Restoration and Reconcilation in Cincinnati, Ohio
Open Government Dialogue
At the recent LSOW gathering (Leading in a Self-Organizing World) - I had the chance to briefly meet Tom Atlee. I encourage you to consider the invitation below and participate in this conversation.
As I have not had time to read everything on these links, do not assume I agree with everything said. If I actually read everything, I will come back to you and let you know my thoughts. What I have read, I find interesting and worthy of conversation.
Either go directly to the link or take time to read Tom's recommendations. I appreciate Tom's thoughts behind his decision to participate and share this with everyone and wanted to share his insights with you. Thx, Elaine
Open Government Dialogue
http://opengov.ideascale.com/
A letter from Tom Atlee, the Co-Intelligence Institute:
Dear friends,
On January 21st, U.S. President Obama issued a Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government, calling for an unprecedented level of openness in government. In the memorandum, the President outlined three principles for promoting a more open government: transparency, participation, and collaboration. Now, Obama is calling on U.S.
citizens to help shape how that commitment is fulfilled.
I hope this is a sign the administration is committed to really engaging our diverse population. A number of their past dialogue initiatives have been motivated more by mobilizing support for the administration's agenda. That is fine for the world of partisan politics, but is not the kind of whole-system inclusive co- intelligent politics I've been promoting for the last decade.
This new invitation from the Obama administration COULD be a turning point. It seems to offer us an opportunity to participate in creating participatory governance. Time will tell if the administration is actually serious about this. Meanwhile, my sense of possibility suggests it is worth imagining that they are.
Chaos theorists tell us that "initial conditions" can have a profound impact on what happens next, out of proportion to the initial energies involved. This is the so-called "butterfly effect" in which micro-currents from the flap of a butterfly's wings get caught up in feedback dynamics that generate a storm a thousand miles away.
If we take an optimistic view of this opportunity, Obama is inviting us to flap our butterfly wings as his administration begins its efforts to make the governmental machinery more accessible and responsive to citizen engagement. They've set up a website to gather ideas from the field, get them commented on and voted up or down, and then to discuss the leading proposals and weave them into a program.
I've browsed over the website, voted on a couple of dozen proposals, added a few comments, and finally added a proposal of my own. On the chance that this just MIGHT be a breakthrough moment, I urge you to take 20-60 minutes to do this yourself. There are many very excellent proposals there, as well as some deeply flawed ones.
At the very least, I ask you to consider voting for the items below, which I consider offer the most leverage for creating a more co- intelligent democracy.
The brainstorming, commenting, and voting stage of this process is open to the public until Thursday, May 28, 2009. So if you want to join this effort, please do so now.
My recommendations for your consideration, comment, and vote:
1. Use Randomly Selected Citizen Deliberative Councils to tap the collective wisdom of We the People
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2971-4049
This is my proposal, described in full below.
2. A national citizens' assembly to represent the people's wisdom
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2535-4049
This proposal comes closest to mine, although it focuses on only one form of citizen deliberative council -- Citizen Assemblies
-- unfortunately the most elaborate and expensive one. But it is grounded in the same theory about how to generate a wise voice-of-the- whole.
3. Ask Federal Agencies to Adopt the Core Principles for Public Engagement
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2510-4049
This is the consensus document project I engaged in with the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation, that I described in my April 6th mailing. You might also like to search and vote for the
IAP2 principles, another powerful, although less broadly agreed-to set of guidelines submitted to this Open Government site.
4. Promise USA - National Network of Citizen Conversation
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2632-4049
This is a broad dialogue project which, while not actually producing the kind of coherent "voice of the whole" that I believe we urgently need, includes facilitation by Girl Scouts, which I think is a brilliant innovation! If instituted, its conversations could include discussing the findings of national citizen deliberative councils.
5. A "Plan B" when Congress doesn't Represent: Better and National Ballot Initiatives
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2469-4049
I favor this national ballot initiative idea because the referenced proposal has a Citizens-Jury-like deliberation built into it to evaluate ballot initiatives. That one modification goes far to salvage the ballot initiative process currently so corrupted at the state level with special interest influence.
6. From Bottom Up: Increasing the quality and quantity of local citizenry engagement with critical public issues and the government
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2859-4049
This offers a general perspective I would love to see adopted by governments everywhere.
Thank you for any exercise of your citizenship you wish to practice in this forum.
May this part of the Journey prepare us well for what is to come.
Coheartedly,
Tom
====================
MY PROPOSAL TO THE OPEN GOVERNMENT SITE
Use Randomly Selected Citizen Deliberative Councils to tap the collective wisdom of We the People
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2971-4049
Ad hoc, randomly selected, well-informed citizen deliberative councils like Citizens Juries, Citizen Assemblies, and Consensus Conferences have been used hundreds of times around the world to provide policy guidance to public officials and the citizenry. The U.S. lags far behind in their use.
These similar approaches all enable a microcosm of a country or community to generate informed public judgment about specific issues.
They are not legislatures. They are temporary councils, more like juries, but they deliberate on public issues rather than private guilt, and they are far more actively engaged in becoming informed than any jury can be. They get professional help in hearing each other and creatively deliberating.
As with juries, random selection (a) creates greater diversity than one finds in a legislature, (b) makes it much harder for corrupting influences to skew the results, and (c) levels the conversation with an assumption that all participants are peers. Also like a jury, a citizen deliberative council disbands as soon as it completes its work.
These councils can be used for any number of purposes -- to recommend solutions, to evaluate proposed legislation or ballot initiatives, to evaluate the performance of public officials or interview politicians seeking election, and more. They are useful wherever a dependable, informed, reflective non-partisan (or "transpartisan") "voice of the whole" is desired. Their recommendations can be advisory, or a mandate, or they can be put to a vote by the electorate.
A related process, a citizens' Wisdom Council, could serve as an annual "state of the union address" by a group of randomly selected citizens officially convened for the purpose. They would not be assigned an issue to deliberate, but would have a creative conversation for several days and come to consensus conclusions they would then share with the country. Whatever they came up with would certainly stimulate much discussion!
The point I would like to raise in this proposal for discussion is that randomly selected councils of citizens can, under the right conditions, generate far wiser recommendations than vast dialogue and deliberation programs involving thousands or millions of people.
Random selection -- sortition -- was the foundation of Athenian Democracy. Well designed microcosms can be more demographically representative of a whole community than a self-selected group or an elected legislature -- although all three forms have their democratic roles. Perhaps most important in these times of tight budgets, government resources -- organizational, informational and facilitation -- can be more focused, resulting in higher quality outcomes at less cost.
This approach can also complement broader community or national dialogues. The special outcomes of citizen deliberative councils can be fed into the more broadly participative dialogues and deliberations proposed here by others. The outcomes of citizen deliberative councils add a totally new voice -- the voice of the whole -- to the usually partisan public discourse we think of as democracy.
For more information on this approach and links to the various related practices, see http://www.co-intelligence.org/ CDCUsesAndPotency.html.
Why is this idea important?
This approach provides an inexpensive, effective way to bring the voice of the whole community or country into partisan public discourse or to provide useful, thoughtful advice to policy-makers.
________________________________
Tom Atlee • The Co-Intelligence Institute • PO Box 493 • Eugene, OR 97440 http://www.co-intelligence.org • http://www.democracyinnovations.org
Read THE TAO OF DEMOCRACY • http://www.taoofdemocracy.com Tom Atlee's blog http://www.evolvingcollectiveintelligence.org
Please support our work. • Your donations are fully tax-deductible.
As I have not had time to read everything on these links, do not assume I agree with everything said. If I actually read everything, I will come back to you and let you know my thoughts. What I have read, I find interesting and worthy of conversation.
Either go directly to the link or take time to read Tom's recommendations. I appreciate Tom's thoughts behind his decision to participate and share this with everyone and wanted to share his insights with you. Thx, Elaine
Open Government Dialogue
http://opengov.ideascale.com/
A letter from Tom Atlee, the Co-Intelligence Institute:
Dear friends,
On January 21st, U.S. President Obama issued a Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government, calling for an unprecedented level of openness in government. In the memorandum, the President outlined three principles for promoting a more open government: transparency, participation, and collaboration. Now, Obama is calling on U.S.
citizens to help shape how that commitment is fulfilled.
I hope this is a sign the administration is committed to really engaging our diverse population. A number of their past dialogue initiatives have been motivated more by mobilizing support for the administration's agenda. That is fine for the world of partisan politics, but is not the kind of whole-system inclusive co- intelligent politics I've been promoting for the last decade.
This new invitation from the Obama administration COULD be a turning point. It seems to offer us an opportunity to participate in creating participatory governance. Time will tell if the administration is actually serious about this. Meanwhile, my sense of possibility suggests it is worth imagining that they are.
Chaos theorists tell us that "initial conditions" can have a profound impact on what happens next, out of proportion to the initial energies involved. This is the so-called "butterfly effect" in which micro-currents from the flap of a butterfly's wings get caught up in feedback dynamics that generate a storm a thousand miles away.
If we take an optimistic view of this opportunity, Obama is inviting us to flap our butterfly wings as his administration begins its efforts to make the governmental machinery more accessible and responsive to citizen engagement. They've set up a website to gather ideas from the field, get them commented on and voted up or down, and then to discuss the leading proposals and weave them into a program.
I've browsed over the website, voted on a couple of dozen proposals, added a few comments, and finally added a proposal of my own. On the chance that this just MIGHT be a breakthrough moment, I urge you to take 20-60 minutes to do this yourself. There are many very excellent proposals there, as well as some deeply flawed ones.
At the very least, I ask you to consider voting for the items below, which I consider offer the most leverage for creating a more co- intelligent democracy.
The brainstorming, commenting, and voting stage of this process is open to the public until Thursday, May 28, 2009. So if you want to join this effort, please do so now.
My recommendations for your consideration, comment, and vote:
1. Use Randomly Selected Citizen Deliberative Councils to tap the collective wisdom of We the People
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2971-4049
This is my proposal, described in full below.
2. A national citizens' assembly to represent the people's wisdom
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2535-4049
This proposal comes closest to mine, although it focuses on only one form of citizen deliberative council -- Citizen Assemblies
-- unfortunately the most elaborate and expensive one. But it is grounded in the same theory about how to generate a wise voice-of-the- whole.
3. Ask Federal Agencies to Adopt the Core Principles for Public Engagement
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2510-4049
This is the consensus document project I engaged in with the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation, that I described in my April 6th mailing. You might also like to search and vote for the
IAP2 principles, another powerful, although less broadly agreed-to set of guidelines submitted to this Open Government site.
4. Promise USA - National Network of Citizen Conversation
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2632-4049
This is a broad dialogue project which, while not actually producing the kind of coherent "voice of the whole" that I believe we urgently need, includes facilitation by Girl Scouts, which I think is a brilliant innovation! If instituted, its conversations could include discussing the findings of national citizen deliberative councils.
5. A "Plan B" when Congress doesn't Represent: Better and National Ballot Initiatives
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2469-4049
I favor this national ballot initiative idea because the referenced proposal has a Citizens-Jury-like deliberation built into it to evaluate ballot initiatives. That one modification goes far to salvage the ballot initiative process currently so corrupted at the state level with special interest influence.
6. From Bottom Up: Increasing the quality and quantity of local citizenry engagement with critical public issues and the government
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2859-4049
This offers a general perspective I would love to see adopted by governments everywhere.
Thank you for any exercise of your citizenship you wish to practice in this forum.
May this part of the Journey prepare us well for what is to come.
Coheartedly,
Tom
====================
MY PROPOSAL TO THE OPEN GOVERNMENT SITE
Use Randomly Selected Citizen Deliberative Councils to tap the collective wisdom of We the People
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/2971-4049
Ad hoc, randomly selected, well-informed citizen deliberative councils like Citizens Juries, Citizen Assemblies, and Consensus Conferences have been used hundreds of times around the world to provide policy guidance to public officials and the citizenry. The U.S. lags far behind in their use.
These similar approaches all enable a microcosm of a country or community to generate informed public judgment about specific issues.
They are not legislatures. They are temporary councils, more like juries, but they deliberate on public issues rather than private guilt, and they are far more actively engaged in becoming informed than any jury can be. They get professional help in hearing each other and creatively deliberating.
As with juries, random selection (a) creates greater diversity than one finds in a legislature, (b) makes it much harder for corrupting influences to skew the results, and (c) levels the conversation with an assumption that all participants are peers. Also like a jury, a citizen deliberative council disbands as soon as it completes its work.
These councils can be used for any number of purposes -- to recommend solutions, to evaluate proposed legislation or ballot initiatives, to evaluate the performance of public officials or interview politicians seeking election, and more. They are useful wherever a dependable, informed, reflective non-partisan (or "transpartisan") "voice of the whole" is desired. Their recommendations can be advisory, or a mandate, or they can be put to a vote by the electorate.
A related process, a citizens' Wisdom Council, could serve as an annual "state of the union address" by a group of randomly selected citizens officially convened for the purpose. They would not be assigned an issue to deliberate, but would have a creative conversation for several days and come to consensus conclusions they would then share with the country. Whatever they came up with would certainly stimulate much discussion!
The point I would like to raise in this proposal for discussion is that randomly selected councils of citizens can, under the right conditions, generate far wiser recommendations than vast dialogue and deliberation programs involving thousands or millions of people.
Random selection -- sortition -- was the foundation of Athenian Democracy. Well designed microcosms can be more demographically representative of a whole community than a self-selected group or an elected legislature -- although all three forms have their democratic roles. Perhaps most important in these times of tight budgets, government resources -- organizational, informational and facilitation -- can be more focused, resulting in higher quality outcomes at less cost.
This approach can also complement broader community or national dialogues. The special outcomes of citizen deliberative councils can be fed into the more broadly participative dialogues and deliberations proposed here by others. The outcomes of citizen deliberative councils add a totally new voice -- the voice of the whole -- to the usually partisan public discourse we think of as democracy.
For more information on this approach and links to the various related practices, see http://www.co-intelligence.org/ CDCUsesAndPotency.html.
Why is this idea important?
This approach provides an inexpensive, effective way to bring the voice of the whole community or country into partisan public discourse or to provide useful, thoughtful advice to policy-makers.
________________________________
Tom Atlee • The Co-Intelligence Institute • PO Box 493 • Eugene, OR 97440 http://www.co-intelligence.org • http://www.democracyinnovations.org
Read THE TAO OF DEMOCRACY • http://www.taoofdemocracy.com Tom Atlee's blog http://www.evolvingcollectiveintelligence.org
Please support our work. • Your donations are fully tax-deductible.
Add a Comment
-
Comment by Elaine Hansen on June 1, 2009 at 6:13pm -
here's an update to this orginal post
A Message from the White House
Last week, the White House launched an unprecedented online process for public engagement in policymaking. That process began with a week of Brainstorming, hosted by the National Academy of Public Administration.
You have shared almost 900 submissions and 33,000 votes on ideas ranging from strategies for making government data more accessible to legal and policy impediments to transparency. Thank you!
The Brainstorming phase is drawing to an official close tonight at midnight. We are reviewing all material on the site in preparation for the Discussion Phase, which begins on Wednesday June 3rd. We?ll be distilling both the ideas from the Brainstorming and the comments from an online dialogue with government employees that took place earlier this spring on the MAX federal wiki. All comments from MAX have been publicly posted on the Open Government website.
to read more go here
A Small Group on Facebook
Forum
Great Opportunity 1 Reply
Started by Joan + Michael Hoxsey in Announcements. Last reply by John Burik Oct 14.
Online Conversation: COMMUNITY - The Structure of Belonging 6 Replies
Started by Randy Weeks in Books. Last reply by Andrew MacDonald Oct 14.
The Gripping Side of Poetry 1 Reply
Started by Mark Finfrock in Books. Last reply by Elaine Hansen Aug 3.
Music Event 1 Reply
Started by Mark Finfrock in Announcements. Last reply by Elaine Hansen Jul 27.
Job Announcement- Center for Progressive Leadership, Paid Intern and Program Manager
Started by Collette Thompson in Announcements Sep. 10, 2008.
Groups
-
2009 Summer Intensive ...
7 members
-
YASG
7 members
-
Common Conversations
10 members
-
People with talent to ...
1 member
-
Volunteers: We need you!
3 members
Badge
© 2009 Created by ASG admin
You need to be a member of A Small Group to add comments!
Join this Ning Network