Can We Make Congress Less Dumb About Technology?
from the one-can-hope! dept
Earlier this week, a bunch of organizations -- including Techdirt's own sister organization, the Copia Institute -- announced the launch of a new project, called Future Congress. It's a coalition of organizations, some of whom rarely agree on anything with some of the other members. It is made up of organizations with a variety of political viewpoints and policy ideas. But, this coalition does agree one one thing: we need to stop Congress from being so damn clueless about technology.
For many years, we've talked about the unfortunate decision by a Newt Gingrich-led Congress back in the mid-90s to dismantle the Office of Technology Assessment (or OTA). This was the organization that was a non-partisan, careful think tank focused on providing useful technology briefings to anyone in Congress who needed it. And yet, just as technology was becoming central to our every day lives, Congress defunded it (technically, the office still exists on the books, but it has no funding and no staff). Over the years there have been many calls to bring OTA back, and every so often someone in Congress floats a bill... which always gets shot down (the latest was just a few months ago).
The goal of the Future Congress coalition is to try to convince Congress to fix this -- for its own good. For many, many, many years now, we've highlighted how every time there's a hearing related to issues regarding technology, nearly all of our elected officials come off looking totally clueless to a degree that is outright embarrassing. They could easily fix this -- in a way that will both stop making them look clueless in front of the world and likely lead to better policy outcomes. Hopefully, they realize this.
I will note that last month there were some baby steps towards this, with Congress putting some language into an appropriations bill that fund a study of reviving the OTA while also moving to let the GAO take on some of the work that OTA used to do. It's unclear if this will actually survive or do very much, and Congress should be willing to step up and do much more. Hopefully, this Future Congress coalition will help make it clear to Congress why it should stop being so ignorant on technology -- especially when it has the means to better educate itself.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: congress, future congress, gao, office of technology assessment, ota, tech literacy, technology
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Superfluous Wording
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Superfluous
Why would rational people select "technology" as a prime focus of reforming Congress ?
(sounds like standard special-interest political lobbying)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Superfluous
Tech is one area that is fact rich with readily available sources of data as opposed to other areas in which congress is deficient.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
From the two people digging the hole, five filling it in dept.
I doubt it! Especially when their paymasters (hard and soft money providers) have an agenda and regulating technology to benefit them (we aren't even on the list) is high on the list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dumb or?
"Can We Make Congress Less Dumb About Technology?"
As someone in IT I'm quite sure our leaders are technologically inept. I've dealt with too many people in positions like that, and they are willfully, arrogantly hostile to having their computer explained to them. (Don't tell me what to do, just make it work!)
On top of this, our representatives are paid - and paid well - by special interests to make "dumb" decisions that are written by lobbyists. It's their top priority.
So calling them "Dumb" is off the mark, IMHO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Come on, Mike, even you have to know about Betteridge's law of headlines.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[All these responses answering the rhetorical.]
Do not go gentle into that good night...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do we realy want to
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...you know, it might be helpful if there were comments on this article that weren't just variations on "lolno".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ha! "Thad" The Ant Slayer is taking shots at other fanboys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I do see a trend toward some candidates refusing PAC money or otherwise resisting special interest influence. It's a start.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not until you properly use "dumb" and "stupid".
Slanging in a trite colloquial mistake while implying lack of ability in others is ridiculous. If you expect to be taken seriously on an important matter, then you must at least use words with precision, if not be a precisian. -- Anyone who has to look up that word, isn't. -- On other hand, the PhD papers I've waded through use multiplicity of syllables as a toy to rib all the other academics and/or tool to hide the paucity of thought from those simple folk whom they sneer at. -- That's even before they make up "math" that has no referent in reality. -- Anyhoo, just say what you mean, and mean what you say.
As Alfred E Einstein said: "Ein Geseillschaft macht kurz der werte. TRES kurz. Mit dem choppenhalfer."
Whatever party school your parents paid for clearly had already degenerated about my high school level if let your lousy grammar pass. You reflect badly on all your teachers.
Oh, and by the way, the topic here is only vehicle to advertise your practically moribund "sister organization", the one which is "supported" by your Uncle Google and other Silicon Valley corporations to put out propaganda. -- Heh, heh! "sister organization"! Good one! That's actually just YOU, Masnick! -- Another key point to convincing writing is to NOT aggrandize particularly with FALSE euphemisms. Sheesh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not until you properly use "dumb" and "stupid".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not until you properly use "dumb" and "stupid".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not until you properly use "dumb" and "stupid".
"Intellectualism" -og
FTFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not until you properly use "dumb" and "stupid".
This coming from the guy who just murdered grammar and the English language in the same sentence. I thought you were a "precisian"? Compared to your grammar, Mike's looks like a candidate for a Pulitzer.
And you reflect badly on the human race.
Guess you're just an admitted liar and a troll after all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can we get a Congress that is less dumb...
Only if we get candidates worth voting for. In my area lately the only worthy choice has been "None of the above" but that choice does not appear on my ballot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technology, progressives, stupid ideas and America
And yet, with all that technology at their disposal, and with all the message amplification that comes with controlling that technology, Trump was elected. And even with every news channel blaring that Kavanaugh is a gang-rapist and sexual-predator and blind-drunk, all the recent polling shows that Republicans, and not Democrats, are becoming more committed than ever to supporting Trump and his agenda, and the American values abandoned by Democrats.
Democrats and progressives all but own the technology of communication. And yet their support has been, and continues to be, evaporating. Witness the ACLU and their ridiculous commercial comparing Kavanaugh to Cosby. Effective? Yes. To bring out Republicans to contribute and vote against guilt by association.,
America is Watching. Integrity Matters to Americans. Americans will Vote their will again, Kavanaugh will be confirmed, and Republicans will gain in both the House and the Senate.
Technology does not help stupid ideas. Watch and see.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Technology, progressives, stupid ideas and America
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Technology, progressives, stupid ideas and America
Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
“Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: “Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.”
Soon, there will be very little doubt that Kavanaugh is a member of SCOTUS.
Sometimes what this crazy behavior of the Democrats (as well as your stupid retort) reminds me of is how much I love this country. America, uniquely in the world, accepts the premise that letting idiots and liars speak in public has it’s good side. When they embarrass themselves, repeatedly and publicly, it is a much more forceful condemnation than anything anyone else could ever say.
Speak on, friend. I’m really interested.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: “Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.”
letting idiots and liars speak in public has it’s good side. When they embarrass themselves, repeatedly and publicly, it is a much more forceful condemnation than anything anyone else could ever say
I fully agree. The judge took one look at your drivel and decided that the inventor of email could not be defined. Great job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Goddamn you’re on a roll tonight! Most of the regular trolls don’t have the awareness to self criticise so accurately. Keep it up bro, the truth will set you free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In fact, it looks like Congress is on a roll, Grassley calling out fake news, Tom Cotton accurately calling out the Anarchists, Mansion (I always liked him) about to vote for Kavanaugh. I guess we will see in a few days.
That would be something, woudn’t It. Rolling right over the crazy liberals, both here, in the Senate, in SCOTUS, and then at the Polls.
Roll On, Baby!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wonder what it feels like to live with a mindset of absolute certainty—to think that you know the truth of every matter better than God, to believe that your way is the best way and your thoughts are the best thoughts and your dick is the best dick.
I wuold ask Donald Trump, but considering his busy schedule, I guess I will have to settle for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But as an American, you can be certain about the Constitution. As long as good men will stand up for what is right (like Trump, Graham, Cotton, Grassley and others), due process will be a certainty in the US. Presumption of Innocence will be a certainty.
Just imagine how much fun Kavanaugh is going to have on the court after this fiasco. He will make it a life mission to right the wrongs he and other good Americans have been subjected to, here, in the News, in the Senate, and other places.
MAGA. Confirm Kavanaugh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Protip Cowboy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey bro
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey bro
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Oh yes, like all those thousands of innocents that were prosecuted for rioting who didn't actually riot. Or the millions of people who visited a protest site the DOJ wanted to be exposed and prosecute. Or the blatant lying and ignoring of facts surrounding the NN repeal. Or the continual railing against due process in the Russia investigation, threats to fire them, pass executive orders to make it stop, etc... I could go on. Yes, due process abounds in this administration.
Oh? And how is he going to do that. He can't make laws, he is only one voice, and he can only overturn laws that are clearly unconstitutional (if a majority of the other justices agree).
Looks like he's probably not going to have much fun, even if he is confirmed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I couldn’t have said it better.
Try not being so hard on yourself though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: “Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.”
Yes, and I called he would win when he first announced it. Why? Because he was a "throw the bums out" vote. He came out of nowhere, not from within the typical parties and originally ran as an independent. He started off his whole campaign with his "drain the swamp" slogan. Of course he won. People are sick of the status quo, Trump was an alternative to the status quo. A bad alternative but an alternative nonetheless.
That's the only reason he won. Not because he would actually be good at being POTUS, not because he had some magical quality that everyone rushed to, no, he offered the American people an alternative to a bad situation. The fact that most couldn't recognize that that alternative was rushing from the frying pan into the fire didn't matter to the voters.
Yep. And Trump has done that in spades. He may be POTUS, that doesn't mean he's very good at it, or that he will win a second term. America has had just about all of him they can take.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: “Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.”
He’ll make them take more regardless of whether they want to take it. After all, when you’re a big star, they’ll let you do anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: “Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: “Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.”
Lots of people said he stood little-to-no chance of even winning the GOP nomination in 2015. Do not trust to hope.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: “Stupid ideas and stupid comments speak for themselves.”
Now that he's had a chance to fall flat on his face in the mud, his chances of re-election are slim. If even his own party is abandoning him, I doubt he's got great chances in the next election. Even if he did somehow manage to get re-elected, he'd be a lame duck since I think other parties would sweep the rest of the docket.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For best results...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: For best results...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: For best results...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: For best results...
Wishful thinking, I know ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
silly kid
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: silly kid
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Challenged Accepted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Challenged Accepted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Challenged Accepted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Congress
No. Not without use of experimental surgery and a massive lightning conductor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Congress
So at this point I'm legit wondering if all the people making that same joke are commenting without reading any of the other comments first, or have actually read the other comments, decided "Yup, somebody definitely needs to make that joke again," and then posting it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The short answer is, most engineers, chemists, and mathematicians don't WANT to do what it takes to make congress work (and wouldn't do it well if they tried.) Instead, lawyers, insurance salesmen, and life coaches gravitate to those offices--and, when they know what the right thing is, and care to do it, they are able to do it.
Congresscritters DON'T (and never will) hire "intelligent" or "knowledgeable" people. They will always hire people they trust--close friends, long-time supporters, people who (they KNOW) will help them. And, for a fast-blatherer, intelligence itself is an untrusted thing--the intelligent blatherer could be a faster blatherer--thus, a superior rival rather than a help.
And a blatherer type doesn't WANT an intelligent answer. He wants a quick answer that won't hurt his friends--very much.
I don't have the solution. Mike has had good success becoming a resource for congressional aides. And that's perhaps the best thing a nerd can do.
The rest of us help best by keeping the conversation civil and nonpartisan. Mark down the trolls, gratuitous insults and offensive language--AND partisans of all flavors; NEVER reply to them. There are lots of toilets online; let this site be a safe drinking fountain instead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SIMPLE ANSWER
If they didnt learn on their own
If they didnt learn over time
If they didnt learn from their CHILDREN, frineds, family..
ITS A LOST CAUSE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Looks like a good group. Except for a few bad apples.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]