Govit Tries to Create a Direct Democracy
The knock on the type of representative democracy that is employed in the US is that the people aren't actually voting on the legislation that gets passed -- representatives for the people are doing it for them. And those representatives are potentially beholden to outside influences like political action committees and lobbyists who help them raise money necessary to get elected. The system is supposed to weed out the bad eggs via regular elections (if your rep isn't representing you, don't vote for he or she next time around), but maybe that's not good enough. Enter Govit, a site that lets citizens weigh in on bills currently being voted on in the US House and Senate.
Govit lists every piece of active legislation currently before the United States Congress and lets users vote yes/no or abstain on each. From the voting page for each bill, users can also send a message directly to their government representatives urging them to vote a specific way, or send a message to their friends doing the same. Govit can also compare your votes to those of your representatives, those of Congress at large, and to the rest of Govit.
Govit acts something like a social network for politics. Each member of the House or Senate gets their own profile on the site that has a bio, fundraising information, and voting record, as well as how that member of Congress stacks up against Govit -- do their votes match the will of the people? Users can rate Congressional members, comment on them, and say whether or not they would vote for them.
On a more personal level, Govit allows members to befriend each other, which basically just lets you to compare your voting record to that of your friends if you have your profile set to public view. Unfortunately, by setting Govit up as a social network, the site becomes sort of a microcosm view of the American political system at large -- or at least it has the potential to. If we pretend that Govit becomes popular enough to actually have a national impact (i.e., politicians actually start paying attention to it), because it is set up in a manner where people are encouraged to shill for votes, it is easy to imagine the same back room dealing that goes on in Washington taking place on the site.
It's hard to look at Govit as the true "will of the people" because users have the option to make their votes public -- thus creating the potential for groupthink. Perhaps that is the will of the people anyway, but it would be easier to trust Govit's numbers if users at least didn't know who was voting which way until after the final ballot was cast. In other words: secret ballots tend to yield better results.
Still, Govit provites a useful tool for keeping track of what Congress is talking about, discussing it with like-minded folks, and seeing how your representatives match up with your own views. If you and your congressman are consistently voting on opposite ends of the spectrum, you might think twice about voting for he or she next term.
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Finally! Web 2.0 comes to it's belated senses. I can get behind this. The big advantage is not that the disclosure of an Internet vote will change the outcome of legislation one bit, but that people and pols might see how at odds the vox populi is with the results of the sausage that is under manufacture in our 'house of the people'.
In the early days we were taught that direct democracies are operationally impossible and don't scale. Govit is going to prove a big point either way!
Living in a democracy requires work on the part of the populace. People hate work.
The full democratization of democracy sounds like a great idea on the surface, but I can't imagine that this sort of populist voting would necessarily work in the long run. My concerns are two-fold and centre around the concept of democracy as the "will of the majority" versus the more sensible concept of democracy as providing "rights of the minority", and the overall education of the electorate.
Providing a forum for balanced wiki-style analysis of the legislation is definitely worthwhile and may help to cut through rhetoric, but it still doesn't stop the votes of the ill-informed, and their ability to trample upon the rights of the majority ("Tax breaks for people with blue eyes!"). It could be interesting if in order for people to vote on an issue they had to be able to answer questions about the legislation that analyzes whether the voter has at least considered some of the salient points from across the political spectrum.
I think sending your vote to your reps is a very powerful feature. I didn't even know who my representative were, or how to contact them.
Also was surprised to see the things Congress was voting. Very happy to have my say on these issues.
Great idea. Finally some more direct linking to those who represent 'our' interests. Helpful for both politicians as voters.
Great idea for keeping track of what our representatives are up to, with the added benefit of being able to comment directly upon their work.
There are a lot of things to be said about direct democracy, some of them mentioned above.
As a European citizen I have now created a fake gmail account, picked a zip code for an American software company I know and cast my vote. I am now a one man lobby group.
Govit was very nice to me and presented a form for inviting friends, so if I wanted I could have been part of a quite large lobby group in a couple of days.
#1: We need to have elections open only to those who have a right to vote in that election.
#2: As I live in a country where the person who gets the most votes is elected (unlike some ;-) I believe in the right for every vote to count equal, no matter what education, crazy ideas or whatnot the voter has. But on an election day everyone is summoned to vote. Om a site like this only the people that has the interest or energy votes. That gives a bias.
#3: Even if you restrict voters to a domain (like the US) we need to restrict the number of votes to one per person, i.e. an email address is not a unique identifier.
#4: You can't use ip-addresses as a filter. I, for one, use an old tip from R&WW to come out inside the US via a VPN-tunnel, when I want to.
I personally like this kind of democratic instrument very much, but it is a clash of cultures/realities:
In the old world we dreamed of letting everybody take a part.
In the new world everybody is really everybody on the planet.
Back on square one?
(By the way - I watched "Runaway Jury" tonight and voted against the arms lobby :-)
This is Taylor, founder of govit. Thank you for the thoughtful analysis and the feedback!
This is a representative democracy, and I believe we should have our voice heard. The goal is to bring the issues/legislation, citizens, and representatives together.
Public voting is a touchy subject. So, members can choose to keep their votes and voting records private (in sign up or editable in profile section).
Brad, you’re right, democracy takes work. I hope with the right tool, we’ll do something about it.
Sayuri- Yes! The real power lies in the connection with the reps.
Jangelov - Reps can be spammed from the real world with phone calls or letters as well. On govit you’re required to enter your real name and address. As it gains momentum we’ll react to people trying to spam reps.