I was reading an interesting article in The Economist yesterday about a site called Wikivote. Wikivote is an online forum where citizens can debate referenda, rewrite bills and perhaps even vote. It’s very much in its infancy, but according to the article it has found some early success in Russia. It was used in Russia to re-write a fisheries bill. It is currently being used for an education bill.

There have been other attempts at communal law-making. They have either been ignored by law makers or have run into other issues (lack of interest, lack of transparency, etc).

Could something like this work in America? Citizens can read bills online and you could, theoretically, contact your Congressmember and tell them if you have an issue. Have you ever read a bill? My goodness they are tedious to get through. Would an online forum work in Congress? Or do you think Congress would just ignore it? Could they claim to represent the people if this were the case?

People who take to the internet for social change tend to be on the fringe of whatever society they inhabit. Either hyper-right or hyper-left. If you doubt me, look at the comments section of any article online. Or even something like Digg. You’ll get someone calling for the end of the tax code and someone calling for some form of communism. You know it’s true.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of Wikivote is something brought up in the article: an end to government stupidity. Vasiliy Burov, one of the project’s creators is quoted saying:

“The goal of the state is to get higher-quality laws,” Mr Burov says. “It’s not about being more democratic. So much of what’s idiotic in Russia happens not because somebody wants it that way, but because there’s nobody to prevent idiocy from happening.”

So perhaps it’s not really a way to enact change, more just a way to keep an eye on the people we elect and make sure they aren’t using our money on silly things. Like the vote to re-affirm that our motto is “In God we trust.” A vote they said existed because the president said the motto is “E. pluribus unum” and they wanted to remind him that it isn’t. Oy. It’s clear that we should be keeping a closer eye on these people. Is this how?