US Opens Portal for Online Comments on Regulations
Judg3 writes " My most recent newsletter from the Center for Democracy and Technology included a link to the newly unveiled Regulations.Gov site that allows individuals to more easily find and comment on proposed rules being considered by federal agencies. Comment on proposed rules ranging from the Secretary of Defense, Coast Guard, Veteran Affairs Admission, to even the Post Office." Here's a newsletter about the site.
can't seem to find that Paypal link anywhere...
How long before someone whips up a perl script and starts crapflooding the Senate? We might finally get some decent legislation for a change.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
Now we'll get Slashdot articles linking to places on regulations.gov, and we can make a difference.
Although, I'm not sure what their incentive will be for listening to the public. They're insulated by two different elected branches of the government, and elections, while they happen once per year, are heavily influenced by people with money.
Perhapse the solution would be to get a lot of people involved with it. Not just Techno-geeks, but old-time Ham enthusiasts and other occupation-specific people.
What's this Submit thingy do?
Now all the newbies can send their comments on that "new regulation" where they're going to tax all E-mails sent over the Internet, right?
You call this a signature?
if they actually check the comments to see if they're made by American citizens... of course they can't really do that, because there's no guarantee an IP's location, and even if you could there's no guarantee an American IP has an American behind the keyboard.
I guess this is needed since writing to elected officials only produces auto replies... so hopefully this does more to represent the will of the people.
But the cynic in me thinks the millions that lobbys spend will cancel out any good this site does.
This is a small step in the right direction. On the other hand, I hope there are people on the other end actively taking the public's view into account, and not just shoving comments lacking $$$ contributions aside...
It would be even better if there were a similar site for bills being considered. I did a keyword search for CBDTPA and got 0 results... hmmm.
~~~
"The slave thinks he is released from bondage, only to find a stronger set of chains" - NIN
There was a short article on SecurityFocus a few weeks ago... US lawmakers are requesting input from the community regarding "hacker" sentencing. Hopefully the deadline for submissions hasn't passed yet:
online.securityfocus.com/news/2028
Guidelines here:
www.ussc.gov/FEDREG/fedr1202.htm
The comment feature rules. Because you know how everything anybody ever posts on there will always be sagely reviewed and taken into the fullest of considerations. I'm thinking of quitting my job and just trolling and writing flames on there all day.
Vote with a bullet.
Our company is in a very regulated field. We are directly regulated by 3 (state) government agencies and must be tested and certified by one. We constantly go to the physical 'comment on the regulation' meetings. In the 10 years I have been in this industry (underground tank installation, etc..) I have not seen one comment even considered by the agencies. They do what they want, end of story. I am sure that all those online comments will be directed to /dev/null.
Doug
The real question will be: do comments posted on a site like this, which make it easier for comments to be submitted, have the same weight as comments that are mailed in. Some agencies made it really difficul to comment, which meant that only people who cared enough to follow the directions, make 10 copies, and take a trip to the post office were able to comment. When it's this easy to submit feedback on legislation and policy, the tone and quality of the message may be significantly impacted.
Let me guess: Step 1: Open a portal for comments from the public Step 2: Get massive amounts of Pr0n come-ons Step 3: Determine that the public wants viagra. Step 4: Get censored by Ashcroft. Step 5: Cat everything to /dev/null
-+- SIGSEGV -+-
Lagito ergo expectabo
Pretty much every response in this thread is 'they wont do anything', 'they'll just ignore suggestions' etc etc..
This isn't the agencies themselves making a smoke-and-mirrors 'include the public' PR stunt, but a whole new agency which needs to show that it exists for a reason. So the new agency will pester the old agencies at our behest, and so far it's the best solution the public has.
Sure, one suggestion from one geek means absolutely SHIT, not just to the government, but to anyone. But when enough people start saying the same things, it becomes a valid viewpoint. And if the public starts having things to say, perhaps the government will listen.
Right now the only people speaking up are the vocal minorities. Hollywood elites like George Clooney can't keep their mouths shut, and actually presume they're speaking for all of america when they go off on some looney tangent.
If nothing else, the public speaking out can perhaps drown out the lunatic fringe who are actually being heard in Congress.
If someone said you should start going to the gym with him, you'd maybe ignore it. But if everyone you meet starts calling you Fatty Fatty Four-Eyes, you might reconsider that econo-sized bag of cheet-os for breakfast.
So maybe this wont change the world, but so far whining as ACs on slashdot hasn't either.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Heres one for example:
Heres a slightly less archaic link off that regulations.gov site
BUT im not trying to stir any emotions here, I think that this website will see all these out of date agencies work towards getting themselves fully online. AND hopefully recognizing a gnupg certificate with a high trust rating as BETTER than some bullshit signature on paper (+ the added costs of: snail mail (TTL of like 30 days) AND the time cost of going from print-> electronic (that is once it reaches the org after the snailmail)).
I've had to deal with this bullcrap lately because of moving related circumstances....
-- -- --
Help my mini cause: My journal
It has been many many years since any politians could be considered public servants. And government does very little to serve the "will of the people". And like was said before elections are heavily influenced by people with money, so my questios is why do we need congress? One of the ideas behind the body was that it would be too hard for everyone to get together and participate in governing themselves so we need a small group of elected people to do it for us. Well now electronically it would be a small matter for people to get involved and propose, debate and vote on new mandates. Granted there would be rampant security conscerns, but it could be dealt with. All that would be needed is a small elected body to control the website and make sure things runs smoothly. Of course to make these kinds of changes to the constitution would take an act of congress...and who's going to vote themselves out of the job? Oh well...I guess we live with misrepresentation and corruption.
-- Insert wisdom here:
Comment on the proposed Do Not Call Registry. (I support it!)
sulli
RTFJ.
I suspect they'll have the same incentive they have today to listen, which will be rather high if people start making the same case Congressional representatives and Senators. Trends -- many people saying the same thing over and over -- count much more than one brilliantly insightful email.
Second point: Most people aren't "techno-geeks", so mail about issues near and dear to only those folks may have no more impact than mail from, say, orthodontists. Patient, polite and lay explanations explaining the technical holes in regulations impacting this industry, or illuminating unforseen damage to the public, are more likely to do some good.
Third point: Pay attention to proposed regulation. Screaming bloody murder when the regulation comes into force is a bit late.
Fourth point: People with money do influence who runs for office and how those candidates behave, but they still only have one vote. The real currency of politics is the vote. Geeks have all the tools at hand to create their own Internet-based voting bloc.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
1. you should be able to see other comments on the regulation, add to or detract from them, perhaps even vote on them. as of now - you submit and it goes, well, where? some inbox somewhere that's never checked?
2. which leads me to number 2 - like sending mail to your congressman - there's no guarentee it's ever read. unless you're funding a campaign or cosying up to the regulator/agency in question - is your opinion even going to be looked at.
Given those flaws very few people, probably thousands - but still few, will use this site. It could be done much better. But, like so many things the government does, it won't.
You've just discovered one of the most effective means of controlling a large group of people: Listen to them, but do as you please.
Freedom of speech isn't defended because our government believes in the rights of the individual, but rather because it's an effective technique for diffusing the anger of the political minority. Remember the WTC protests? What about the peace protests? Did they change our foreign policy? Were they even considered?
Has political protest ever made a difference in American policy? The short answer is no. Rather, allowing political speech is the means by which politicians keep us busy while they conduct business as usual.
Historically, democracies have been ruled by the rich and popular. Historically, monarchies also have been ruled by the rich and popular. The difference? In democracies, the people believe that they are free; in monarchies, they know better...
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
And just what constitutes someone as a security threat? Why the TSA says so, thats what. This is one that I think needs some deserved comments.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.