David’s post is a response to Abe Voelker’s recent post entitled GitLaw: GitHub for Laws and Legal Documents – a Tourniquet for American Liberty.
Here is David’s description of his new post:
- GitLaw is inherently desirable, both for accountability & data-driven lawmaking & mitigating corruption;
- Powerful hurdles / objections exist, viz. that leg[islative] process is too idiosyncratic for Git to account for; putting aside institutional foot-dragging & lack of transparency culture;
- But using GitHub or new VCS features in open-source code on OC to draft bills w[ith] public & expert commentary before they’re submitted to legacy Congressional processes is perfectly feasible today; with a focus on specific topics or issue areas where fewest changes would potentially be made to draft legislation once in official channels;
- PPF seeks non-profit funding support to build GitLaw features in open standards & open-source Rails code on OpenCongress.
… input welcome. Drafting leg[islation] in public before submitting would be a fine & significant step forward for #opengov, it seems to me, towards a two-way continual reciprocal platform for constituent communication & participatory democracy.
For more information, please see David’s complete post.
Many thanks to David for granting permission to post his summary.
For my earlier response to Voelker, click here.
Tags: Abe Voelker, Citizens' participation in lawmaking, Citizens' participation in legislative drafting, David Moore, eparticipation, GitHub, GitHub and legislation, GitLaw, Legislative information systems, Legislative version control, Open Congress