Web tech politics

One of the reasons I try to avoid political discussions is because, I feel, many of the national policy issues being discussed are unsolvable problems. I'm pragmatic. If a question doesn't have an answer, I move on to the next question. Am I concerned how the candidates in the upcoming 2008 Election (less than a month away as of this post) will react to the serious problems facing this country? Of course I am. I just don't know which of the policy-sets being discussed are better. They both have their benefits and drawbacks. I'm well informed on the issues and the proposed solutions, but I haven't really taken a stand. To me, neither stands out as better, they're just different.


Plus, most of the things being discussed don't directly effect the things I'm concerned about, right now, at this moment. For example, my tech interests. I'm extremely skeptical that the governing bodies and talking heads are even qualified to examine the deeply complex issues involved in making web related technology policy; I'm not even sure the role US government plays considering it's a worldwide issue. How do you even define "jurisdiction" in a global system? In any case, it seems to me that politicians can only pass laws in the abstract, applying old ideas that involve the telephone, television, radio, and print industries rather than addressing specific issues involved in something entirely new. The web, while tied to all that old stuff, has qualities that are unprecidented. I just don't think those guys in Congress entirely get it. I don't trust them not to screw it up.

Web technology doesn't get much airplay on the campaign trail. It's far too arcane for the masses to grasp, and, well, the candidates are looking to get elected by those masses. Still, the issue is of vital importance and it really should be addressed more indepth.

I try to stay out of politics because the issues I'm directly interested in are those covered by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (and sadly few others). It is my overriding political philosophy that if you keep electronic discourse open and running smoothly, all the other political issues have a better chance of actually being solved. EFF helps facilitate that as an advocacy group for digital freedoms.

As an example of how web tech plays into politics, take the domestic politics issue that does get airplay: The financial bailout of Wall Street. Here, transparency came to the forefront. Anyone with a desire to do so could pour through the actual bill that was passed and read exactly what was put into the bailout. In fact, for the first time in its history, the House of Representative's website was slowed to a crawl as millions of people logged on to read its contents. House.gov was forced to implement a digital traffic cop to handle all the requests. Massive access to unfiltered information like this was simply not available in old-school political discourse. Examining the bill right away just wasn't something any individual could do.

Web technology policies, I feel, aren't just fundamental, they're overriding in today's political landscape. We really need to put more focus on how congressional leaders are handling this.

Now, I was pleased to see that the presidential candidates did manage to take a stand on the issue of Net Neutrality. Popular Mechanics had a great article on this, and I give them props for echoing that these important issues are being overlooked in the race to the White House. Obama and McCain's stance on Net Neutrality are vastly different, and I'm not going to tell you which one to support. I will tell you that you should familiarize yourself with the issue and the candidate's positions, because however issues like Net Neutrality are finally resolved, it effects each and every one of us.