It’s exciting. The new townhouse is incredible, my roommates (@ptklein and @scottlanford) are fantastic, and the opportunities for this neighborhood are seemingly limitless. It’s a part of town that could, without a doubt, use a little work, but it’s got a ton of potential. One of my goals—and our goals as residents here—is going to be to stay as involved with the surround neighborhood and Ward 5 as we possibly can be. We’re not just going to live here and sit idly by while lazy and corrupt politicians ruin a phenomenal part of the District just because they won’t do something to take advantage of the opportunities this area provides.

We’ll be at meetings. We’ll be vocal on Twitter. And we’ll even be blogging. Not here, but on a new, separate blog, and a new blog for the DC local blog ecosystem: Twoomies. Named after our joking term for ourselves (Twitter roomies = “twoomies”), we’ll be documenting the fun we have, our experiences here in Edgewood, and we’ll throw in a healthy helping of animal goodness, too. Make sure you’ve got it bookmarked, and stay tuned for more and more frequent updates.

Stay tuned.

Go read the job numbers from today.

Back? Ok good. Now re-read this part:

The Labor Department data showed private sector employment increased by 104,000, while government jobs continued a downward trend, reporting a loss of 24,000 jobs.

Private sector? Check. They’re hiring. Not at huge paces, but they are hiring. Public sector? Nope. Our government is actually reducing the amount of jobs they provide. And for the most part, I blame that guy up there, Mitch McConnell.

For a Congress that’s supposed to be all about jobs (even though it’s really all about denying President Obama a second term), they’re being awfully hypocritical. Take some of the GOP’s favorite talking points, for example—they’re completely at odds with each other. Even “Create more jobs!” directly contradicts “Reduce the size of government!”

Republicans in Congress are essentially saying that some jobs simply don’t count—specifically, government jobs. It’s fine, as long as it’s not public service, says the GOP.

Is that what we really want to promote? I’ve always thought public service was a good thing. That is was good and honorable to want to serve your country, whether in the military, through volunteerism, or through public service. Why do public sector jobs, apparently, not count anymore?

Of course the GOP would probably respond to this post saying that federal workers are lazy, and the the government is inefficient and can’t get anything done. But aren’t there better solutions to fixing that than cutting jobs? Republicans and their senseless, over-the-top “we need a surplus” agenda are causing the problem. We should be finding ways of training existing government workers to make the government work better. We should be trimming programs and unnecessary projects, yes, but we should do so in a way that salvages as many jobs as possible.

Anyway, my point is: I’m sick of hearing Republicans complain about slow job growth. Progressives and moderate conservatives are pushing to take three steps forward, while the far right is forcing us to take one step back.

America, please look at this carefully. Read, learn, watch, and observe closely. The problem here isn’t President Obama or his policies. It’s progress being held back by ancient ideals and outrageous politics and personal vendettas. That’s not the way a democracy should run.

Yes, I’m taking the LSAT. Just like I took the GRE last month, and I’ll probably take the GMAT a couple months from now. I’m doing it for pretty much the same reason I do most things like this: why not?

I have no idea what my future holds. Obviously, things are good right now, but grad school is—at some point—certainly on the horizon. With a degree in marketing, a degree in communications, and a minor in statistics, I’m lucky to be in a position where I have a great degree of flexibility over which graduate program I might pursue.

Given my passion for politics, government, and all the ins and outs of how our country works, law school does, perhaps someday, make sense for me. Obviously the LSAT is the first step. Wish me luck!

shortformblog: soupsoup: Visualization of Twitter Town Hall topics Press focuses on conflict/politic

Call me a crazy liberal, but I find it difficult to argue with the success and the good things that came out of the WPA. This article on Brainpicker got me thinking–while I agree with the idea of the stimulus, maybe we should’ve structured it a little more like we did way back when. Problem is, something like that would never happen today. It’s too much government power, it’s taking power away from the private sector. I can see conservatives now–they call Obama socialist already! What if he passed a package like this?

And of course that’s regardless of the results. There’s no doubt in my mind that a renaissance of the WPA to help us tackle the current crisis would’ve helped us recover more quickly than almost any other solution. But conservatives will be conservatives, and they would never in a million years even dream of support such a “radical” solution.

That’s not even to mention the cultural and artistic brilliance that came out of the era. Brainpicker said it best:

We just wish the political powers of the day would consider investing in such art-driven efforts the way the WPA did. What would $7 billion be, adjusted for inflation? Roughly $160 billion. And how does that compare to what today’s government is investing in war? As the kids say, just sayin’.

I couldn’t agree more. Check out some of the amazing posters on this Flickr set.

What do you think? Would you like to see this? Is it too “socialist” for you? I’m curious.

What is the Coffee Party? From their Web site, Coffee Party USA:

…aims to reinvigorate the public sphere, drawing from diverse backgrounds and diverse perspectives, with the goal of expanding the influence of the People in America’s political arena. We do not require nor adhere to any preexisting ideology.  We encourage deliberation guided by reason amongst the many viewpoints held by our members. We see our diversity as a strength, not a weakness, because we believe that faithful deliberation from multiple vantage points is the best way to achieve the common good.  It is in the responsible and reasonable practice of deliberation that we hope to contribute to society.

Their Web site attracted more than 170,000 fans in its first week. Its Facebook page has already surpassed the numbers of the Tea Party, despite its much shorter existence so far. This isn’t a fringe group–these are rational people.

The “Coffee Party movement” is about embracing differing opinions, without screaming and going crazy. It’s about embracing diversity and empowering everyone. It’s about utilizing our government and elected officials to enable the people to achieve and succeed, but also curbing that influence before it gets out of hand. It’s about using our country’s wealth to rescue us from economic collapse–done!–and now pulling back and forming a hard and fast plan for reigning in the ballooning deficit. It’s about basic human rights for everyone, regardless of race, gender, or sexual preference.

This is mainstream America. I firmly believe we are no longer a center-right country. The right just so happens to be the loudest–because they will scream, shout, and sometimes even lie to get their beliefs (whether right or wrong) across. This movement is, I hope, something much stronger and more civil than that. It’s about using the facts, theory, ideas and innovation of the American people to make a difference. It’s about looking at our government and deciding who’s doing their job right, and who’s holding us back. Who is looking ahead to the future, and who is stuck in the 19th century.

That said, I think it’s a stupid name. As my friend Dan pointed out, it leaves itself easily open to attack–”stale,” “bitter,” etc. Ah well, we’ll see what happens. I’m not gonna sign up just yet, but I’ll be watching it closely.

I’m kind of excited. The national kick-off for the Coffee Party is tomorrow.

Panelists were:

• Brent Colburn, Director of External Affairs for the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
• Roxie Merritt, Director of New Media at the U.S. Department of Defense
• Richard Boly, Director of eDipomacy at the U.S. Department of State

It’s difficult to sum up over an hour of panel conversation. Throughout the course of the presentation, much of the discussion focused on challenges the government is facing to get into social media and take advantage of it in order to perform better in their respective functions as government agencies. So I’ll focus on that here, as well. Here’s, from what I heard, the three biggest challenges for government right now and how their working to overcome them.

1. Getting over the bureaucratic “hump”

One of the first and most memorable quotes of the morning came from Brent Colburn, at FEMA.

“Government needs to realize it’s not always the smartest person in the room,” he said. He said that sometimes the most innovative person in government is being the one to make a memo teaching everyone else how to understand things coming from the private sector–like social media.

Later on, he spoke about how, although it’s easier at a smaller agency like FEMA, the public needs to continue to push government for interaction. Roxie Merritt, at DoD, concurred, as did Richard Boly. Merritt said the first task is to convince the leadership, something that, surprisingly, has gone particularly well for DoD and State.

At DoD, Merritt said that Secretary Gates has made communications a priority. Looking at things like social media from a tactical standpoint, they’re being used by the enemy in the Middle East, and all over the world. If we don’t have a handle on it, we’re losing. Boly spoke about the priority Secretary Clinton has placed on new media with the Department of State. Failures in communication such as the Christmas Day underwear bomber obviously indicate they aren’t quite there yet, but they’re making progress.

2. Convincing the “middle”

The leadership is on board with social media. The new people coming into these agencies are already tech-savvy naturals with Facebook, Twitter, etc. So what’s the problem?

According to the panelists, it’s in the middle. Middle managers have been there the longest–even longer than the leadership, obviously. They’ve got the most at stake, and they’re typically the most reluctant and resistant to change. They see this technology, and they’re skeptics.

The trick is how to convince them of its value. As Richard Boly said, “[Social media] is not a passing fad, it’s crucial to the way we do business and we avoid it at our peril.”

State has already gone a long way towards convincing its employers. With the creation of an internal “e-suggestion box”, they’re already showing employees the power of crowdsourcing and social media. They’re made the suggestion system a true two-way conversation and used it effectively to enact some worthwhile changes at the department.

Take, for example, their bike-lending program, which came out of a suggestion from the e-suggestion box. After complaints that it took too long to travel the city via taxi, public transit, and personal vehicles, employees suggested bikes as a quick, easy and healthy means to get from place to place. The State Department took it to heart and started a program, even putting in showers for employees to use.

“What used to be water cooler discussion,” said Boly, “has become the crowdsourcing of solutions.” In one fell swoop, the e-suggestion box helped improve employees work atmosphere, empowered them as forces for change within the organization, and shown them the power of social media. Merritt suggested emphasizing communications tools in training courses for employees, to start them out with this mindset.

And for those afraid of social media? The Department of Defense has come up with a clever solution for that.

Many have feared the technology for national security concerns, and due to the fact that it’s often difficult to tell a legitimate source from an illegitimate one. At the Department of Defense they’ve created a registration system that registers all official DoD Web sites, accounts and social media presences. If it’s not on the list, it’s not cleared by DoD.

Colburn, at FEMA, made a good point about the issue, too. The old media isn’t dead, their role is just changing a little. He said it’s essential to maintain a good relationship and balance between old and new media, particularly for maintaining legitimacy. The “watchdog role” the old media play still applies, and like it or not they still serve as a credible source of information. By maintaining a good relationship with the old media, they can act as a legitimizing force.

Finally, Richard Boly at State had a great point to make, too. Part of credibility is about the relationships you already have. If you get followed, linked to, or re-tweeted by someone else influential, particularly in the technology and Web community, you gain credibility that way. It’s “credibility by association,” he said.

3. Creating a two-way conversation

The final challenge is, without a doubt, the largest. It’s a problem not just for government but for all users of social media–private corporations, individual people and government departments alike. How do you create that two-way flow of information? What if your reputation becomes tarnished by comments on your Facebook feed? How do you monitor it? How do you convince people you are real? Isn’t it easy to be overwhelmed?

All valid questions. But also, solvable ones.

Colburn said he didn’t have a lot of answers for those kinds of questions yet, but then he went on to prove that he actually has some pretty good ideas. He talked about social media presences having to pass the “smell test”–they have to prove they’re human. He said that expectation of ghost-twitterers and ghost-bloggers for important people has to be overcome. It’s all about the two-way interaction, he said, that will help build the trust.

Providing employees with the right tools is part of it. Colburn talked about how, on the ground in Haiti, the only form of communication FEMA employees had at first was texting via AT&T’s network. By having as many tools for communication as possible at their disposal–whether it’s texting, social media, or something else–they can do their job better. They can also be more actively present on social media and in the conversation.

Roxie Merritt at Defense said they’ve actually already had huge success reaching out to bloggers. Communications people at DoD have even started considering some bloggers part of the mainstream media! By reaching out to “chronic posters,” as she called them (people who reach out constantly and act as a force multiplier for spreading information), they’ve been successful at spreading word and creating a conversation.

The feedback to their social media presence is huge, said Merritt. She spoke of how there’s more tolerance for “less perfect” being built into the culture–I see it as a humanizing effect. It breaks down those traditional psychological barriers between “normal people” and important leaders.

As for concerns about comments, re-tweets, etc., Merritt was blunt: “You have to be pretty hard-skulled,” she admitted. They pretty much take it all. She said the screen on a limited extent, for sensitive information and possible national security threats, but for the most part they just try to respond to as much as possible. They take criticism and run with it, trying to improve as much as they can.

Moving from need-to-know to need-to-share

Overall, I obviously came away extremely impressed by the panelists. Not only did they know their stuff, but they had concrete accomplishments to show for their efforts. Many of these things I’d never even heard of, but they’re clearly having an effect.

One of the things that truly stuck with me from the panel discussion came from Richard Boly, at the State Department. He talked about how, during the Cold War, everything was on a need-to-know basis. Everyone was so paranoid and afraid of leaks and security issues that communication was absolutely kept to a minimum.

We’re living in very different times. No longer is it need-to-know, Boly said. We’re moving on to a “need-to-share” phase of government.

There are a lot of pros to this. Empowered employees, increased collaboration, greater openness and transparency, increased interaction with the public, bridging the divide between private industry innovation and government advances–the list could go on and on.

I’m excited to see what they come up with next.

Thanks so much to Gibraltar Associates and especially James Davis for inviting me to the event. Already looking forward to the next one!

These people are the cause behind DC’s cause movement. There is no question in my mind that these people are some of the most important people in the District of Columbia.

These people see more pain than anyone else in DC.
These people endure more frustration than the most frustrated politicians on Capitol Hill.
These people work harder than the hardest office workers the United States has ever produced.

These people put in hours upon hours upon hours of back-breaking, mind-numbing, heart-wrenching work, all for a cause. They want to make D.C.–and the United States–a better place to live. They want to make it a better place to work, a better place to eat, and even a better place to get sick. It’s amazing.

I heard comments describing our group last weekend as “a bomb waiting to explode”, a group with “collective momentum” to change the world. One attendee, Greg Bloom, said “Web sites don’t make change, and neither do rallies”. And he’s right. These people working on these causes, right here in D.C., they’re the ones that make change. And I can see it coming. It’s beautiful.

Now after leaving the conference, I began to feel a little overwhelmed. I was thinking back to the people I heard speak, flipping through my notes, shuffling through the business cards I picked up, and I realized that there’s a lot of work to be done. There’s a lot of causes out there. There’s a lot that needs fixin’. And for me, I didn’t even know where to start.

Should I volunteer for DC Food for All and help make D.C. sustainable and feed those in need? Or should I volunteer with Miriam’s Kitchen to feed the homeless? Or maybe I should go out and volunteer with the MLK Library’s Adult Literacy Resource Center and help teach people to read. Or I could even work with the Open Forum Foundation in their push for more open government.

See what I mean? But now I’ve realized that, really, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter where you start, as long as you start somewhere. You’ve got to get out here and do something. You’ve got to pick something you’re passionate about and go for it, help out, put some weekend hours into it. It’s worth it, because this is our city. This is everyone‘s country. And we can help make it better.

Personally, I’m hoping to get involved some this semester, if I don’t collapse under the load of schoolwork. Even if not this semester, though, I’m already formulating a plan for the summer to volunteer with ten different causes on ten different weekends, ten weeks in a row. Rest assured, you’ll hear more about that as it comes close.

In the meantime, I’ve assembled a list of organizations and people I heard about and/or met last weekend. The links for organizations will take you to their Web site, where you can find out how to get involved. The links for people will take you to their Twitter profile, where you can contact them directly. And finally, if you have any questions or want to know more about my experience, you can comment and/or e-mail me at alex.priest[at]mac.com. Click the read more for the full list. Thanks for reading, looking forward to seeing you volunteering one day soon.

I’ve done my best to categorize them–some fit into multiple categories, some don’t quite fit anywhere (Hub DC, for example) but ah well. Here they all are, regardless. Please let me know if you have any causes to add to my list, I’d love to turn this into a good, updated resource for friends/family, etc. Also, if you want to be on this list or want to fill in a missing last name, let me know! Just e-mail me (or comment) with your name, Twitter and/or e-mail, Web site, whatever.

Food DC Food for All (on Twitter) Miriam’s Kitchen DC Central Kitchen Food Not Bombs Rooting DC DC Food Finder Bread for the City (on Twitter) Health Regina Holliday’s Medical Advocacy Blog Education DC Urban Debate League Baha’i DC MLK Library Adult Literacy Resource Center Facilitating Leadership in Youth (F.L.Y.) General Social Welfare Save Our Safety Net The Hub DC (on Twitter) ProgressDC New Organizing Institute (on Twitter) Crisis Camp Government & Politics Open Forum Foundation GovLuv You2Gov Politics Under 30 Sunlight Foundation OpenMeetings.org

People Aaron Ginoza – Social Justice Camp DC organizer Jennifer Bonsall – Social Justice Camp DC organizer Kelli Shewmaker – Social Justice Camp DC organizer Greg Bloom – DC Food For All, Bread for the City, ProgressDC Wayne Burke – Open Forum Foundation George Chriss – OpenMeetings.org Noel Dickover – CrisisCamp, CongressCamp, Gov2.0 Jeri Ekdahl – politics, open government, women’s issues Gabriela – Sunlight Foundation Erica Grigg – environmental David Hale – National Institutes of Health Regina Holliday – health care Ben Merrion – MLK Library, adult literacy Joni Podschun – DC Food for All Alan Silberberg – You2Gov Charise Van Liew – Facilitating Leadership in Youth DC Liz Whitehurst – various causes

]]> http://alexpriest.com/2010/01/25/the-cause-behind-dcs-causes/feed/ 7