Bettendorf HW

NFL Nationals 2010

FUCK THIS SHIT NC

We negate the resolution: Current trends in American political dialogue compromise meaningful democratic
deliberation.

The Random House Dictionary1 defines “trends” as: “the general course or prevailing tendency; drift:” The
implication of this definition is that the debate should center around social events that have a large influence on
American political dialogue.

Meaningful democratic deliberation would be productive deliberation, or discussion of all sides, according to
Princeton University2. We need to show that the current trends in dialogue provide for deliberation, and not
necessarily that productive deliberation must exist always. There are factors external from dialogue that may affect
democratic deliberation.

A prerequisite for productive decision-making is factual information. Should political dialogue eschew evidence, then
that would ultimately compromise meaningful democratic deliberation. Thus, if we prove that current trends in
American political dialogue have more factual information, then we win.

Our first contention is that transparency is an overarching trend in current political dialogue.

The Washington Post reports on President Obama’s transparency agenda:

, President Obama issued new orders today designed to improve the

In a move that pleased good government groups and some journalists

federal government's openness and transparency. The first memo instructs all agencies and
departments to "adopt a presumption in favor" of Freedom of Information Act requests, while the second memo orders
the director of the Office of Management and Budget to issue recommendations on making the federal government more transparent.

"The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be
embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or
abstract fears," Obama said in the FOIA memo, adding later that "In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch agencies (agencies) should act promptly and in a spirit of
cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are servants of the public."

the Obama Administration "will work together to ensure the public trust and
His memo on government transparency states that

establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen
our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government." The order directs the yet- to-be-named
chief technology officer to work with the OMB director to develop an "Open Government Directive" in
the next four months.

This has all culminated in a new openness in information, and government websites such as Budget.gov and
GovernmentSpending.gov that show where our tax money is going and how it is being used.

Greg Blankenship of the State Journal-Register continues:

The concept of full disclosure is one that started with our founding fathers. It was a philosophy that led
Thomas Jefferson to state the following, regarding the need for government transparency:
“We might hope to see the finances of the Union as clear and as intelligent as a merchant’s books, so that every member of Congress and every man of any mind in the Union, should be able to comprehend them, to
investigate abuses, and consequently to control them.”

In 2006, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act 2006 was signed into law. The law
requires the full disclosure to the public of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds.
1
"trend." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 08 Jun. 2010. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/trend>.
2

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn. 13 June 2010. Princeton WordNet

-1-
 Bettendorf HW
NFL Nationals 2010
FUCK THIS SHIT NC

Our second contention is that the Internet provides a new and helpful medium of engagement.

First, dialogue is moving online. The Congressional Management Foundation writes in a 2008 paper “Communicating with
Congress: How the Internet has changed citizen engagement,” accessed online at http://www.cmfweb.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=251

The right to petition government for a redress of grievances is a cornerstone of democracy in the United States, and it - along with the right to vote - is the foundation on which civic
participation is built and practiced. Since the founding of our country it has been a strongly held conviction that an active and engaged citizenry is imperative for a healthy democracy.
However, when the Founders included this right in the First Amendment they never imagined something like the Internet, which has fundamentally transformed citizen participation . The
Internet has provided promising new opportunities for citizens to access and share information,
organize around issues, and communicate their views to their Members of Congress. Citizens are taking
advantage of these opportunities in greater numbers than ever before. The demographics of the Internet increasingly mirror those of the
country, though Internet users are still more likely than the general public to vote. [3] These people are flexing

their political muscle in entirely new ways which have created both challenges and opportunities for
Congress. Legislators have the opportunity to assess public opinion in ways not available just five years
ago. Although the Internet offers Members of Congress new avenues to interact with their constituents and invite citizens to participate in the public policy process, the promise of the
Internet for democratic dialogue has yet to be fully realized. In fact, congressional offices are still stymied by outdated technologies, frustrated by online grassroots advocacy tactics, and
mired in paper-based communications practices.

Further impacts are CYNICISM AND DISCONNECT ARE LIKELY TO DIMINISH. The Congressional
Management Foundation writes in a 2008 paper “Communicating with Congress: How the Internet has changed citizen engagement,” accessed online at
http://www.cmfweb.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=251 The Internet has had a profoundly positive effect on the

democratic dialogue between citizens and Congress, offering millions of Americans new
opportunities to learn about and interact with their elected officials. However the full potential has yet to be realized. The breadth,
fluidity, and affordability of online communications offer both sides in this dialogue the chance for a greater understanding of the other's motives and values . This greater

understanding could not only lead to a more efficient government, but a more effective and more
responsive government. It also could result in a better public understanding of Congress, chipping
away at the cynicism about government that seems to permeate our society.

And finally, the new media, as a whole, is creating a greater deliberative democracy.

Adam Theirer from the Progress and Freedom Foundation writes:

In truth, one can make a strong case that the new media — and the Internet, above all — are facilitating a more rigorous
deliberative democracy and a richer sense of community. “In modern American political history, perhaps only the coming of the television age has had as
big an impact on our national elections as the Internet has,” observes Raul Fernandez, chief executive of the software firm ObjectVideo. “But the effect of the Internet may be

better for the long‐term health of our democracy. For while TV emphasizes perception, control, and centralization, Internet‐driven
politics is about transparency, distribution of effort, and, most important, empowerment and
participation—at whatever level of engagement the consumer wants.”

The new media and the Internet together are creating a richer deliberative democracy by moving away from the stoic,
one-way communication of the newscaster to a dynamic community of shared opinions.

-2-