Hacker News Reader

You (and everyone here looking to engage their technological skills in the democratic process) should consider putting some time into the PROGRESSIVE CODERS NETWORK (ProgCode)[0]. They are a non-profit that helps organize and direct volunteer coders, programmers, designers into open-source political projects. They are about connecting and facilitating projects, not dictating what projects should be. They are party-neutral, but seek to empower the people and provide tools for running successful campaigns and being engaged as a citizen.

If you can take away the need for millions of dollars to run a campaign then policy makers aren't beholden to the few wealthy supporters that helped get them elected.

Many of your points are already being worked on and the projects would love more support and input.

[0]http://progcode.co

> Using technology to bypass the expensive outreach vectors traditional candidates are stuck with.

This is a huge frustration of mine. It is nearly impossible to get the attention of politicians unless I'm willing to spend a vast amount of my time on the phone, because they don't pay attention to email, social media, etc.

It would be awesome to have a social media platform that is dedicated to political communication. And with ample features related to communicating about policy. Like for example:

1) The ability to search for a pending bill based on the text of the bill, highlight text, and comment directly on it.

2) The ability to +1 someone else's comments in a meaningful way.

3) The ability to publicly challenge a politician's claims through research, data citations, or other types of analysis.

4) The ability to find the appropriate politicians/appointees for a specific concern.

5) The ability to facilitate directional communication from politicians on specific issues. It would be great if a politician had a common platform to explain in detail why they voted yay/nay or abstained from voting for something, with quick crossreferences, data visualization, etc.

It is nearly impossible to get the attention of politicians unless I'm willing to spend a vast amount of my time on the phone

I almost hate to reveal this "secret" since I thought it was pretty well-known, but if you contribute to your Representative's campaign, there's a pretty good chance you can get a one-on-one or at least attendance to a dinner event. This is much easier with state politicians.

I wonder if they listen more to phone calls or letters if you're a donor. And if so, what kind of dollar amount makes your call 'matter'? I'd happily donate $5 to the local Republican congressman if he'd take my calls more seriously.

My understanding is that the staffs keep their bosses informed about the volume and tone of constituent feedback; if many people are calling in with similar views on an issue, the congressperson will do whatever the constituents want. Being a big donor, or even better, a representative of big donors means that you can influence the congressperson when there is no strong public sentiment, or if you have a very strong policy point.

Five dollars? No. Just search for "[your representative's name] dinner event" and you can find the typical cost of access. For instance, my Rep has required 500 dollar contributions in the past. If you're actually interested, just call up the local party HQ and ask for the next event.

I know that $5 isn't going to get you "real access". It's a token amount so that you can truthfully say you're a donor. My thought was along the lines of "Hi, I'm a donor to XXXX's campaign, and I feel YYYY about ZZZZZ". Make a difference, or not?

I have a feeling part of why they don't use tech solutions is that the 'cost' of making a statement is valuable information: if a ton of people are willing to spend 10 minutes to make a call, that tells you something. Having 100 people, half of them Russian bots, click on a "+1" button, might not tell you as much.

It's a costly signal [0], that's for sure. But what is unfortunate is that it is a signal that is far more costly for some than it is for others. It's the reason why minorities, immigrants, renters, etc., are underrepresented in local politics...angry white-haired retired homeowners with nothing better to do than complain about other people parking in "their" space are the ones that can show up to meetings. Everybody else has far more pressing things to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory

Like you say, that's especially true at the local level.

So I don't know what the answer is, but I don't think it's "just" removing the "costly signal".

Having worked myself as a constituent contact in a Congressional office, I can tell you from experience that you are exactly right. Someone who's willing to hand-write a letter and pay for a stamp is seen as a more motivated constituent -- more likely to care enough about the issue to have it decide how they'll vote in November, in other words -- than someone who makes a call; and the caller is more motivated than someone who clicks "send" on an email; and the emailer is more motivated than someone who signs a Web petition.

For a long time, in fact, this mindset meant that a really effective way to "hack" the Congressional contact system was to send your message in a telegram -- because if you were willing to pay to have a messenger run your message across town and deliver it by hand, you were assumed to be very motivated indeed!

(I doubt that's true anymore, of course; not least because I'm not sure you can send telegrams anymore. But now I'm wondering if you could get the same effect these days by sending your message via FedEx's most expensive service...)

I asked this elsewhere, but does being a donor matter at all for calls/letters? If so they check the dollar amount?

They legally aren't allowed to check but if a staffer or politician recognizes someone's name and remembers that they met at a fundraiser, it obviously influences them, at least subconsciously.

I was never asked to; Congressional offices and campaign offices are supposed to be legally distinct, and that information would have all been held by the campaign.

That being said, once the sums you contribute get large enough you will almost certainly get to be known around the office -- either explicitly (e.g. the Chief of Staff tells all the people who handle correspondence "Bob Smith is a good friend of the Congressman's, if you find any messages from him bring those straight to me") or implicitly (e.g. the staff of the Congressional office notices that when Bob Smith comes in to meet with the boss he's ushered right in and stays for a long time). So large contributors' messages can easily get special attention, even without that kind of direct connection to their contributions ever being made.

Yeah, I'm sure if you're a Big Donor that's one thing, but that's not what I want to do. Was just curious if by saying you're a donor on your phone call whether it might make a difference.

Surely these offices still have fax machines?

I know this to be the case. But then, that suggests to me that this is another place where tech has a chance to make a dent, not by short-circuiting the "proof of work", but by coordinating the effort so that people know how and when to put it in.

> It is nearly impossible to get the attention of politicians unless I'm willing to spend a vast amount of my time on the phone, because they don't pay attention to email, social media, etc.

Mail them a letter. Yes, a letter, on paper. They take those very seriously -- especially when so many of them come in that their office is filled to the rafters with them.

All good suggestions.

Legislating is an information processing task. They're just doing triage. It's your job to get their attention. The only way I've ever gotten my way is when I show up with a crowd. Then whoever's sitting in the chair will do whatever it takes to make you go away.

Politics of Attention https://www.amazon.com/Politics-Attention-Government-Priorit...

All worthy suggestions.

TLDR: Replace current campaign managers, consultants, fund raisers, etc.

Which I totally support. But how?

Please ask candidates (past, present and future) about running for office. Better yet, run for office. See what it's like. I highly recommend the training from http://wellstone.org and http://democraticfuture.org. I'm sure there's others.

Also, join some local campaigns and do the grunt work. See how the game is played. Especially fund raising and endorsements.

---

This is not a technical problem.

Like the nerdtopian legislative information systems (https://www.govtrack.us) before, geeks making fascinating tools without deep knowledge won't make a dent.

Source: ran for office, activist/lobbyist.

I'd be interested in your opinion on this initiative: https://sites.tufts.edu/gerrymandr/

Just saw this. Belated response. Sorry.

Excellent link, thank you.

Redistricting is my #1 issue. I've been long

I'm slowly warming up to the idea of voter efficiency. It'd likely moot the geometric based techniques, like compactness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasted_vote

http://election.princeton.edu/2016/11/24/a-lower-court-win-o...

http://gerrymander.princeton.edu

Politically, I work on local issues. We recently formed a local working group. So far we're researching and networking.

My personal policy goal is to have an open, transparent redistricting process. Regardless of the heuristics used. Modeled loosely on Iowa's system. Though I'm super partisan, all gerrymandering (disenfranchisement) makes me sick. I want to prevent scenarios like Ohio and Maryland.

I do not yet know how voter efficiency standards will change my plans, goals.

I don't think the actual running is much of a technical problem. I think getting people to run is.

I could go on and on about this.

My direct observation is that (most) successful politicians are careerists. They started as pages, legislative assistants, etc. Makes perfect sense.

At the same time, most of the lowest rung (entry level) offices have a ridiculous number of candidates. Most first time candidates are walk-ons, having no idea how to play the game (me, for example). Most aspirants wash out after their first loss.

Along with Crowdfunding/Kickstarter, a platform that allows for the White House's petition signature mechanics for city/state offices (with a lower threshold for "response required" correlated with population for the candidate's office/area) might be a good way to engage constituents: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/about

You could also possibly allow constituents to place donations that would go through if the petition succeeds and a response is given.

>I've set a goal for myself to get a specific number of friends and acquaintances to run

Do you plan to run yourself?

Nope. I have the wrong hair for it. But what I've learned in the past few weeks is that a suggestion to a friend that they run for office is almost always met favorably; it's a compliment, like "that's a nice jacket", so your worst case scenario is still a positive interaction, but your best case scenario is a small but real chance at changing the world. I'll take that bet any day.

The UK startup https://www.mysociety.org/ is very active in this space.

e.g. https://www.theyworkforyou.com/ (Hansard prettified), https://www.writetothem.com/ (case study at https://www.mysociety.org/democracy/writetothem/ )

Lovely list. I'd add ways to address problems with "congressional fund raising" as discussed by John Oliver (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ylomy1Aw9Hk), so congress members can focus on the needs of their constituents rather than those who pay for their re-election run.

Check out liquid democracy.

Thomas, I've been thinking about this as well. Here are some additional mechanics that could be used to build a "YC" for democratic candidates:

1) 8 week Training Program - an eight-week training program targeted at lawyers, entrepreneurs, and others who are interested in serving as state and federal legislatures. Candidates have their training and expenses paid for, and they learn all of the key things they need to know to win. It's an open process, where people all over the country can apply, and the program becomes prestigious over time, like Echoing Green or YC.

- Public Speaking Training - Social Media Growth Hacking - Fundraising and Donor Management - Policy Issue Training

2) Shared News: A hacker news type site for democratically minded people to share political articles. Builds inbound attention to the accelerator.

3) Blog: Articles about what it is like to become a politician. It features lots of examples and profiles. Shows everyday people they can do it as well. - What does the career path look like for someone who joins the House of Representatives? - How do state senators support themselves?

4) Funder Network: Candidates get introductions to top funders from the state who can help. Each candidate gets a certain amount of intros, and the accelerator manages the process.

5) Fundraising Tools: the candidate is trained in how to use tools, such as a CRM, to manage the process. I've seen a lot of startups struggle with setting up the right infrastructure, and I'm sure candidates have the same challenges.

6) Public Speaking Training: Politicians need to be electrifying. Have politicians train with TV media experts to become compelling in front of the crowd.

7) Digital Profile: Help candidates set up a website, volunteer management tools, and social media tools. Create a standard set of tools for candidates.

9) Growth Hacking Team: a small squad of growth hackers who devise strategies for growth hacking political candidates. This team builds software and strategies, and these tools are disseminated to candidates through the training program. Think of it like a consulting firm within the program.

9) Intern Pool: Many early-stage state legislatures rely on interns to provide the manpower needed for the procedural aspects of campaigning and running office. The accelerator can help recruit thousands of interns from different sources, and it can provide each candidate with a constant stream of interns to provide the manpower needed to win. Interns are given credit for being part of the fellowship program (like YC fellows) and are part of a cohort with shared events, message board, hr people they can talk to.

10) MOOC: make a public MOOC to let people view the training program. This makes people excited about the program and interested in applying. It also helps scale the program, similar to How to Start a Startup.

If you'd like to follow up, my email is in my username.