionalism in terms of the planning, delivery, management, skills and governance of IT enabled change. This will result in more successful outcomes; fewer costly delivery failures; and increased confidence by citizens and politicians in the delivery of change by the public services.

===== Implementation Plan =====

In March 2006, the Cabinet office released the [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/transgovt.pdf Transformational Government Implementation Plan].

At the same time project released a [http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/transgov/HMGovPosterFront_Draft3.pdf Timetable for Change] to the public, detailing when planned changes would be implemented.

===== Progress So Far =====

* Centralized government web presence at [http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/index.htm DirectGov]

===== Public Response =====

The government invited public response and criticism to the strategy and implemenation plan. A summary, and copies of the individual responses recieved are [http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/responses/index.asp available here].

==== Europe's Information Society ====

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/index_en.htm

==== U.S. Government Efforts ====

===== Coordinating Planning Efforts =====

* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/ Presidents's E-Government Initiative] coordinated through OMB

* GSA's [http://www.estrategy.gov/flashmain.cfm?action=main eStrategy.gov] website provides guidance to help promote, implement and manage E-Government initiatives and programs at federal, state and local levels of government. The overall objective is to improve citizen, intergovernmental, and business access to E-Government information and services.

* Council of Federal CIOs

===== Coordinating Web Presence =====

USA.gov [http://www.usa.gov/]

==== Improving Delivery of Services ====

* The State of Michigan, among others, utilizes the web to simplify the process of starting a new business. A government website allows a business to obtain a tax registration online, access other necessary forms, and obtain information about programs and initiatives designed to encourage entrepreneurship. [http://www.michigan.gov/businessstartup] A criticism of Massachusetts for failing to implement such a program can be found [http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/11/a_web_strategy_for_better_state_government/ here].

----

=== Promoting Government Transparancy ===

Because citizens cannot depend on the government alone to provide sufficient transparancy -- particularly those directly impacted by electoral politics -- private efforts to promote easy access to infomation will play a critical role in the development of e-Government. This "watchdog" role has traditionally served primarily by the institutional press, which will continue to play a crucial role for most citizens, but as information becomes more widely available to all, its role will be to integrate available information, rather than to serve as a gatekeeper of information that is not widely available. Alternately, the role of integrating and distributing information might be accomplished by the public at large, or even by the government itself. [http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/]

==== Sunlight Foundation ====

The [http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/ Sunlight Foundation] was founded in January 2006 with the goal of using the revolutionary power of the Internet and new information technology to enable citizens to learn more about what Congress and their elected representatives are doing, and thus help reduce corruption, ensure greater transparency and accountability by government, and foster public trust in the vital institutions of democracy. Sunlight Foundations efforts are entirely focused on the use of "technology and the power of the Internet" to help citizens, journalists and bloggers "be their own best watchdogs, both by improving access to existing information and digitizing new information, and by creating new tools and websites to enable all of us to pool our intelligence in new, and yet to be imagined, ways."

The Sunlight Foundation sponsors a wide range of projects that are designed to encourage civic involvement in monitoring government activity. Some examples of these projects include:

* [http://www.congresspedia.org Congresspedia]: Congresspedia bills itself as "the 'citizen's encyclopedia on Congress' that anyone can edit." As the name suggests, it hopes to duplicate the success of Wikipedia in the realm of politics, encouraging public contributions to articles about members of Congress, draft legislation, and other political activity.

* The [http://www.sunlightlabs.com/research/sites/ Congressional Web Site Investigation Project] enlisted "citizen journalists" to evaluate the methods by which members of Congress are using their personal web sites to connect with their constitutents and further the Foundation goals of transparency and accountability. The project has compiled submissions concerning these web sites and anticipates releasing its findings in the next 10 days.

* [http://www.sunlightnetwork.com/punchclock The Punch Clock Campaign] is designed to encourage current and potential members of Congress to post their daily schedules on the Internet to allow constituents to observe how their elected representatives spend their time and energy, and to better understand what elected representatives actually do when Congress is not in session.

* [http://www.opencongress.org/ OpenCongress.org] is a resource that combines official government information with news and blog coverage to provide in-depth information about the quotidien happenings in Congress. It aims to increase transparency by organizing information about pending bills, providing links to commentary, and enable citizens to become better informed and thus more involved in governance. The future plans for OpenCongress.org are more ambitious: it hopes to provide a forum for collaborative public commentary, analysis, and activity concerning pending litigation, encouraging citizens to become involved not only in electoral politics but in policymaking itself.

===== Transparancy Grants =====

''Transparancy Grants'' provide financial support to enhance independant efforts such as:

* [http://www.maplight.org/ MAPLight.org], which was founded to illuminate the connection between campaign contributions and voting records in the California legislature. The project correlates publicly available information on bills and legislative voting records with political contributions. The online database is searchable by individual legislator, interest group, subject and by bill number. In December 2006, MapLight received a Transparency Grant that will help the organization create a beta version of their database to correlate information on federal legislators. The new database is expected to be available in April 2007.

* [http://www.citizensforethics.org/ Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)] to fund the launch of its "Open Community Open Document Review System." CREW had already developed a demonstration version of an online reviewing process that is a really cool tool. It lets anyone review, tag and comment on any of the thousands of pages of documents that CREW has in their possession. (CREW has thousands of pages of governement records as a result of their thorough and repeated FOIA requests.) Our grant will help them build a massive publicly searchable database of every document they receive -- a database put together by citizen journalists. Beta version will be available in late March 2007.

* [http://www.followthemoney.org/ National Institute on Money in State Politics] to continue the development and implementation of their initial Web Service Application Program Interface (API), to conduct extensive outreach to ensure its adoption later in this year, and to develop several custom APIs for journalists and/or academics.

* [http://citmedia.org/ Center for Citizen Media] to develop an Election Year Demonstration Project for citizen journalism in one Congressional district. CCM will oversee the creation of a website that will seek to cover everything that can possibly be reported on a Congressional election, with an emphasis on drawing on the talents and ideas of local citizen reporters. The site will include in-depth biographical and political information on candidates, audio and video archives, campaign finance profiles, first-person reports, links to articles, etc. This project is designed to serve as a model for possible nationwide implementation in hundreds of districts in 2008.

* [http://www.newassignment.net/ New York University's NewAssignment.Net Project], a non-profit site that is working to foster journalistic innovation by showing that open collaboration over the Internet among traditional reporters, editors and large groups of reader-reporters can produce high-quality work that serves the public interest, holds up under scrutiny, and builds trust. This project is an experiment in networked journalism, exploring how to blend the experience of veteran journalists with the engagement of passionate amateurs to produce work that neither could manage alone.

----

=== Efforts to Increase Citizen Involvement in Governance ===

==== Sunlight Network ====

The Sunlight Network is a sister organization to the Sunlight Foundation, which was founded in January, 2006 to strengthen the relationship between lawmakers and the people they represent through transparency, technology, and local communities.

The Sunlight Network directly supports small projects, runs national campaigns, and provides a social networking hub where people who want to create change can meet. It is committed to supporting citizen initiatives, local community organizations, and the growing network of people who believe their elected officials should be more open and responsive to their constitutents. We are experimental, irreverent, and especally (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

The Sunlight Network exists to:

* Mobilize real political muscle behind calls for reform, to help Congress change its habits.
* Provide a means for people to have direct access to power. We will constantly be experimenting with tools and campaigns to make it easier for people to meaningfully and positively affect their representativeâs behavior.
* Offer a model for other nonprofits that have gotten used to top-down control within their organizations. We hope to learn, through trial and error, how best to enable the extraordinary latent power of citizens within a public organization.

Examples of programs sponsored by the Sunlight Network include:

* [http://www.congressin30seconds.com/ Congress in 30 Seconds] encourages members of the public to create (using provided tools and video clips) a 30 second political commentary, inspired by MoveOn.org's "Bush in 30 Seconds" video.

==== European Union ====
European Union eParticipation Case Studies [http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment_research/doc/eparticipation/eparticipation_goodpractices.pdf]

== Conclusions ==

E-government is not immune to threats common to democracy in general: the possibility of domination by a small group of elites with the means of dominating the flow of communication and information, and the risk of citizen apathy towards government. However, increasing the flow of information within the government and between the government and its citizens is unlikely to make either of these threats more severe. On the contrary, increasing governmental accountability and avenues for citizen involvement may revitalize democratic governments, overcoming elitism and apathy and generating a government that is truly responsible and responsive to the electorate.

E-government is not likely to happen overnight. Incremental improvements in effectiveness, transparency, and communications are happening already, however. Moreover, new initiatives are able to build on earlier initiatives; OpenCongress.org, for example, references data provided on government web sites and Congressional biographies generated by Congresspedia. Just as the Internet did not emerge overnight as a major force in society, we should not expect e-government to arrive overnight - but it is coming.

The greatest challenge to e-government is ensuring that all citizens are able to participate fully in the new methods of civic activity and enjoy the full benefits of governmental embrace of ICT technology. Extending access to the Internet and other technologies is one means of accomplishing this; even before universal access is achieved, however, substantial gains can be realized so long as all parties ensure that the rights of those not participating in the process are protected.