, for deliberating and debating public issues. Already,
fascinating cyber-experiments are exploring the potential of computer-mediated politics.
Although their long-term impact is by no means clear, these experiments deserve broad public
support.
For example, we endorse initiatives such as Grassroots.com (www.grassroots.com), which
provides information about issues, including schedules of events, links to interest groups, and
position statements by candidates and elected officials. We also support the League of Women
Voters’ DemocracyNet (www.democracynet.com), which provides state-by-state information
about candidates, election dates, and voter registration. DemocracyNet’s “issue grids” empower
citizens and third-party candidates to raise important issues for debate, and pressure candidates to
post in-depth policy. We hope that every state will follow California and Minnesota, which have
pioneered the use of Web sites to convey information about state and local politics and issues. For
example, the California Voter Foundation publishes an online voter guide to state candidate races
and provides behind-the-scenes information on the sponsorship and financing of state ballot
propositions. The foundation’s Web site even broadcasts “The Proposition Song,” a whimsical
summary of the state’s 20 ballot initiatives and referenda (www.calvoter.org). The Minnesota
Electronic Democracy Project (www.e-democracy.org) provides links to candidate web sites, runs
online “issues forums” in which citizens can discuss policy concerns, and sponsors online debates
in which candidates for major offices respond to questions, with the answers posted on the
Internet and emailed to interested citizens.
While these experiments have almost certainly made it easier to find information about issues and
politicians, the Internet is by no means a panacea. Like any other innovation, it may exacerbate
existing problems or create new ones. We must be aware of this potential and try to blunt any
negative effects. For example, we are concerned that democracy-by-modem may deepen
problems such as the disproportionate representation of the “haves” among the participating
public (at least until the “digital divide” has been bridged); the loss of real deliberation and
persuasion; and the tendency of like-minded people to talk exclusively among themselves. Until
these problems are mitigated, the Internet should be considered a complement, not a substitute,
for direct face-to-face political communication.
Americans are ready for top-to-bottom reform of their democracy. They want government they
can influence and elected officials who respect them. Citizens are looking for visionary leaders
who will inspire the many, not pander to the few. Fixing democracy will require that we create
new, meaningful opportunities for participation and that we give citizens reason to believe, once
again, that their participation counts.
