Constitutional Amendment for Campaign Finance Reform?

We are happy to share the announcement below from NCDD organizational member and NCDD Catalyst Award winner John Spady of the National Dialogue Network. John’s announcement came via our great Submit-to-Blog Form. Do you have news you want to share with the NCDD network? Just click here to submit your news post for the NCDD Blog!

Until June 14, 2014, the National Dialogue Network (NDN) is crowdsourcing ideas from as many people as possible about whether or not a constitutional amendment is necessary to either limit or protect current practices of election campaign spending. Please share this announcement and encourage participation using this link: http://ndn.codigital.com.

The Codigital process is the same one recently used by NCDD. Our own experience with Codigital can be reviewed at http://ncdd.org/14641

The purpose of the NDN project is to solicit statements from all sides, edit and rank them using Codigital, and create a summary of the results for delivery to the Senate Judiciary Committee that meets in June to debate the value of a constitutional amendment to limit (or not) election campaign spending.

After June 14 a follow on phase will repackage these results and create materials for local consideration, public engagement, and national feedback using the tools that the National Dialogue Network gives freely to collaborating individuals and organizations to roll up results from numerous local communities. NDN wants our political representatives to understand the opinions and values of those who care deeply about this issue — from all sides.

John Spady is a long time and sustaining member of NCDD. His vision for a National Dialogue Network received the 2012 Catalyst Award for Civic Infrastructure from NCDD voting members. Details about that award are available at: http://ncdd.org/10940. The website of the NDN is: http://NationalDialogueNetwork.org

If you have any thoughts or encouragements, please add your comments below.

Open Government Needs Public Trust

The piece below comes from the Gov. 2.0 Watch blog, a project of our organizational partners at the Davenport Institute. The reflections shared on building trust in government as a critical component of public engagement and open government initiatives are good food for thought, and we encourage you to read more below or find the original post here.

DavenportInst-logoIn the wake of recent scandals involving California lawmakers, this CA Fwd interview with Leon Panetta is a needed reminder of the importance of integrity in public service. Ed Coghlan comments:

Three months into 2014 and three California State Senators have had brushes with the law. Needless to say, public confidence in elected officials is shaken.

It’s understandable, but like any setback in life, it’s also an opportunity to reflect and change for the better.

Now is the time for our elected officials to enact immediate and meaningful reform in response to alleged state-level corruption that has gotten national media attention. Only then will public trust in government be on the road to recovery.

CA Fwd is attempting to “catalyze a conversation on rebuilding public confidence in government,” and released a roadmap called The Path Toward Trust in April. More information is available here.

The Huffington Post published a related article last month by Gavin Newsom and Zachary Bookman, highlighting successes in the “Open Government movement” in Palo Alto, Bell, San Francisco, and the California State Lands Commission, that they argue have helped to increase public trust and civic engagement:

As a sector, government typically embraces technology well-behind the consumer curve. This leads to disheartening stories, like veterans waiting months or years for disability claims due to outdated technology or the troubled rollout of the Healthcare.gov website. This is changing.

Cities and states are now the driving force in a national movement to harness technology to share a wealth of government information and data. Many forward thinking local governments now provide effective tools to the public to make sense of all this data.

New platforms can transform data from legacy systems into meaningful visualizations. Instant, web-based access to this information not only saves time and money, but also helps government make faster and better decisions. This allows them to serve their communities and builds trust with citizens.

You can find the original version of this post at http://publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu/davenport-institute/gov20watch/index.php/2014/04/public-trust-open-government.

New National Budget Issues Guide from NIFI

NIF-logoWe are pleased to announce that our organizational partners at the National Issues Forums Institute have released their latest issue guide. The newest guide is called America’s Future: What Should Our Budget Priorities Be?, and it is designed to help facilitate discussion on national budget issues.

As with other NIFI issue guides, the new guide encourages forum participants to weigh three different courses of action on a controversial issue. The guide lays out the choices on dealing with the national budget in this way:

Option One: Keep Tightening Our Belt

Though painful, the sequester showed that we can get by with less. We should continue cutting gradually to bring down the deficit, shrink the national debt, and let the private sector drive the recovery.

Option Two: Invest for the Future

We are making progress on the deficit. We need to make some adjustments to entitlements, but now is not the time to slash programs and hobble the recovery.

Option Three: Tame the Monsters

We need to control the unbridled growth of defense, Social Security, and Medicare/Medicaid, which are the main consumers of federal dollars.

You can read more about the new issue guide at by clicking here, and we encourage you to order or download the issue materials here.

Lady Gaga’s Born This Way Foundation a key player in Thursday’s Text Talk Act

We’re excited to announce that Lady Gaga’s Born This Way Foundation is partnering with Creating Community Solutions to promote youth participation in Thursday’s Text Talk Act event! How cool is that?

BornThisWayFdn-Partner

We hope many of you are planning on participating on Thursday. For those of you still on the fence, please join in and hold at least one TTA conversation.  All you need is 3 people, a smartphone, and about an hour, anytime on the 24th.  Anyone can participate, though involving young people is especially encouraged.

If you are planning on hosting a Text Talk Act conversation on Thursday, do us a favor and add yourself to the Creating Community Solutions map! After logging in/creating an account on the Creating Community Solutions site, click on the “Add your dialogue to the map” button under the “Dialogues” tab — or just click here).

Learn more about Text Talk Act here, and sign up today.

NCDD is part of the collaboration running the Creating Community Solutions national dialogue effort aimed at tackling mental health issues in our communities, along with these other NCDDers:  National Institute for Civil Discourse, Everyday Democracy, National Issues Forums Institute, AmericaSpeaks and the Deliberative Democracy Consortium. Check out all of our previous posts on Creating Community Solutions here.

Featured D&D Story: Strategic Planning for Sustainability in Dauphin Island

Today we’d like to feature a great example of dialogue and deliberation in action, Strategic Planning for Sustainability in Dauphin Island. This mini case study was submitted by Dr. R. Warren Flint of Five E’s Unlimited via NCDD’s Dialogue Storytelling Tool (add YOUR dialogue story today!).

ShareYourStory-sidebarimageTitle of Project:
Strategic Planning for Sustainability in Dauphin Island

Description
I was contracted to design and facilitate a long-term strategy and implementation plan (more here) to create a more resilient community able to balance economic development with environmental protection and conservation. I facilitated planning meetings that included the public, the Town Planning Comm., the U.S. EPA’s Mobile Bay NEP, the NOAA Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Program, and state/county agencies toward designing a strategic planning process to achieve sustainable community goals, adhering to NEPA guidelines and the protection of threatened species. I assisted the community in identifying how strategic planning process could better inform the Island’s Comprehensive Plan and enhance future community resiliency.

The results of this strategic planning process emphasized major issues such as water conservation, community behavior changes related to climate change strategies, including energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions, eco-tourism programs, rising sea level, protection of pristine coastal environments, diverse land-use strategies, and the general assessment of best uses for existing community assets (capital) to achieve long-term community resiliency.

The project planning activities developed both short- and long-term strategies for these issues and more. This project was recognized as a finalist in the International Association of Public Participation’s (IAP2) 2009 Project of the Year Award. The international recognition by IAP2 on pages 8 and 67 in the above linked report acknowledged the diversity of environmental, social, and economic issues addressed, as well as the project’s promotion of the IAP2 Core Values in public participation.

Which dialogue and deliberation approaches did you use or borrow heavily from?
Open Space / Unconference, Study Circles, World Cafe, Appreciative Inquiry, Public Conversations Project dialogue, Technology of Participation approaches, Future Search, Charrettes and Deliberative Polling

DauphinIsland

What was your role in the project?
Project director; Primary facilitator; Process design specialist

What issues did the project primarily address?

  • Economic issues
  • Education
  • Environment
  • Planning and development
  • Science and technology

Lessons Learned

  • Important to employ multiple ways of engagement for the different publics in community.
  • Make sure an implementation group is in place before project of planning is completed.
  • Keep reminding stakeholders of the role of sustainability in all discussions for actions.
  • Public engagement includes the promise that the public’s contribution will influence the decision.
  • Public participation seeks input from participants in designing how they participate.
  • Public participation must provide participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way.

Where to learn more about the project: www.eeeee.net

April 2014 Confab Call on “Text, Talk, Act”

Last Wednesday, NCDD hosted its April 2014 Confab Call with featured guests Matt Leighninger and Mike Smith talking about the innovative project known as Text Talk Act.  If you missed the confab and are interested in learning more, you can now listen to the entire conversation — or look over the collaborative document participants created during the Confab Call — at the links below.

  • /
Update Required
To play the media you will need to either update your browser to a recent version or update your Flash plugin.

As part of our role in the National Dialogue on Mental Health project Creating Community Solutions, NCDD and our partners have been experimenting with how the fun and convenience of text messaging can be leveraged to scale up face-to-face dialogue — especially among young people.

The first round of Text Talk Act took place on December 5, and round two is coming up on April 24 (and we hope you’re planning to participate!).  Here’s what you can do to learn more…

You can also learn more about NCDD’s Confab Calls and other events (including our upcoming National Conference in Reston, VA) in our Event Section.

Introducing our fabulous youth organizers for Text Talk Act

Creating Community Solutions is pleased to announce that we’ve teamed up with Active Minds, Lady Gaga’s Born This Way Foundation, and our other partners (NCDD is one of them) to identify some fantastic young people across the U.S. who will be helping organize Text Talk Act events in their communities.

We asked them to send us selfies, and you can check out their brief bios here.

Young_People_borders

Hopefully you already know all about Text Talk Act from our previous postings and recent confab call on the project, but in case you don’t, Text Talk Act is an innovative event taking place on April 24th (next Thursday). Thousands of people across the country will participate by (1) getting together in small groups of 4 or 5 people and (2) texting into 89800 to get polling questions and discussion questions sent to them by text.

In other words, this is texting-enabled face-to-face dialogue.  We’re experimenting with how the fun and convenience of text messaging can be leveraged to scale up face-to-face dialogue — especially among young people.  And we hope all of you are planning to take part!

Learn more about Text Talk Act here, and sign up today.

NCDD is part of the collaboration running the Creating Community Solutions national dialogue effort aimed at tackling mental health issues in our communities, along with these other NCDDers:  National Institute for Civil Discourse, Everyday Democracy, National Issues Forums Institute, AmericaSpeaks and the Deliberative Democracy Consortium. Check out all of our previous posts on Creating Community Solutions here.

Beyond the Polls on Americans’ Feelings on Gov’t

This post comes from Beyond the Polls, a joint blogging initiative from Public Agenda, the National Issues Forums Institute, and the Kettering Foundation – all of which are NCDD organizational partners. We hope you’ll take moment to read about the latest insights they’ve gained from recent polls on opinions about government, which you can read below or find here.


beyond polls logo

Do Americans Really Loathe The Federal Government?

What does it mean when fewer than 1 in 5 Americans say they are satisfied with the federal government? Over the last few years, survey researchers have fielded dozens of questions that seem to show the public’s contempt for the federal government.

In a Pew poll last year, just 12 percent of Americans said they were “basically content” with the federal government, while 30 percent were angry about it, and 55 percent were frustrated. Just 19 percent of the public says it trusts the government in Washington to do what is right most of the time. It’s a stunning number. When Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy were in office, that number was above 70 percent.

chart_agencyperformanceBut if so many Americans are so dismissive of government, then why were so many of us appalled by the government shutdown last fall? Is this just further proof that Americans will happily indulge in anti-government rhetoric, but that they really like government and what it does for them? Or are there more complex and consequential questions lying beneath the surface—questions that deserve much more careful analysis and discussion?

Here is a quick tour of some of what lies beneath.

  • There’s government – and then there’s politics. Then there’s the frustration factor – the sense that government has a crucial role to play, but that it’s just too bollixed up with politics to meet its responsibilities. This sentiment comes up forcefully in Public Agenda and Kettering research and the National Issues Forums. When citizens gathered in NIF forums a few years ago to discuss options for addressing the federal debt, many were honestly perplexed by the government’s inability to solve the problem. “Never in my 57 years have I seen our government so dysfunctional,” a man in Kansas said. “Everyone seems to be pointing fingers and calling each other names and not working together to compromise.” This participant wasn’t suggesting doing away with government. He was making a plea for government to function.

chart_institutionsThe fact is that public attitudes about government are mixed, multi-faceted, and to some degree unresolved. What’s more, Americans’ lack of resolution about what government can and cannot do — and what it should and should not do — lies at the very heart of debates on the economy, the budget, health care, education, and other key issues.

“Americans’ lack of resolution about what government can and cannot do — and what it should and should not do — lies at the very heart of debates on the economy, the budget, health care, education, and other key issues.”
This comes through clearly in the recent Public Agenda/Kettering Foundation work on curbing health care costs. Some people in our focus groups opposed and feared government action to contain costs, while others saw government as an institution that could help protect patients from insurers or providers who got greedy.

When surveys show Americans voicing disdain for government, it’s easy to jump to dramatic, but misleading conclusions—that large swaths of Americans want to roll back long-standing federal programs or that people always prefer local or private sector solutions for the problems we face.

In some very important respects, public dissatisfaction is real, and that’s worrisome. But there’s also ample evidence that most Americans want government to play an effective role in solving the country’s problems, even though many haven’t fully sorted out their expectations or priorities.

Our view is that opinion research should lead to more than sloganeering and hand wringing. It should point us to topics and themes that we as a people need to talk about and think through together. In this case, polls suggest that the U.S. is in dire need of a more detailed and far less categorical discussion about what we expect from the government and what costs and trade-offs we’re willing to accept to make it work.

Beyond the Polls is a joint endeavor of Public Agenda, the National Issues Forums, and the Kettering Foundation. Sign up to receive an email update when we have a new Beyond the Polls post.

 

New Medicaid/Medicare Issue Guide from NIFI

In case you missed it, we wanted to make sure to let you know that our partners at the National Issues Forums Institute released a new issue guide last month on Medicaid & Medicare. The health care issues our nation faces require serious deliberation, and we know this new guide will help guide good conversations around real solutions. You can read more from NIFI on the guide below or find their original post on the guide here.


NIF-logoThis issue guide was prepared for the National Issues Forums Institute in collaboration with the Kettering Foundation.

The following is excerpted from the introduction to this 16-page issue guide:

Nearly everybody will, at some point, get sick and need the help of health-care professionals. Finding the resources to cover these public programs is an ever-increasing challenge at a time when our national debt is at an all-time high. Ultimately, all Americans—policymakers as well as citizens—will have to face painful decisions about reducing the cost. This may mean fewer choices in health care for the tens of millions of people enrolled in these programs. The choices are difficult; the stakes, enormous…

The guide presents three options for deliberation:

Option 1: Do What It Takes to Maintain Our Commitment

Keeping the programs solvent may mean higher taxes for workers and companies, or raising the age of eligibility for Medicare. It could mean asking Medicaid patients to share the cost of their coverage. We need to do what is necessary to continue the commitment even if that costs everyone more.

But, raising taxes to pay for both programs may cost them the broad-based support they now enjoy. Making people wait longer to collect Medicare or forcing the poor to pay part of their health care may cause people to delay getting help, resulting in higher costs later on.

Option 2: Reduce Health-Care Costs Throughout the System

It is critical to put Medicare and Medicaid on a better financial footing. We need to pay for fewer lab tests people get and reduce money spent on end-of-life care. The U.S. government should negotiate for lower drug costs as other countries do.

But, fewer tests may mean more people will die from undiagnosed illnesses. Less end-of-life intervention may mean that more people will die sooner than they would otherwise need to. And lowering the profits of drug companies will mean less money for research into better drugs that benefit everyone.

Option 3: Get Serious about Prevention

One reason Medicare and Medicaid are headed for a crisis is because so many Americans have unhealthy lifestyles that cause them to develop preventable illnesses like diabetes and heart disease. We should stop expecting others to pay for the consequences of our bad choices. Government incentives should reward those who weigh less, eat right, and exercise more.

But, an emphasis on prevention and requiring that people adopt healthier lifestyles would invite unfair scrutiny of their behavior and would increase government intrusion into people’s lives.

Click here to order or download these issue materials.

Featured D&D Story: Respectful Conversations Project

Today we’d like to feature a great example of dialogue and deliberation in action, the Respectful Conversations Project. This mini case study was submitted by Jerad Morey, Communications and Program Manager of the Minnesota Council of Churches via NCDD’s new Dialogue Storytelling Tool (add YOUR dialogue story today!).

Title of Project:
RespectfulConvProjectRespectful Conversations Project

Description
When the state of Minnesota was facing a ballot question defining marriage, people were divided. Churches found themselves in sharp internal disagreements that mirrored those in the broader community. Fearful of the end result of a year’s worth of polarizing media campaigns on Minnesota’s civic discourse, churches decided to build peace as a way to love the communities they were in and strengthen Minnesota’s civic culture.

The Minnesota Council of Churches, with support from the Bush Foundation and in partnership with The Public Conversations Project, Twin Cities Public Television and The Theater of Public Policy, designed a conversation model not to change minds, but soften hearts. Respectful Conversations on the Marriage Amendment were conducted across the state in rural, exurban, suburban and urban communities. One thousand five hundred fifty Minnesotans participated in 54 conversations. 62% of participants reported experiencing more empathy for those with whom they disagreed. That figure grew much higher in those conversations were the array of viewpoints was most diverse.

People were excited to participate in these conversations and they have proven to be generative. In level 2 evaluations, participants reported improved listening skills, facilitation skills, reduced tension in home conversations, improved parenting skills and paradigm shifts. Many congregations have gone on to create peace in their communities around other divisive issues and sectors such as higher education, government and public health have studied the model for future implementation.

Which dialogue and deliberation approaches did you use or borrow heavily from?
Public Conversations Project dialogue

What was your role in the project?
Program co-designer and communicator

What issues did the project primarily address?
Gender / sexuality

Lessons Learned
Budgeting more for evaluations that captured people’s stories of the experience in multiple media would have been a great idea — we were surprised by all of the good will and gratitude generated by the project, and the thirst for follow-up activities. Had we captured it better to better report on it then we would have had a great storytelling tool that Minnesotans could be proud of.

Where to learn more about the project:
http://www.mnchurches.org/respectfulcommunities/respectfulconversations.html