Download to read offline
![Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org> 10/28/16
2
Voters are frustrated, but have not yet
given up or significantly polarized
▪ >70% polled say “they
disapprove of how Congress is
handling its job” and 65%
described it as the "worst
Congress of their lifetime"
[pollingreport.com, 2016; CNN, 2014]
▪ Voting rates have not
changed significantly over
the last 100 years
[fairvote.com, 2016; electproject.org, 2014]
▪ Political ideology has not
shifted significantly over the last
45 years
[Gentzkow, 2016]
Political Ideology, 1970-2015](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/krennalgorithmicdemocracyabjan2016-170326001904/85/Krenn-algorithmic-democracy_ab_jan_2016-2-320.jpg)
![Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org> 10/28/16
10
▪ Algorithmic democracy will enable compromise,
influence elections, and should lead to better
laws and less waste
Government is too big and important
to be left to the politicians [C. Bowles]
➔
➔
I am an engineer, and I want to help](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/krennalgorithmicdemocracyabjan2016-170326001904/85/Krenn-algorithmic-democracy_ab_jan_2016-10-320.jpg)
Uploaded bydemocracyGPS
Krenn algorithmic democracy_ab_jan_2016
The document proposes the concept of 'algorithmic democracy' as a solution to political dissatisfaction and inefficiency, suggesting that algorithms could enhance voter engagement and legislation effectiveness. It outlines a system where citizens regularly express their political views and preferences, leading to political representatives being dynamically monitored for alignment with the electorate. The proposal emphasizes the need for robust implementation and user-friendly tools to facilitate better governance and citizen involvement in the democratic process.
More Related Content
Similar to Krenn algorithmic democracy_ab_jan_2016
Krenn algorithmic democracy_ab_jan_2016
- 1. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 1 Algorithmic Democracy: The Time Is Now Chris Krenn, www.democracygps.org 3/25/17 Copyright © 2016 by Christopher Krenn democracygps (at) gmail (dot) com
- 2. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 2 Voters are frustrated, but have not yet given up or significantly polarized ▪ >70% polled say “they disapprove of how Congress is handling its job” and 65% described it as the "worst Congress of their lifetime" [pollingreport.com, 2016; CNN, 2014] ▪ Voting rates have not changed significantly over the last 100 years [fairvote.com, 2016; electproject.org, 2014] ▪ Political ideology has not shifted significantly over the last 45 years [Gentzkow, 2016] Political Ideology, 1970-2015
- 3. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 3 • Everyone age 10 and up regularly completes a survey of their political views, legislative goals, and positions on current issues • Everyone chooses decision-making delegates for national, state, and local issues • Algorithms dynamically monitor agreement between users and their delegates • Algorithms predict voter support for current legislation • Algorithms produce outlines of new legislation with support of broad majorities Imagine a world where… Can algorithmic democracy relieve the frustration?
- 4. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 4 Algorithmic democracy is the future Representative Democracy Direct democracy
- 5. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 5 ▪Data from a Chinese deliberative budget poll (Fishkin, 2010) ▪167 voters, 3337 votes, 30 projects, 30% funding available, & many millions of funding options ▪With unequal project costs, optimization usually increases satisfaction(~30%) over simpler methods Proof of Principle: Computer optimized budget allocation can satisfy more voters
- 6. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 6 Proof of Principle: Ranked Voting Simulations of the 2016 Presidential Election
- 7. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 7 ▪ Possible issues for discussion and consensus: • Government transparency, electronic voting, drug policy, or others ▪ Development steps: • Step 1: 12 beta users in 3 groups • Step 2: 100 students on 10 university campuses • Step 3: city or state initiative Extend prototype code and test with real political issues Algorithm and interface development Following computer security best practices will be vital to our success
- 8. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 8 ▪ Traditional direct democracy demands too much time and attention from the voter and doesn’t scale ▪ Algorithmic democracy features could be added to current social politics web platforms like Brigade, Countable, or Whatsgoodly. • “LiquidFeedback”, Adhocracy, DemocracyOS, Flux, and Deliberative Democracy methods may benefit from more users and should be part of our solution ▪ Algorithmic democracy implementations complement Nation Builder and move beyond “We the people” ▪ We may be duplicating unknown systems What’s new here? We are proposing a fresh and agile approach to make useful and user-friendly tools
- 9. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 9 ▪ It will be a tool to document differences between the voters’ will and government actions ▪ It will enable better laws to be proposed and passed ▪ It will pressure members of government to support the interests of all of their constituents ▪ Specific benefits could include minimum wage changes; immigration, criminal justice & education reform; and better community/police relations. ▪ Hosting platforms would benefit from a larger user bases and associated revenue opportunities Algorithmic democracy will benefit the user, government, society, and investors So what?
- 10. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 10 ▪ Algorithmic democracy will enable compromise, influence elections, and should lead to better laws and less waste Government is too big and important to be left to the politicians [C. Bowles] ➔ ➔ I am an engineer, and I want to help
- 11. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 11 ▪ What do you think of the idea? • Would you consider using a future “Algorithmic Democracy” system? • Why or why not? ▪ Have you heard of or used Brigade or Countable? ▪ What questions should I be asking? ▪ What should I read? ▪ Who should I talk to next? Questions
- 12. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 12 References Adhocracy: https://adhocracy.de Bowles: http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/1253.ht ml Brigade: https://www.brigade.com/ CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/09/politics/cnn- poll-congress/ Countable: https://www.countable.us/ DeliberativeDemocracy: http://cdd.stanford.edu/ DemocracyOS: http://democracyos.org ElectProject: http://www.electproject.org/2014g FairVote: http://www.fairvote.org/research- and-analysis/voter-turnout/ Flux: https://github.com/voteflux/ Gentzkow: https://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/ PolarizationIn2016.pdf LiquidFeedback: http://liquidfeedback.org/ NationBuilder: http://nationbuilder.com PollingReport: http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm WeThePeople: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/ WhatsGoodly: https://whatsgoodly.com/
- 13. Chris Krenn <www.democracygps.org>10/28/16 13 ▪ Needs to be constrained by budget and by law ▪ Needs to be robust to activists from the far left and right, protect minorities, manage privacy concerns, and maintain “one citizen one vote” • Apply demographic weighting • Learn from professional pollsters, Alaska, and Estonia ▪ Needs broad participation Appendix: an algorithmic democracy system will face many challenges
Editor's Notes
- #2 Thank you for being willing to meet with me today. I’d like to talk to you about a vision of a future for democracy that I believe will overcome frustrations with the overwhelming influence of money in politics and with how little our individual actions seem to affect government policies. My vision is a electronic hybrid between direct and representative democracy. You will be able to vote on what you want, as often as you want, but you can also delegate your voting on an issue by issue or vote by vote basis as well as change your choice of delegates as often as desired. I have 10 slides, including this one, describing this vision and an implementation plan in more detail, and I’d like to walk through them and to ask your feedback. Please also feel free to ask questions along the way. Note to reader: I apologize for the redundant text in slides and notes, but on some slides, I believe that the script does add some value.
- #3 Currently, US voters are frustrated, but they have not given up. Consistently, more than 70% of those polled say that they disapprove of how Congress is handling its job, and, in 2014, 65% described it as the worst Congress of their lifetime. Yet voting rates have not changed significantly over the last 60 plus years. Since 1948, presidential turnout has been, on average a little less than 60% and mid-term turnout a bit more than 40%. Political ideology also has not shifed significantly over the last 45 years. Notes: 57.95714286 41.31363636 (averages)
- #4 Can algorithmic democracy relieve the frustration? I believe that it can be a very important part of the solution. Imagine, if you will, a world where every citizen age 10 and up regularly completes a survey of their political views, legislative goals and positions on current issues. Every citizen chooses decision-making delegates for national, state and local issues; algorithms dynamically monitor agreement between users and their delegates; algorithms predict voter support for current legislation, and algorithms produce outlines of new legislation with support of broad majorities.
- #5 I believe that algorithmic democracy is the future. This is not representative democracy, which is currently failing with populations of 300 million people. It is also not direct democracy. Even the smallest conceivable national government is much too complicated to put everything to a direct vote. An algorithmic democracy interface could look something like this: a summary of a user’s political views, legislative goals, a list of representative delegates for various issues, opinions on current issues of concern, and a list of predicted positions.
- #6 As proof of principle, I developed a simple program that uses user preferences, combined with random voter response to optimize budget allocations for the San Francisco Recreation and Parks Budget. In some cases, funding the most popular projects makes sense, but because of variable project cost and a fixed budget, sometimes other funding solutions will, by many metrics, satisfy more voters than other options. Notes: This particular implementation is a version of the well known “backpack” problem and can be solved quickly with linear programming methods. Other formulations of the problem are easy to solve using parallel computing methods.
- #7 And, I’m working on simulations of how ranked voting may have affected the 2016 presidential election.
- #8 So, how do we move closer to this vision? Before we fly, we need to crawl, walk and run. I believe that significant progress requires only some time and some collaborators for algorithm and interface development and to extend existing prototype code and to test with real political issues. My strategy is to start small with 12 beta users in 3 groups working towards group consensus on topics such as government transparency, electronic voting, drug policy, or others. Next, I would work with 100 plus students on 10 university campuses. Finally, I would transition to a city or state initiative.
- #9 So, what’s new here? What we are proposing is a fresh an agile approach to make useful and user-friendly tools. Traditional direct democracy demands too much time and attention from the voter and doesn’t scale. Algorithmic democracy features could be added to current web platforms like Brigade, Countable, or Whatsgoodly, and I believe that Liquid Feedback and Deliberative Democracy methods may benefit from more users and should be part of any algorithmic democracy implementation. Algorithmic democracy implementations complement Nation Builder and move beyond “We the people”. However, we may be duplicating unknown systems. Notes: Nation Builder allows affiliated special interest groups to work together. We The People is a White House run petitioning system.
- #10 Last, but not least… So what? Why should I care? This proposal will benefit the user, government, society, and any investors in the project. It will be a tool to document differences between the voter’s will and government actions. It will enable better laws to be proposed and passed. It will pressure members of government to support the interests of all of their constituents. Specific benefits could include minimum wage changes, immigration and education reform and better community/police relations. And, last, but not least, any hosting platform would benefit from a larger user base and associated revenue opportunities.
- #11 To wrap up, in agreement with the economist Chester Bowles, I believe that government is too big and important to be left to the politicians. Algorithmic democracy will enable compromise, influence elections, and should lead to better laws and less waste And, I am an engineer, and I want to help.
- #14 I don’t think that this process will be easy, and an algorithmic democracy system will face many challenges. The system needs to be constrained by budget and by law. The system needs to be robust to activists from the far left and right sides of the political aisle, to protect minorities, to manage privacy concerns, and to maintain the principle of “one citizen one vote”. This will be tricky, and will be an evolving process. In the short-term, we can apply statistical weighting using correlations with public opinion polling; we should certainly learn as much as possible from professional pollsters; and in the longer-term, U.S. might even see the value of a online voting systems like they have in Alaska and Estonia. And, it needs broad participation. One possible marketing tagline: “Does Barbara Lee always speak for you? If not, then speak for yourself today!” Notes: Try to recruit early participation from across the political spectrum. Other issues: management of the project, mobile and web design, revenue, privacy, partners, marketing, algorithm development.