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?"
Tell 'em its cheap.
Say the words "hard earn tax dollars"
and be prepared to be called a dirty red commie.
You can't take the sky from me...
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.
Fundamentally, you need to be pushing a solution to a problem people care about. Or you need to provide a better way of doing things, that is worth the hassle of accepting. Change for change's sake is scary to voters. And if you're trying to push Linux just because it's l33t and r00lz, then quit now; you're just wasting people's time.
If you can demonstrate that using Linux will...
- Reduce computer costs and free up more money for education...
- Make it easier for kids to get computers, to play and learn with (and so develop future job skills)...
- Have a proven track record of being more secure against attackers...
- Will enable computers and related services to more available, more quickly to e.g. rural areas than otherwise...
...then you've got something you can sell to non computer-geek voters.
You need to simply identify how using OSS well improve your would-be constituents' lives.
ShoutingMan.com
- reduced cost of licencing
- reduced cost of licence compliance
- reduced cost of dealing with security
- reduced waste in government offices (open software tends to have less feature-creep, which means less time doing stuff that shouldn't be done at all (like writing your memos in three columns).
Issues of freedom come second. The problem is they are more abstract, difficult to grasp, and non-local. And you are not running for President so your voters might not care about your opinions about copyright and copyleft.Of course if you were running in Berkeley, things might be different ;-) but you aren't.
-- look, cheese ahoy!
Would you vote for a landscaper whose campaign speeches were treatises on the merits of hardwood mulch over pine bark mulch? Or an auto mechanic who promised to improve the performance of the city's vehicle fleet by switching to synthetic motor oil?
I know I wouldn't.
If you're running for city council, stick to the top issues in municipal government: schools, taxes, crime, etc.
At most you might say something like "as information technology becomes increasingly important to the successful managment of any business or government, our city council would benefit by having a member who understands how to apply IT tools to improve the function of city government." But leave it at that.
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.
How do I make that concept accessible and interesting to 40,000 citizens?
Use puppets. MAke one of them act mean, make the other one act kind, and make sure that the kind one explains the moral at the end.
Barring that, most voters won't pay attention.
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?
As for the cost savings, yes, Linux can cost more money than it saves when the transition is not carefully planned and executed. Part of the reason for that is the large number of people who "make Linux harder than it is", as Roblimo, IIRC, pointed out. There is a variety of extremely simple graphical e-mail clients. Konqueror or Mozilla are both web browsers that can be used by almost anyone (whereas Konqueror can be set up easily by anyone with half a clue to look and act like IE). It's exactly the Internet client problems that are mostly solved on the desktop. Don't invent problems that do not exist. Surely you could set up mutt and procmail on a library computer, but then don't be surprised if people point and laugh.
But cost savings are not the main reason to move to Linux. The main reason are the long-term benefits of source code openness, which includes easy expandability, which is a major plus, because many additions by anyone from government agencies to corporations will be returned into the pool of open source software, to the benefit of all -- the more open-source software (GPL) is used, the more powerful this effect becomes (and there's the obvious "given enough eyes .." security/stability advantage, which also increases exponentially). Also, schools and libraries will not have to deal with unmanageable obsolescence cycles which are deliberately created by the Wintel duopoly. OSS will make computers better, more easy-to-use and cheaper. You should support those trying to make that difference, or become one of them.
Give me a map and compass, drop me into the Amazon Rainforest, and I will be lost immediately too. But that Crocodile Hunter guy on TV would figure out where he is, and start walking. Might take him a week, but he would find his way out, while I would still be trying to reboot the compass.
Crikey! If you look ovah here, you can see a primo example of the dread Linux Hacker. 'e's a dangerous brute, but ain't 'e bayutiful?!
I can get this close to 'im because I respect 'is terrortree. You're a notty hacker! Yes you are! He's a dangerous wonk, alright, but I'm okay because I'm a trained profeshun'al.
Let's all remember the the Linux Hacker is an endangud species. Paoching and biggah predatas like the fanged Microsoft encroach on 'is terrortree more and more each yeah. If we want to keep these bayutiful creatuhs around, we gotta protect 'em!
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Make your campaign slogan "Free as in Beer"
Then make posters like this:
FREE
as in
BEER
Make the "FREE" and "BEER" in a really big size, and the "as in" in a really small size.
Oh, don't forget to put your name on the poster somewhere too. In big letters. Probably as big as the letters you make "FREE BEER".
Seriously though, I would check with the town clerk or historian and see how much they have been spending on software over the past few years. Draw up a budget plan and present it to the people showing the disparate prices between the software, and the re-training/OSS costs.
--You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
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
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!
Thanks, folks. The answers that seem to be the most correctish are the ones that read "what are you, stupid?" The point being that this is a topic of such piddling interest and without bearing on the Real World(tm) that it has nothing to do with a city councilor, least of all with a campaign. It's the IT guy's job, end of story, for the most part. I had suspected this to be the case, but figured that it was something worth asking /. about.
:) Thanks, all.
Now I know.
-Waldo Jaquith