Unofficial Voice of the Utah Senate Majority
Welcome to The Senate Site
Monday, May 04, 2009A better conversation between citizens and elected leaders - how do we get there?
By Lyle Hillyard
Senator, District 25 I spend a lot of time after each session meeting with groups and discussing what we did and why. I generally like to begin my discussion by letting the meeting attendees ask me questions so I have some idea what they want to hear. I am also interested in finding out what they have heard about the session. I am always amazed at how many small things that have never passed become the focal points, while the really important issues are missed. For example, one question asked me recently was how we were going to enforce the bill that passed that taxed caffeine. When I explained that this was suggested by a House member in what I thought to be a more tongue-in-cheek effort and no such bill was even seriously discussed, the person seemed truly surprised. Often - especially with the more weighty bills - I would love to have intelligent and thoughtful input from the public, but I can generally only find it by calling people I know for their opinions. With the Internet and the access given to people all over the state to follow what we do on an hourly basis, we still don’t do a very good job about educating the public about the process or the issues. I guess the press has found the best way to get people involved; pick up the oddity, such as a comment, and only portray that oddity. Then it leaves the impression that the oddity was the only thing we did. I have found that public meetings during the session are either very poorly attended or attended only by special interest groups with an agenda to influence us, thus not receiving the public input we need on some of the weighty issues. Give me your thoughts. What can we do during the session to make the general public more aware of the issues we are really considering and receive their suggestions and input?
posted by Laura B at 10:20 AM | Link
|
Connect & EngageRadio Free SenateKeep in TouchTwitter UpdatesYour Government 2.0 Lab
Current Discussions
Senate Site Feed
|
© 2008. All rights reserved. Designed by Jeremy Wright & His Brother-In-Law
10 Comments:
Webcams, everywhere.
The blogger pressers were great, and can also be used as a venue to attract more than interested bloggers, but the public at large.
And, with all honesty, the request for input has to be universal, and frequent. Buttars sucked up all the air this past session (with a little help from a few "Chili's is a bar" comments), and it's not fair to blame the press. Can we expect them to ignore it? Should we? Often what I see attempts to control the press, or consistent, ingrained FEAR of the traditional press (Ahem, Urquhart, Hughes, Stephenson...) results in a distasteful public who choose to not pay attention. I'm sure these valiant few feel they are sewing the seeds of revolution. But what they don't realize is that in every state, and every bloc of voters, such behavior only raises suspicion. We have many reason to doubt the press, for sure, especially after the lead up to Iraq, but voters still have more reason to doubt politicians. And it's not only the political junkie that will avoid an unreliable, or seemingly "sketchy" source, but also the soccer mom.
I think that it is a choice is important to remember. Webcams, twitter, chats, online conferences, text updates from your rep... all great things, all should be employed where possible, but the Trib and D-News are still going to be the sources that drive the issues, outside of a handful of interested bloggers. And the most common mistake made is the assumption (take a look at the current RNC twitter efforts) that just using the technology is enough. It's not. You have to be supplying information that proves reliable consistently enough that people believe there is a benefit in their paying attention to what comes directly from the body, or requests from the body for their input.
The tools are there, and they are easy to use. But until you can convince voters that your message of inquiry, and your request for their engagement is sincere, the tools are going to read as gimmicks, not outreach.
Maybe instead of trying to educate the entire state as to everything that's going on in the legislature, each individual representative should work on educating their constituents as to what they are focusing on. With technology today, I really don't see why each representative can't take 5-10 minutes each day to post a blog or send an email out to all their constituents explaining what they're doing and the positions they're taking.
I agree with most of what Jake and Jason have said before me, Senator Hillyard. Another thing that I think would work wonders is if there's a topic that you think is being undercovered in the media or needs more public awareness, lawmakers should not be afraid to approach the media outlets in their areas and ask for help spreading the word.
From my experience, the outlets will agree to do a story or write something up 95 percent of the time, unless they really deem the issue not newsworthy. Speaking from my experience at The Herald Journal and certainly now at KVNU radio, I can almost guarantee that if you or Reps. Webb, Hunsaker or Draxler approached me and said, "Tyler, do you have some time this week for us to talk about XYZ Bill? It needs more public attention than it's getting," I would get you on the air ASAP.
For the most part, the media does a fairly good job of prioritizing what's news and what's not news, but we're not perfect, and part of our role as community watchdogs is to get out the information that our elected officials think needs to get out there once in a while.
I think this would help a lot.
Jason and Jake are both in the right track. The problem is not what the press cover, it's how the voters feel about their government. Despite the efforts of the Senate Site to reach out (for example) too many people view the government as out of reach and non-responsive. When the senate majority reaches it it is easily dismissed as an empty gesture. When the senate minority reaches out it can be dismissed as a waste of time because they have no power.
The solution to that problem is as Jake said, for individual representatives to reach out to their individual districts. It can be done - as proven by my rep who blogged every single day of the session. (I'm sure it took much more than 10 minutes of her time each day.) If each rep and senator can convince their constituents that they are accessible then the voters can realize that they can connect with their government by paying attention to two people (at the state level anyway). If they learn to join the mailing list or follow the blog for their rep and their senator they may feel that they can make a difference and pay more attention to the process. Then they can hold their rep and their senator accountable for what they are doing rather than getting swept away in the tide of the entire legislative body.
The things the media cover may get people up in arms, but usually they vent their frustrations and then drop the subject as they return back to the regularly scheduled program. If they were to pay attention to what their elected leaders are doing then they can recruit new candidates to challenge the incumbents if they are unhappy with who they have now. They can contact their elected leaders to express their frustration and it does not take very many people to get the attention of a state rep or state senator if they seem to be ignoring an individual.
It might be helpful for some legislators to compare how much of their time during the session is spent with paid lobbyists instead of constituents.
The responsibility would fall back on the legislators to set limits upon themselves so time is freed up for the folks back home.
Maybe set up a regular weekly brown bag time at the Capitol to inform and get input. Include technology for more access. The regular communication might cut back on the email deluge which could allow for more time spent on the important stuff, not off-hand comments.
I think part of the problem is our legislators are too busy for us during the session and we're too busy during the rest of the year to think about the legislators.
Elect someone with less than triple my yearly income. Elect someone less than twice my age.
Let me vote online. Let me view all state and national issues on one website. Make it as easy to use as Amazon. Recommend legislation I might be interested in.
Don't say "Republican" or "Democrat". I don't want to hear it.
Stomp Rush Limbaugh. Tell Obama to shut up and go build some houses. Remove politics from primetime television.
Let me vote for issues and not for politicians.
The public has been largely delinquent in its responsibilities and there is a real lack of depth to reporting on government in Utah. These are the two biggest problems in my estimation. It is amazingly easy to get an audience with almost every Utah legislator if you are one of the legislator's constituents. You just have to care and try. And I mean care more than caring to whine.
As to some of the comments above, while you can and should expect the press to report the oddities, the public also must realize that with more than 100 legislators there will be some oddball things flying around. The public tend to view the legislature as a monolith, when it's really a whole bunch of individuals trying hash out solutions to big problems in a short time frame. Oddball ideas are pitched for many reasons, some of which are merely for effect, others with a sincere desire to effect the change they represent. Judge the legislature by what it passes, not by what one member pitches.
Utah has an amazingly accessible government, especially the legislative branch. The public needs to engage, rather than merely whine.
More representative and competitive elections (no, not what the Fair Boundaries folks are proposing).
Proportional representation using the single-transferable vote.
You'll get majority rule, but with proportional minority representation from different corners of Utah. A broader variety of viewpoints should lead to better solutions.
I am trying to offer a solution to our massive populous and our need for better representation. I have started a grassroots organization called US Acts! We are dedicated to creating year round voting on issues of importance that are clearly represented in debate format. Please visit our website and help us create this: www.usacts.org
President John F Kennedy benefitted tremendously from his family dinner debates. It helped him form his skills. US Acts! is determined to encourage this sport in every state of the union. May we all learn to debate intelligently, and may we develop an organization that sees to it that our decisions based upon intelligent debate make a difference in the world. Join US Acts! in creating a voting vehicle that will represent our democracy. Our representatives need our feedback and we need better representation. Let's work together in US Acts!
Visit www.usacts.org today!
Thank you!
Post a Comment
<< Home