Slashdot Mirror
Selling Open Source on the Campaign Trail
Waldo Jaquith writes: "I'm a long-time advocate and user of open source and free software and, as of this morning, I am a candidate for the Charlottesville, VA (USA) City Council. Naturally, I see lots of areas in Charlottesville's IT infrastructure (as well as potential areas of expansion) where Linux and various free software projects would be ideal. But can I make that a talking point while campaigning? How do I make that concept accessible and interesting to 40,000 citizens?"
They're not going to be interested in what the software can do for them. They will be interested in fact that a significant amount of money will be freed in the budget. Don't go promising tax refunds or anything, but I think the financial benefit will be the most tangible to non-technical folk.
What do voters care about? Taxes. It's that simple. So, you want to get elected, voters want lower taxes. How do you react to this situation? Find a way to lower, or at least not increase, taxes. Open source solutions are free. Maintenance of such systems, contrary to what M$ heads would have you believe, is about the same cost, maybe even less (because once it's running, it JUST WORKS.) Now, let's follow along to make a logical conclusion:
You want to be on the council.
The voters don't want to pay as much tax.
You want to use something that's free for IT purposes.
Tell the voters that using free software would reduce costs!
The voters will automatically imply that your action of reducing costs will lead to lowered taxes and BAM!! you're elected.
Good luck!
~ now you know
As a citizen, do you think I want to know what brand asphalt you're going to use to fill the potholes? No, I just want to get it done. Details like that are for you and your staff to work out.
Be reasonable and willing to compromise. Other people will sometimes need to have their way, even if it is wrong. Remember, while often times most palatable, open source is not always the best solution (no flames please!).
Try not to be an open source zealot....most people won't understand, and, if and when something goes to hell, your "free" software will be blamed. CYA!!!
I suspect that talking about "open source" won't
mean a lot to your constituency. However, you can
say that you have ideas about how to streamline
governmental IT budgets without cutting services.
A more subtle point is that open source improves
openness. Using open file formats and protocols
protects the government and the public from vendor
lock-in. It also improves the chance that government archives will still be accessible in
the middling and distant future. I don't know
how you can make these points sound-bite-friendly,
but it's worth thinking about.
Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
The trick that you would need to do is to make sure you wrap a lot of the OS rheteroric in a way that doesn't sound communist or anti-capitalist.
As soon as your opponent would say: " wants to give away all software, and that will cost jobs, especially in this industry where people are being laid off now" then you are sunk with the 40,000 people who don't know the industry.
Another thing you will realize, is that, on the whole, people don't care about the same things that get discussed on here. They just don't. Perhaps they should, but that doesn't make it happen. So again, I wish you luck.
Don't get any where near "Linux," just keep it to "advanced technology solutions."
Yes, it sounds cheasy, but the people aren't going to want to hear about Linux ("What's that?"), they'll want to know you're looking out for their interests in the most efficient manner possible.
I don't know how accesable "open-source" stuff is to "the people" but you can't ignore the University of Virginia - located right in Charlottesville! Now, clearly not all the students there are registered voters in charlottesville but I'd guess about 1/3 of them are (maybe more since UVA is 60% in state students) - and for these students I bet open source is not only an idea accesable to them, but an issue otherwise jaded and synical students would be willing to get of thier buts and vote on. Also I am sure a fair number of the professors and staff would be interested in this to - so it is an issue you can definantely bring up when campaigning on the UVA campus! Good luck!
Something like this will most likely end up costing more in the end.
Make the point of "Why are we spending large amounts of money on licenses and opening outselves to spending even more defending ourselves against charges that we haven't bought enough, when there's software available that does the job and which doesn't require a license per seat?". Point out the state and municipal governments that've gotten audited by companies like Microsoft and had to spend large amounts of the taxpayer's money to prove they really did have all the licenses they needed. Ask whether this is really a prudent way to spend tax money, when there's an alternative available.
Furthermore, you can explain briefly how with the source code available, special changes to the software for specific needs can be done by any programmer and the city won't have to buy $100K of custom software -- $100K will easily get you a couple full-time programmers in Charlottesville for a year.
Just remember, voters don't want things complex, and TV and papers will almost never let you discuss anything in detail, so it's got to be something simple and quick. "If we change to Linux, our base costs will be less and our long term costs will save the city X dollars over Y years." "Remember Virginia Beach and the Microsoft audit! One hundred twenty-nine THOUSAND dollars for software the city already bought!!!" You get the idea, otherwise, give up politics. (:
woof.
Agreed. I personally believe that the cost of re-education will be lower than the amount saved by switching to free software. However, you'd better be prepared to back that up with a good plan and some hard figures. Such might include outlining a gradual, planned transition from applications with the highest cost-saving potential.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
If someone asks you about your views on Open Source, then answer it truthfully, sure, but don't make it a campaign point to stand on.
I'd be suprised if anyone asked about it. Why not include it in the "saving the city money" part of the platform. When asked about how you propose to save the city money, rattle off a few ways (I assume you have some!), and include the Open Source stuff in there. But I agree with the poster above, don't make it a major talking point.
Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
Several people have written articles on how MS and others are moving to a pure leasing arangement. At some point you will be paying monthly and if you stop paying, you will be unable to access your data. Add in DMCA nightmares of reverse engineering prevention, and the future is very bleak. Plus, how can you trust a convicted monopolist?
And have They been to your city yet. Use it to your advantage. Use examples of other successful places. Between a lower budget, better reliability, and no fears of data lockup, it would make a good plank in your platform, but you will need other things to make a stand on. Lastly, be prepared for some mud slinging. Probalby they will paint OSS as commie or some other Non-American thing. Explain it as being Christian (give unto poor) and use other metaphors to make the populace think of Free software writers as good charitable folks. Might want to avoid outright speaking of it as Christian, but as a politician, you should know how to turn a phrase to put an idea in the populace's mind.
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
I'm a Charlottesville resident, as well as a member of C-ville's tech crowd (tightly-knit bunch that we are) so I don't think you'll have any problem finding local advocates to back you (or help with implementations.)
To the rest of our community (the non-techies) I'd cite the licensing trouble several local governments have had with Microsoft, and some of the BSA actions. That should be enough to convince them that if they're going to use non-free software, they're going to not only pay for the licenses, but also for the license audits. That should help bottom-line-oriented people understand the benefits of free software.
I should also add that I think it would be highly inappropriate for any governmental body to publish any document in a proprietary format (Read RMS's editorial on that). If all of the desktops in the city offices used only free software I think the odds of that happening are slim.
Actually, what I'd really like to see the city do is own the "last mile" of telecom wiring...
At least up here in NoVA (Northern Virginia, the DC suburbs), the big issues in local elections are traffic, schools, crime. Taxes are always a factor, especially if it involves shipping $$ to Richmond and not getting as much back in roads, schools, etc...
In your case, there MIGHT be a campaign issue involving the "efficiency" of city government, espcially if there's a program to "wire" the city or get city departments "on line". Without knowing the politics in Charlottesville, I will assume it is not a burning issue. (It took Marion Barry YEARS to make government incompetance an issue in DC - by causing much of it - and it's STILL far from being fixed). Schools? You might have computers in the classroom issues, or the town/gown deal with UVA, but I expect just getting a "passing" grade on the state Standards of Learning exams are a big enough deal.
Sure, you can work open source software into elements of the campaign, but it isn't going to get you elected. Or understood.
[semi relevant factoid: The Al Gore presidential campaign web site ran on linux and used open source software throughout (apache, php, mysql...). Did anyone care? The campaign did - it saved them $$ and worked better than W's big $$ Dell cluster running ASP. Did it help the campaign - yes, for raising money and building "community". Did it make a difference in winning or losing the election? IMHO, not a bit.]
When was the last time that such minutia actually changed your vote one way or the other unless it directly affected you? Probably never.
.5% of the local government costs. All these decisions take time, far too much time for the average voter to concern themselves with. We have public officials and representatives for a reason.
Even if you THINK you do, I doubt you really do. In order to make an informed decision on these matters must spend SOME time learning the background and the difference between the competing alternatives. Even with an issue like Open Source, there is considerable debate in the technical community about whether or not it actually saves money and it's got to be even harder for the average person to make heads or tails of it. It's not as if there's a simple authoritative source you can go to that says Open Source > Closed Source. It may be trivial to discover that the software itself takes money to actually purchase, but finding out the actual support costs, training, quality of the software, and other elements takes a lot of time and intuition. Speaking for myself, I'd actually be opposed to this kind of adoption, especially in a government agency.
Now you're going to do this kind of research for each and every little item? Asphalt? Shovels? Paper? Paper clips? It may sound ridiculous, but I doubt software costs more than
This argument is especially ridiculous when you consider that the kinds of day to day payroll decisions made by managers have a far greater impact and cost far more. For instance, would you rather have an experienced admin run NT or a bunch of clowns running Linux? I know which I'd pick. Yet it's blatantly obvious that we can't effectively engage in this kind of oversight.
...it's high time that our governments took advantage of its investment in these quality resources.
:)
That's speech material right there. Has a beautiful ring to it.
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
That is very unlikely since the chances are that the city already has bought much of its software.
I think the guy has no clue as to the relevance of open software to a town council or the amount of influence a junior councilor is likely to have.
The division of responsibilities between city and state vary. Even so it is unlikely that a town of 40K would have more than 200 odd administrators. sure they may have a lot of police, teachers etc, but people in that type of job are unlikely to use very much software and that they do use is likely to be chosen for compatibility with county, state or federal systems.
The running of the executive office is typically the responsibility of the mayor or an appointed chief executive. Either way that individual is not going to allow you to dictate their IT policy. If that person says that the cost is $1000 per employee to retrain them or that the open software option does not meet their needs it will be near impossible to persuade the rest of the council to override them, and if they did their motive is unlikely to be commitment to open source.
More likely however is that the decision on which software to buy is made on an individual basis. If a secretary knows how to use word they get her a copy of word.
However, you'd better be prepared to back that up with a good plan and some hard figures.
A good place to start would be finding out how much the town spends each year on software and how much of that is on applications that have open source alternatives.
The overwhelming probability is that most of the spending dollars on software go on low volume niche type software that would only be relevant to councils. Public sector accounting packages, pupil progress monitoring packages, police evidence management systems, court clerk management systems. The council that size might buy a hundred copies of Office a year for $40K but an accounting package might easily cost $100K plus the same again for installation, customization etc.
While 40K might seem a lot to you it is not a major item in a city budget. If the only plank in your platform is that you can save the city 40K you should probably be directed to the suggestions box rather than the council chamber.
The guy appears to share the somewhat arrogant assumption of many voters that the state is granting people a great favor by allowing them to work for considerably less than the going rate in industry. The choice of software has the greatest effect on the employees work environment. Why should some open source monomaniac decide that they have to use something different because their current software offends his religion?
If open source has any validity it is about choice, not compulsion. The cost of software is irrelevant compared to the cost of employing the person who uses it.
If you actually want to save the council money a much better approach is to look into opportunities to cut costs by outsourcing IT functions. Most companies outsource their payroll because it is cheaper to let ADT work out all the fiddly tax laws than have someone build that experience in house. Many companies outsource management of their email systems, it is cheaper for a company like USA.net to have 50 admins working 24x365 managing 500 companies email than it is for any of those companies to have a half time admin during business hours only.
The problem for small enterprises (city governments being typical) is that they are simply too small to realise the savings of scale that large companies can.
The cost of software is really not where the pain is. The Total Cost of Ownership and Return On Investment are the metrics used.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Just don't. Trust me on this, the average user just does not care about his computer. He does not care about improving performance, or being able to tweak his programs, or helping other programmers. He just wants "the machine" to work. If you focus on open source, you will get hammered in any and all public forums. Just for the heck of it, here's a quick sample speech by a hypothetical opponent of yours that could be made after you gave an "open-source" schpeel:
"Ladies and gentlemen, like many of you, I have heard Mr. Jaquith's speech on the benefits of switching the town to what he calls 'open-source' software. And like many of you, I am confused. Our city need money for roads, and schools. Our children need more parks and playgrounds, and children's programs to keep our youth off the streets. As we go into this new century, our city faces questions of crime, of poverty - Mr. Jaquith talks about Linucks and Debean or whatever it's called - I, for one, cannot make heads or tails of it.
And that's his perogative, of course - the right to campaign freely is what makes this country what it is, the unshakeable roots of our culture. But not to put too fine a point on it, do the people of Charlottville really care about my worthy opponent's issues? As long as our taxes and payrolls for city workers are processed in a timely manner, as long as other computerized fuctions are carried out properly - why should we change them? Even Mr. Jaquith cannot tell us how they will save any meaningful amount of time - in fact, I tell you it will cost us time, as our town employees are forced to learn the new system. So why does Mr. Jaquith want this?
I can tell you that. He believes that it is wrong, my friends, to pay for software. He believes a product that costs thousands of man-hours to produce must be given away for free, and that those who would not do this are evil. Go to a web site called slashdot.org, or freshmeat.net, or read any "linux advocacy" magazine, and the "open source" position becomes clear.
I know that this is a tight race, and that I may not be elected. That's fine, that's the democratic process, and I can accept that. But my fellow citizens, I ask one thing of you. When the time comes for you to vote, vote based on the issues that actually matter to your lives. Schools, taxes, health care - if you do not agree with me on these things, then please do not vote for me. But please don't vote for Waldo Jaquith for the sake of a complex new system that we don't need. Thank you."
It's a little rough, I admit, but with a little polishing it might be good against you, sir. Find "real" issues, like those mentioned in the speech above, and campaign on those - open source is something you can work for once you're actually in power. I hope this helped.
I'm the stranger...posting to
Don't.
Or rather, don't make open source a focal point in your campaign because you'll just get 40,000 glazed eyes, and 40,000 people who will think you're a nut who has focused on some small aspect of the campaign rather than the "big issue" ideas such as city management, police, fire, and schools.
Of course if you do put together a position paper on your overall campaign, you may want to toss out open source as a line item, or a minor talking point. But by and large, think of a campaign as a very large job interview in front of 40,000 potential employers who don't give a damn and who can't be bothered to read your resume.
If I were you, in this current election cycle, I would concern myself with police first, schools second, and local concerns third. If open source even comes up, talk about it as a potential tax savings that can potentially be used to help fund police efforts or whatever.
By the way, a realistic estimate of the cost to transition a town to open source should factor in the cost to retrain users and the cost for your town's MIS department to make the transition in terms of lowered productivity and consulting time. And while overall you probably will save a fair amount of money, realistically speaking the fiscal savings over the course of a year may not buy one police squad car. (Not that the savings is insignificant, but in the scope of running a town, it's relatively small chump change.)
Oh, and by the way, slightly off topic: beware political math done by any of your opponents! When I helped my brother win in the city council in Fresno several years back, it was done largely because he went up against an opponent who tried to claim that a $1 million savings in one place could be used to hire a hundred police officers and pay their salaries for one year. (Do the math: factoring in training costs and the cost of supplies, what's left wouldn't pay minimum wage.)
Oh, and beware the last minute advertising blitz! That is, beware of your opponents taking out a whole bunch of last minute advertising which sways the voters away from you. The last election cycle, my brother was defeated because his opponent violated campaign financing rules (a criminal offense in this state) to buy advertising that painted my brother as a crook. (The irony there should be obvious.)
Anyways, good luck!