Bridging the Gap with Teleconferencing for Congress
Is there higher than acceptable disconnect between Members of Congress and the voters of the district they represent on matters of national, state, and local interest? If you said yes, then you agree with the Florida Whig Party.
The Florida Whig Party is in the process of crafting a resolution and/or platform plank that encourages the use of teleconferencing for Members of Congress (House and Senate) as well as Members of the Florida Legislature. Our discussions and postings on this site regarding outrageous use of state airplanes for questionable travel and the part-time status of our Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, and Chief Financial Officer as they all campaign full-time for higher offices, should provide adequate ammunition that the time has come for a fundamental discussion regarding modernization of the legislative process through teleconferencing hardware and software that will also empower and inform more people with a greater depth of access and information.
We are seeking your assistance, guidance, words, and wisdom in the crafting of Party policy. Review the following then use the contact form to express yourself and become involved. Established and newly forming coalitions are encouraged to make this a primary topic of conversation at one or more meetings. We also ask that journalists and bloggers from Florida and across the nation, write, discuss, and opine on the issue; feel free to call and quote the Party.
Should the Florida Whig Party support an effort to require Members of Congress (House and Senate) to telecommute and conduct business from their home state capitols on a regular and ongoing process?
Should the Florida Whig Party require that a minimum percentage of time while in elective office be conducted within the borders of the state rather than in Washington, D.C.?
If yes, what should that percentage be?
Has telecommunications technology become widely accepted and efficient that the time has come to sincerely discuss the broad positive and negative ramifications a decentralized legislative process?
Is it worth the cost to fly the Speaker of the House of Representatives and her staff, back and forth between San Francisco and Washington, D.C. on a private military jet on a regular basis?
Should Members of Congress be embedded as much as possible with We the People during hearings, discussions, votes, and readings of the bills presented or should they remain separate and apart with limited access?
Is Congress able to craft legislation that allows video-conferencing in order to constitute a quorum?
Should video-conferencing be used to examine witnesses when committees hold hearings and if so, under what circumstances?
What are the benefits of using a traditional meeting process?
Does the cost savings and public access of increased teleconference legislating outweigh in person legislating?
Does the voice of those in rural and remote areas of the nation have fair, equal, and balanced access to the legislative process?
Would telecommuting provide greater opportunity for We the People to witness committees at work?
Would parliamentary procedures be maintained through teleconferencing?
Should technology similar to that used by the military and the President be afforded to Congress to increase efficiency and effectiveness?
Should a vote of a Member of Congress be permitted when using teleconferencing technology?
How many committees should be operating at one time through teleconferencing?
Should each state maintain a teleconference center for their Congressional Members (House and Senate) and if so, should each state be required to locate the facility at the state capitol or permitted to have multiple facilities throughout the state?
Would teleconferencing reduce undue influence and pressure on party members to vote the party line?
Would reckless policies be minimized through decentralization?
Would known lobbyists and quiet peddlers of influence and power be reduced because of an increase in local vigilance by local media, interested individuals and groups?
Would the magnification of local exposure and attention increase the power of local political power based groups?
Would 92 year old United States Senator Robert Byrd (D), who has been a Senator from West Virginia since January 3, 1959, be able to effectively and efficiently handle teleconferencing technology?
What security upgrades to teleconference equipment, software, and facilities are necessary and if so, which federal or state pocket of taxes should pay?
What are the national security advantages and disadvantages to teleconferencing Congress?
Would the risk of a tactical strike on the United States Congress while in session be reduced?
Would the continuity of government positively or negatively impacted?
Would the families of Members of Congress improve by having their loved ones home more often?
Would fewer Members of Congress be required to purchase second homes in Washington, D.C. if teleconferencing was implemented?
Would We the People see fewer sex and financial scandals in Washington if Members of Congress were making effective and efficient use of teleconferencing?
Would the majority of We the People like to be able to look our elected officials in the eye to express our opinion and ask a question?
If unable to obtain an appointment or travel to Washington, D.C., would a webcam facilitate the process of connecting with your Member of Congress?
Article 1, Section 4 of the United States Constitution reads:
The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.
Article 1, Section 5 of the United States Constitution reads:
Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide. Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member. Each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such parts as may in their judgment require secrecy; and the yeas and nays of the members of either House on any question shall, at the desire of one fifth of those present, be entered on the journal. Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.
The Alaska State Legislature has long relied on automation for its core business, and it has won awards for its pioneering use of the Web to reach the public. The Information Services (IS) unit of LAA currently supports some 550 users, 60 of whom are elected officials. Many users are employed by the Administrative Services and Legal and Research Services groups, as well as other LAA divisions, such as Legislative Finance, Legislative Audit, the Ombudsman’s Office, and the Office of Victim’s Rights. The LAA IS staff must be responsive to the demands of each of the 60 legislators and the leaders of the legislative support units.
Alaska’s lawmakers collaborate principally by using communication software to pass documents back and forth. In addition to e-mail, legislators rely on instant messaging, to collaborate closely with each other, especially as specific elements of legislation reach their final form.
Automation also plays a major role in the actual legislative drafting process. Software programs have been integrated into a workflow systems developed by LAA to circulate draft material among legislators and their staffs.
Alaska’s Legislature is in session in Juneau for a mere 90 days per year. During the session, legislators move their offices and staffs to Juneau. When the session ends, legislators and their staff pack up and moved back to their home offices from Anchorage to Fairbanks and from Kenai to the Kodiak Island. Efficient and effective communications connects the wide area network for the next nine months, and the process repeats with the opening of the next legislative session.
LAA managers estimate that savings in travel and productivity gains are the most significant justifications for the cost of new upgrades and point to the increased quality and responsiveness of Alaska’s Legislature.
An Alaskan state employee said: “Some things that seem downright easy in Seattle or Los Angeles are a lot tougher when you get up here.” This statement begs the question from the Florida Whig Party: “Do Eskimos in the State of Alaska have equal access and voice to the federal government as those who live in Bethesda, Maryland? If not, why not and how do you justify the inequality?
Think About It
Links for additional reading:
Link 1,
Link 2, Link 3,
Link 4,
Link 5,
Link 6,
Link 7,
Link 8,
Link 9,
Link 10.
