New Democrat Update - January 2002
COLORADO FALLING BEHIND
With considerable fanfare and a significant expenditure of taxpayer money to the KPMG Consulting firm, Governor Bill Owens launched New Century Colorado (NCC), billed as "the first comprehensive government re-engineering effort in the age of the Internet." Unfortunately, despite (or maybe because of) NCC, the national rankings of the state's digital government efforts range from very mediocre to downright horrible, and in many cases, are actually getting worse.
Last September, after two years of NCC, a Brown University 2001 study ranked Colorado's web site only 29th in the nation. Providing online services was 35th, while security and privacy - two of the public's top concerns about the Web - were 29th and 43rd, both down from Brown's 2000 analysis.
Maybe worst of all, Colorado is botching a great opportunity to bring citizens closer to their government, ranking dead last on empowering visitors to post public messages on surveys and chat rooms, tailoring the website to their particular needs and directly contacting departmental staff via e-mail. When asked by The Denver Post about the low number of e-mail addresses listed, Secretary of Technology Marc Holtzman's weak answer was "That's an oversight."
Another independent study - the 2001 Digital State Survey - puts Colorado in the bottom half on electronic commerce, social services, taxation/revenue and management/administration, again all declines from 2000 (the specific rankings will be released later this month). The Center for Digital Government, the Progress & Freedom Foundation and Government Technology magazine conducted that analysis.
This miserable performance is especially galling in a state known nationally for its private sector leadership in the New Economy. The DLC's think tank - the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) - released a 1999 report, ranking Colorado's New Economy third in the country - just behind Massachusetts and California. The state also finished third in a Milken Institute survey released just last November.
Colorado's economy could do even better if not for the slow pace of implementing digital technologies into state government. High-tech public sectors foster broader business and individual use of information technologies, leading to more e-commerce and faster economic growth. Governments help the private sector by refocusing their procurement power and providing a critical mass of online services, from smart cards for welfare recipients to tax filing. Maybe most important of all, digital government can increase the quality and reduce the costs of public services for businesses and residents.
Unfortunately, NCC got off track early, overlooking the source of true public sector reform - redesigning the institutional arrangements in which state government operates - its incentives, its accountability systems, its power structure and its culture. Reaping e-government benefits requires much more than merely transferring the existing brick-and-mortar structures of government to an online environment. NCC's strict focus on technological improvements - while ignoring antiquated organizations and systems - will do relatively little to improve services or cut costs.
Predictably, the state's website is designed from "inside out," rather than from the "outside in." Instead, it should reflect what makes the most sense to citizens, not how government personnel view their world.
Rather than confusing program jargon, the website should be intuitive and easy to use with data and transactions that people want, rather than the information the politicians want them to have (like Owens' picture and his endless news releases). Compare Washington State's web site and Colorado's and see the huge difference.
Colorado should be creating integrated sites - designed to help citizens solve their problems - from different agencies, federal/local governments and the private sector. The pages and sites should have a common look and feel.
Such integrated, citizen-friendly sites will motivate citizens to use the Web for self-service interactions, allowing gradual government downsizing, while expanding the quality and quantity of services. For example, companies and citizens could be sent friendly email remainders when renewals are due (business and drivers licenses, etc.) while saving on internal mailing, printing and handling costs. Oracle, the computer company, now processes employee expense reports online, saving more than $6 million annually.
Owens must drop his failed strategy and give the Office of Innovation and Technology stronger authority over agency information systems budgets. To overcome internal bureaucratic barriers, cross-agency digital funds should be created for innovative initiatives that individual agencies are unwilling to finance alone (The money could come from a small set-aside assessed on all state department information technology budgets). To hold the administration's feet to the fire, the legislature should hold annual oversight hearings to monitor the number of web site visits and growth of transactions.
E-government's potential to spur more state e-commerce, provide better public services (especially to rural areas) and to streamline bureaucracy is far too great for "politics as usual."
ABORTION AND GUNS
Many on the left believe Colorado Democrats can win statewide and "swing district" elections by emphasizing strong, uncompromising positions on abortion rights and gun control. They cite polls showing most Coloradans are pro-choice, and strong voter approval for closing the gun-show loophole.
In fact, many Coloradans have significant qualms about abortion and guns but dislike extremism and value personal choice. In both cases, they wish to preserve the basic right but with reasonable common-sense restrictions. Half the voters (or a member of their family) own a gun while the same percentage personally know someone who has had an abortion.
Of course, Democrats should never back away from their core positions on abortion and gun-safety. But we must also relax our sometimes intransigent opposition, advocate sensible limits and avoid unnecessarily polarizing language.
For example, former President Clinton always stood by his pro-choice stance, but when he said that abortion should be "safe, legal and rare," he limited his losses among anti-abortion voters. In 2000, former Vice President Gore pushed away many voters, moderately opposed to abortion, with "us vs. them" rhetoric that drew bright lines.
Similarly, our party should call for a healthy balance between gun rights and gun responsibilities. Democrats must reason with gun owners, not demonize them. Despite the absolutist claims of the National Rifle Association leadership, 65 percent of gun owners agree that rights and responsibilities can coexist.
Both messages will help voters trust Democrats again on values and culture.