Please See My Four Ideas at White House.gov/OPEN (and then vote for them)

Last week, I told you about the White House opening up its "Open Government Initiative" by creating a special website for the public to suggest ideas on how federal departments and agencies can be more "transparent, participatory, and collaborative". Visitors to the website can also vote and comment on the "brainstorming" ideas.

Full-disclosure: I want you to give a "thumbs-up" vote to my ideas (below) the White House website for "open government" -- before it closes down on Thursday. Update 5/27/09: The links (below) have been corrected.

Supposedly, the ideas with the most votes will "bubble up" and receive special consideration by the White House "Open-Gov" team that is headed up by Beth Noveck, Deputy Chief Technology Officer for Open Government.

The main goal of this "brainstorming" session (along with two other phases that will be open to the public) is to answer the overarching question:

"How can we strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness by making government more transparent, participatory, and collaborative?"

PLEASE NOTE (and VOTE): This first "brainstorming" phase ends sometime Thursday (5/28/09) and, in order to vote, you will have to give then an email and create a password). As I write this, there are already 500 ideas, but here are four ideas (below) that I ask that you consider and VOTE for. (Yes, they are my ideas.)

===========================================

1. "MyGov.gov" --> Customized to What Affects YOU

The government should be trying to engage YOU (not vice-versa). For example, an email-notice can reach out and engage you, but an obscure website does not. "MyGov.gov" would let you fill out a profile, so that you will get email-notices ONLY about those things that affect YOU. (This is how USAjobs.gov already works.)

Give that idea a "thumbs-up" here:
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2929-4049


===========================================

2. Make It Safe for Govt. Workers to Innovate to Save Money

I'm a former federal employee who worked at five different agencies, and I know from experience that the only way for to make it safe for government workers to talk about saving money with innovative ideas (or simply pointing out waste) is to have an online system that allows them to raise the idea BUT hides their true identity. (FYI: The existing Inspector-General system does NOT do this.)

Give that idea a "thumbs-up" here:
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2481-4049

==========================================

3. Give Citizens a Simple Checklist for Rating "Public Engagement"

Citizens should have a simple checklist that they can take when they attend a public meeting so that they can rate how "open" the meeting was (i.e., with respect to Transparency, Participation, and Collaboration).

This simple checklist could be the standard tool for citizens to provide feedback to government agencies about the quality of their public engagement activities. In fact, the requirement for federal department and agencies to "solicit public feedback" about their public engagement is mentioned three (3) times in President Obama's Memorandum on Transparent and Open Government. (BTW: The League of Women Voters has something similar to this.)

Give that idea a "thumbs-up" here:
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2789-4049

==========================================

4. Let's Be Clear on the Terminology about "Public Engagement"

We need to better define the terms that we are using in order to have a better discussion about how we achieve Open Government. For example: If a "town-hall meeting" can be a political speech followed by couple questions, then does that qualify as "public engagement" (or is it just a photo-op)?

If we all have different ideas about what is (and is not) "public engagement" or "transparency" or (insert buzzword here), then we will have a very hard time reaching consensus about how to go forward. (This, of course, is one lesson from "The Tower of Babel").

Give that idea a "thumbs-up" here:
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2693-4049

==========================================

And if you are still interested ...

PHASE TWO: On June 3rd, the White House will begin Phase Two of the "Open Government Iniatitive" in which there will be an online discussion to "dig deeper on the ideas and challenges identified during the Brainstorm phase." However, there is an ongoing (unofficial) discussion about the "Open Government Directive" that anyone can join by going to http://groups.google.com/group/opengovernmentdirective

===================================

TinyURL for this posting:
http://tinyurl.com/p4yueq

===================================

Update (6/3/09): I was on the radio! To listen to me interviewed last week about this blog-post on D.C.'s "FederalNewsRadio" (1500AM-WTOP), click here.

Public Commenting on the "Open Government Directive"

According to a notice that will appear in the Federal Register on May 21 (see link, below), the White House is inviting members of the public "to participate in the process of developing recommendations via email or the White House website at www.whitehouse.gov/open offering comments, ideas, and proposals about possible initiatives and about how to increase openness and transparency in government."

Federal Register notice as it appears on May 21, 2009:
(Text) http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-12026.htm
(PDF) http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-12026.pdf

Note: The deadline for comments is June 19, 2009.

Once their website is open, I'd be interested to see your comments about it.

==========================
TinyURL for this posting:
http://tinyurl.com/qjpyyg

No Due-date for Open Govt. Directive

Many "open-gov" reporters and bloggers have mistakenly said that the Open Government is due by this May 21. So, let me set things straight (so that YOU can be the smartest person at the next staff meeting on "open-gov"). Here it is:

The Presidential Memorandum on "Transparency and Open Government" does NOT require completion of the Open Government Directive (OGD) by May 21.

It only says that "recommendations" for the OGD be delivered by that date. The subsequent delivery of OGD, based on those recommendations, has no due-date in the President's Memorandum.

Of course, if the CTO (who was only recently hired) wants to rush the process faster than necessary (or prudent), then he can certainly do so.

That would not be surprising because, after all, D.C. is all about political expediency -- people are rarely given enough time to do it right the first time, but always given time to go back and fix it again and again.

And, if YOU know something that we don't know, then please share it with us here.

Get Ready to Wiki-collaborate

"Collaboration-by-wiki" is coming to open-government ... soon.

If you're interested in government transparency, but have been putting off learning how to use all these new "Web 2.0" tools (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, etc.), then NOW is the time to start learning how to use a "wiki" to collaborate.

Because, in the very near future, it looks like you may have the opportunity to make edits to the draft federal report of recommendations for "Transparency and Open Government" that Pres. Obama wants delivered to the White House within 120 days (i.e., by May 21st), which will then be the basis for creating the "Open Government Directive" (OGoD).

According to the most recent issue of DotGovBuzz (a federal newsletter from the General Services Administration):

"The White House is using OMB's MAX wiki to solicit innovative ideas, proposals and brainstorming about how government can tackle the topics of transparency, public participation and collaboration, until March 6. Currently MAX is only open those with a dot gov email address, but plans are to create another website open to the public." [my emphasis added]

Of course, all of this is being developed on the fly, so whatever "plans" the White House have right now are still evolving. But, at this point in time, it looks like there will be some type of online opportunity for the public to review the draft recommendations and provide feedback.

And that feedback platform may be nothing more than the "thumbs-up/thumbs-down" option offered for issues on Change.gov during the Presidential transition. BUT, they might set up a "public-facing wiki" similar to the one being used now for federal employees to brainstorm and collaborate on recommendations for the report.

And, if it's true that those federal employees only have until March 6 to contribute via the "MAX-wiki", then many of them may spend most of the next 8 days on a learning-curve of how to "collaborate-by-wiki". So, we should not be surprised if the timeframe for the public's feedback is similarly short.

And that is why it is important for you to start getting up to speed on how a wiki works. But I'm no expert myself, so I'm inviting your suggestions on the best web-tutorials, etc. for learning how to "collaborate-by-wiki".

If you want me to keep you up-to-date on developments regarding this topic, please be sure to Subscribe-by-email or RSS (in the right-hand column of this blog). And, if you have information that you want to share, please provide a comment below, or email me confidentially.

[There's a technical glitch for Comments. Simply click on "Links to this Post" (below) to post your comment.]

Wiki-collaboration on Obama's "Open Government Directive"

Okay, I've been thinking about this for awhile, and so here's my idea.

As you may already know, President Obama, on his first full day in office (1/21/09) issued a "Presidential Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government" in which he says this:

"I direct the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services, to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies, within 120 days, of recommendations for an Open Government Directive, to be issued by the Director of OMB, that instructs executive departments and agencies to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in this memorandum."

So that means that, between now and May 21st, some type of task force will be drafting up a list of suggestions about how the federal agencies of the U.S. government can be more transparent, participatory, and collaborative with the public.

And (this is not a wild guess) one thing that it will probably say is that "a great tool for collaborating with the public would be to use wikis".

So, if I'm a federal "wiki-evangelist" and I'm drafting a policy document (i.e., the Open Government Directive) that talks about how great it would be to use wikis for collaborating with the public, then shouldn't I put my final draft out on a wiki so that it can be improved by others, before I send it to the White House for signature?

Keep in mind that I'm not advocating some kind of absolute transparency where we put web-cams on the heads of the task force that drafts the Directive, but how about a 30-day public review and suggestion period (e.g., using a wiki) prior to its finalization for signature by the President?

THAT, more than anything else, would show citizens, including those that are federal employees, that the new leadership is willing to "walk the talk" or, in other words, "BE the Change!"

If you are interested in my updates on "wiki-collaboration" news with respect to development of the Open Government Directive, then please note that you can also stay abreast of this blog when you "subscribe-by-email" (see box, right-hand column).

P.S. This "walk the talk" suggestion is also made the National Academy for Public Administration (NAPA) in its recent white-paper "Enabling Collaboration: Three Priorities for the New Administration" (see page 20 of 40: "Implementing a culture of collaboration will be a task primarily of leadership by example.").

==============

UPDATE (2/20/09): I submitted this suggestion at the Sunlight Foundation's new "Our Open Government List" where you can vote for the best ideas for the "Open Gov't. Directive" (OGoD). You can vote for mine at http://feedback.sunlightfoundation.com/oogl/24/

P.S. As a former fed, I still like acronyms. So ... What do federal executives say when they're told to use social-media and wikis to achieve "open-government"? ---> "OGoD!" (My invention, thank you.)

Whistleblowing as One Aspect of Transparency

A lot has happened since my last posting (e.g., Obama is our new president), so I wanted any new visitors to know that I will be focusing on the bigger picture, now, with respect to "transparency" in government.

Even though "whistleblowing" is an element of government transparency, there is much afoot on a much larger scale and, so, that larger aspect needs my, and all of your, attention.

In a nutshell, President Obama has directed, in a memorandum signed on his first full day of work, that all parts of the executive branch will be more transparent in order for citizens to better be involved in how to make their government "work better and cost less".

From Steve Clift's "Democracy Online" blog:
http://www.dowire.org/notes/?p=451

Having worked in Washington, D.C. for 25 years, I see a danger that the good intentions of the Obama administration might be subverted by those who are invested in the status quo, often posing as "new converts".

That is why they need help, from kindred souls on the outside, in shaping a system of "citizen involvement" that can withstand the efforts of those who will try to bend it to their own special interests.

Ethical Govt. as a Campaign Issue

As I mentioned in my first posting, I would like the presidential candidates to tell us how they might "reform/change" government by answering the following question:

"Will you make it safe for government workers to point out
waste, fraud or abuse, without the fear of losing their jobs?"

So I have an idea on how to get the presidential candidates to start talking about this, and I would like to know what you think.

I'll give you the web-links below, but try to follow me here for a minute.

I was browsing around the EthicsPoint website and found a page about how any federal agency can simply "buy" their services for operating a "whistleblower hotline" (e.g., via a website) just as if they were buying office furniture or copy-paper (i.e., without a bidding process).

[BTW: That means that any federal agency can allow whistleblowing tomorrow without an Act of Congress (i.e., trying to improve the failed Whistleblower Protection Act).]

BUT then I noticed, in the left-hand column, a link to the "Ethics & Compliance Officers (ECOA) National Conference" next week in Orlando, FL, which lead to me to their conference agenda, with sessions like this:

"Dangerous Silence: What Employees Won't Tell You, Why, and
What You Can Do about It"

"Optimizing Corporate Ethics and Compliance
Programs in the Federal Government"

So it appears that the people attending this conference (i.e., ethics and compliance officers) are the very people most qualified to judge whether a candidate actually "gets it", or if he is just spouting empty rhetoric.

Now I wouldn't expect the candidates to rearrange their schedules to attend the ECOA conference, and it still might be too much to even arrange a teleconference. So I'm thinking that maybe the ECOA could ask both campaigns to send a short (5-minute max.) video of each ticket's candidate(s) responding this simple, straightforward question, so that the ECOA conference attendees can then "confer" about it.

"Will you make it safe for government workers to point out
waste, fraud or abuse, without the fear of losing their jobs?"

In the interest of fairness, the videos could be "embargoed" until shown to the ECOA conferees, so that no candidate could tailor their his/her remarks based on the others'. And, after the viewing, the videos could be posted on YouTube for everyone else to see, and the media could interview conferees to get their assessment of the candidate's statements, while drawing a LOT of publicity to the ECOA mission and its members.

So what do you think? Got an idea of your own?

Please share your thoughts here, or contact me directly and, in the meantime, I'll go see if ECOA (or some other similar group) is interested in picking up on this.

--- SB

1. Any federal agency can buy a "whistleblower hotline/website" right now:
http://info.ethicspoint.com/markets/government/

2. ECOA National Conference agenda (and link to ECOA homepage):
http://www.theecoa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Events/AnnualConference/AC_Agenda.htm