Thompson, Nicholas.

Machined Politics. How the Internet is really, truly-seriously-going to change elections.

Washington Monthly Online. May 2002. Last accessed Sept. 1 2002 @ http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0205.thompson.html.

Internet Used by Organizers of Israeli, Palestinian Rallies

by: Sheridan, Mary Beth. :

Different Causes, Similar Tactics. Internet Used by Organizers of Israeli, Palestinian Rallies.

Washington Post Wednesday, April 17, 2002; Page B08


By Mary Beth Sheridan

Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 17, 2002; Page B08

"The pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian demonstrations organized in Washington this week represent the emotional culmination of weeks of smaller rallies across the country, indications of how the violence in the Middle East has alarmed many Americans.

The proliferation of demonstrations reflects the strength of Jewish organizations and efforts by much smaller Muslim and Arab American groups to play a bigger role in U.S. politics. Adding to the mix is the power of the Internet, both to pull together rallies and to connect Americans with those suffering in the Middle East

by: Sheridan, Mary Beth. :

Different Causes, Similar Tactics. Internet Used by Organizers of Israeli, Palestinian Rallies.

Washington Post Wednesday, April 17, 2002; Page B08

Accessed date of publication @ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63371-2002Apr17.html ,

And last accessed Nov 7, 2005 @

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A63371-2002Apr17&notFound=true

US Kids choose Internet over other media

http://www.nua.ie/surveys/index.cgi?f=VS&art_id=905357821&rel=true

Copyright © 1995-2002 ComputerScope Ltd. All rights reserved

US Kids choose Internet over other media

Apr 08 2002: "A new study from Statistical Research indicates that one third of children in the US would choose the Internet over other media, if they were restricted to one choice."

----

--

In his new book, Lawrence Lessig warns of threats to innovation as the Internet becomes

"The next threat to the Internet

Legal scholar warns of challenges to innovation"

BOOK REVIEW
By Anick Jesdanun
ASSOCIATED PRESS

http://www.msnbc.com/news/681181.asp?0na=x2236140-

In his new book, Lawrence Lessig warns of threats to innovation as the Internet becomes increasingly controlled by businesses, the technology they develop and the laws they push.

In his 1999 book, "Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace," Lessig warns of threats to free speech and privacy as the Internet becomes increasingly controlled by businesses, the technology they develop and the laws they push.

"The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World," published by Random House, is in many respects a sequel: Lessig argues that innovation is under threat by those same efforts.

One tendency Lessig worries about is the development of software techniques that would let Internet service providers prioritize — and perhaps charge more for — certain traffic over others.

*%%$%&&%%^$^$^^^^

"THE demand for uncovering family histories is proving almost as popular as sex on Internet

"Family values battle porn for Internet ratings"

Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd.

BY ADAM SHERWIN

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2-2002000402,00.html

"THE demand for uncovering family histories is proving almost as popular as sex on Internet hit lists, and likely to grow even greater as the 1901 census for England and Wales is published online today."

================================

Mandate for the Middle: By Sen. JAMES M. JEFFORDS

November 30, 2002

Mandate for the Middle

By JAMES M. JEFFORDS
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/30/opinion/30JEFF.html

ASHINGTON
I have listened to a lot of people discuss what went right and what went wrong in the 2002 midterm elections. In the final tally, there is no question that President Bush did a masterful job engineering victories for the Republican Party.

But I worry that the list of issues that dominated the election season was woefully incomplete. As we respond daily to the latest threats of terror highlighted by the administration, I believe other issues that bear directly on the security of our homeland are being dangerously obscured.

Our slumping economy, our threatened environment, our underfunded schools, our corporate scandals — these are not issues that you will hear discussed by the White House, but they are being talked about by people who don't have the power to define the nation's agenda.

In Congress we have just passed a law that will bring about the largest restructuring of our government since World War II. We are telling the American people that a new Department of Homeland Security will protect them. But Americans are losing their jobs and their ability to support their families. In less than two years, more than two million private sector jobs have been lost, while our economic growth is the weakest it has been in 50 years.

We should be addressing that homeland security issue.

Too many hard-working people are stuck in low-wage jobs, wondering how they will make the rent payment and cover child-care costs. The Census Bureau's recent income and poverty report stated that 1.3 million Americans slipped below the poverty line in the last year. This increase means that 11.7 percent of the United States population is living in poverty. The Census Bureau also reported that median household income decreased for the first time since 1991.

What's more, many workers who are fortunate enough not to have to worry about their jobs are now worrying about their savings. More than 50 percent of Americans have investments in the stock market, and they have seen the value of those investments decline by more than $4.5 trillion since last January.

We should be addressing that homeland security issue.

Coal plants in the Midwest continue to spew toxic pollutants into the air, yet the administration does not see the wisdom in regulating these emissions, preferring to rely on the good-faith efforts of plant owners to police themselves. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of people are dying prematurely every year from such pollution.

I was proud to work with President George H. W. Bush on the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990. He called our work "a new chapter in our environmental history, and a new era for clean air." Now, President George W. Bush insists on moving us backward, undoing his father's legacy and our nation's environmental policy. Last week the administration issued regulations to ease clean air rules to allow power plants to avoid having to install new antipollution equipment when they modernize their plants.

We should be addressing that homeland security issue.

The lack of funding for our schools is disgraceful. Of the major industrial nations, the United States ranks among the lowest in terms of financing education at the federal level, providing only 7 percent of the cost. The president's education plan is long on new federal mandates but short on the resources to make them work. The government promised more than 25 years ago to pay 40 percent of special education costs for children with disabilities; it now covers only 18 percent.

There's no question that we are living in a dangerous time. Some of the threats we face are being met with judgment and careful deliberation. But others, namely the steady erosion of economic opportunity here at home, are being ignored.

If the new, razor-thin Republican majority abuses its power and moves forward with an extreme agenda that overlooks the concerns of the many and benefits only the privileged few, there will be repercussions.

Since the election, my decision to leave the Republican Party last year has been subject to new scrutiny. The attention on my personal decision, while understandable, is misplaced. If the Republicans read the recent election results as a rejection of moderation and a mandate to steamroll opposition from within the party, they will be making a grave mistake.

James M. Jeffords, an independent, is the junior senator from Vermont.

Copyright The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy

"One Citizen's Determination to Make a Difference"

==================================

http://www.e-advocates.com/case_studies.html

One Citizen's Determination to Make a Difference

The StopFamilyViolence.org

http://www.stopfamilyviolence.org

.... {The} campaign was the result of one concerned citizen's recognition of the devastating effects Congress' failure to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) would have on her community.

VAWA provides vital resources, including hotlines, shelters, and other services to women and children who are the victims of family violence. With just 37 working days left in the session, the VAWA reauthorization was stalled in the 106th Congress and considered unlikely to pass.

In just 12 weeks, Irene Weiser and e-advocates helped move a stagnant issue, delivering two major votes and doubling funding for the Violence Against Women Act.

=====

The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, #S.1731,

The FARM BILL of 2002 .
~~ by technopolitical ~~ ` `

The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, #S.1731, passed by the Senate on February 13, 2002, ( and vernacularly known as the “2002 Farm Bill”), is far-reaching and elaborate legislation touching on most every facet of the American agriculture industry. The Farm Bill regulates the prices of America’s staple crops, livestock, and dairy products. Payments of subsidies to farmers of corn, wheat, and cotton, comprise the bulk of the bill’s total expenditures, estimated at $171 billion over the next 5 years. [Miller]. The bill also includes issues of conservation, land / water rights and usage, and allots $800 million more per year for food-stamp payments and nutrition programs than current levels. [AP]

It is important to note that there are not fixed amounts of money distributed by the Farm Bill, only the “mechanisms” of how the money is paid out is fixed. Many factors that affect crop prices are beyond human control. So specific payments can vary according to volatile economy of the agriculture industry. Weather factors, like drought, flood, and early frosts can reduce crop productions, while good weather conditions can cause bumper crops. A main function of the farm bill is to insulate farmers from major price fluctuations by stabilizing their earnings with subsidies.

The passage of a Farm Bill is a forgone conclusion, as the legislation is the centerpiece of domestic agricultural policy. The battle becomes what will be in the Farm Bill. As we will see a Senator’s foremost concern is what they can get included into the bill for their home state.

While the final vote on the bill broke mostly on partisan lines --with 48 Democrats voting for and 38 Republicans voting no--- the bills sponsor and prime architect Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) hailed the outcome as a “bipartisan” victory. (The word bipartisan appears no less than 5 times in the bill’s brief press release on Harkin’s official website.)

In reality, the Farm Bill is a parochial piece of legislation. Senators and their home state farm interests tended not look into the big picture of the national bill, but more just how much money came to their state. Nine Republicans voted for the bill, and two Democrats voted against it. Here we will highlight a few of these swing Senators, who split from their party leaders, as they give an excellent overview of the issues involved in the Farm Bill’s particulars.

Six of the nine Republican yes votes came from just three states-- Alabama, Maine, and Virginia— where both senators are Republican and both voted for the bill.

Of the three other Republicans who voted yes, two--- Chuck Grassly of Iowa and Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois--- come from states that fair well with the Farm Bill. The votes of Grassly, whose co-senator Democrat Tom Harkin was the bills Prime Sponsor, and Fitzgerald, whose co-senator is Democrat Dick Durban, were never really in doubt.

(Senator Arlen Spector of Pennsylvania, was the only Republican ‘yes’ vote whose co-senator did not also vote yes, as fellow Pennsylvania Republican Rick Santorum voted against the bill.)

******

The technology of the Internet greatly affected the shaping of the debate of this year’s Farm Bill, by way of a single group called the Environmental Working Group (EWG). Using the freedom of information act, the EWG compiled comprehensive statistics on exactly to whom and to where subsidies from the previous Farm Bill went from 1996-2001 and posted them on their website for all to see. [www.ewg.org] The data posted on the EWG site became embedded into the debate on the bills formation, and provided Senators, interest groups, and reporters covering the bill, with volumes of statistical information. (Most every article used to research this paper mentioned the role and/or contained statistics from EWG.) A New York Times article published a week after the Senate’s vote summed up the impact of the EWG website:

“Throughout the angry Senate debate about whether to limit subsidies to wealthy farmers, lawmakers kept referring to ‘the Web site’ to make their points. ‘You can see on the Web site — 10 percent of the farmers get most of the money,’ said Senator Don Nickles, Republican of Oklahoma. ‘I looked up Indiana on the Web site,’ said Senator Richard G. Lugar, Republican of Indiana, ‘and very few Indiana farmers would be affected by a modest limit.’ [Becker]

EWG revealed that 75 percent of farm subsidies from 1996-2001 went to only 15 states. As well, EWG showed that many of the largest recipients of payments via the 1996 Farm Bill were to Fortune 500 Corporations who own major farming concerns.

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) put together what was dubbed the “Eggplant Caucus”, a bi-partisan coalition of mostly northeastern senators whose goal was to bring regional equity to federal farm subsidies. (This caucus included Maine’s two Republican senators whose votes in favor of the final bill were crucial to its passage and will be highlighted below.)

The Eggplant Caucus secured the major provision of the Senate 2002 Farm Bill that greatly lowered the cap on subsidy payments. The 1996 Farm Bill contained a cap of $460,000 per farm, while the 2002 Senate bill places the cap at $275,000 per farm. [Zremski] This cap reduction is designed to make more money available to be distributed to states --outside the Midwest---- that in the past have received fewer moneys.

Maine’s republican senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins joined Northeast Democrats in voting yes and were important swing votes, with Collins in the undecided camp until just a few days before the Senate’s final vote. The prime motivating factors for the Snowe and Collins vote, was how it would affect the dairy industry in Maine, which has lost one-fifth of it dairy farms in the past decade. [Jensen]

The Farm Bill of 1996 included price supports for milk, but the program expired last September 30, and Maine’s senators battled vigorously to reacquire those moneys plus some. Senator Snowe was instrumental to the addition of $2 billion a year for payments to dairy farmers within the bill. $500 million of which would be divided among the Northeast states. [ibid]

It is important to note that subsidy payments for a particular product—in this case milk—are not uniform and varies from state to state. Republican Pete Domenci of New Mexico, claimed that in final Senate bill New Mexico farmers would get only 6 cents per 100 pounds for milk, while Maine farmers would average 90 cents per 100 pounds. [ibid]

Senator Snowe’s fight for this milk money also put her at loggerheads with Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana whom as the ranking Republican on the Agriculture committee was a prime opponent of the final bill. Lugar singled out the milk issue for criticism saying, “there is no sound policy reason for this disparity.” [ibid]

Whether or not the milk price support system is sound fiscal policy, it was part of the “pork” that Maine’s Republican senators demanded in return for their support of the Senate Farm Bill.

Senator Collins held out her support of the bill until Sponsor Tom Harkin agreed to include an experimental savings program intended to help insulate farmers from price drops. Under this program the government would match the first $5,000 that farmers put aside into their savings accounts.

As well, Maine’s senators won major increases in money available for conservation. The 1996 Bill gave Maine $4.6 million a year for conservation, while the 2002 bill will give the state least $12 million per year and maybe as much as $29 million per year [ibid].

Alabama’s two Republican Senators Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby also voted for the bill because of what they got for their homestate. Sessions was able to get four additional Alabama counties added to Delta Regional Authority, which provides grants to farmers in eligible counties.

"I am pleased the Senate voted to add these four counties to the 16 Alabama counties already included in the Delta Regional Authority," Sessions said. "These counties will benefit from DRA grants to improve their infrastructure and draw jobs to those areas. I am hopeful that conferees will work expeditiously, so President Bush can sign this bill as soon as possible. Planting season is quickly approaching and our farmers need the certainty that a new five-year farm bill provides. [Sessions]

The only two Democrats who voted against the bill; Sen.Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, and Sen. Jon Cozine of New Jersey, each had different specifics of why they opposed the legislation, but the common factor was that that saw the bill as bad for the folks back home. After her no vote Lincoln stated: “My support for the Senate farm bill was dependent upon what it did for my state, and I voted against this bill because it unfairly inhibits Arkansas farmers and ranchers.” (AP-1)

Sen. Lincoln opposed the final bill because it contained a provision that prohibited meat-packers from also owning the cattle within 14 days of slaughter. Lincoln argued that this provision would prevent the Arkansas meat-packers from running at full capacity at all times. [ibid]

Meanwhile, New Jersey Democrat Sen. Jon Carzine saw the Farm Bill as unfair to Jersey farms as “the overwhelming bulk of subsidies in this bill will go for commodities that, by and large are not produced in the Garden State” [Miller].

The Farm Bill clearly demonstrates the axiom that “all politics are local.” Despite its massive size and scope, in the end legislation got an individual up or down vote from our swing senators solely on what the bill did for that Senator’s home state. Loyalty to homestate interests outweighed all other factors in the formation and passage of the legislation.

-----------------------------------------------------------------END OF PAPER

See here for more ;

http://technopolitical.blogspot.com/2002_08_01_technopolitical_archive.html#_ednref82

-----------------end ---END of paper >>>>>>

NOTES :

AP

“Senate Passes Farm Subsidies Bill” by The Associated Press

Obtained via the New York Times on the Internet; www.nytimes.com . 13 February 2002.

-------------------------------------

AP-1

“Arkansas Senators vote no on bill.” The Associated Press State & Local Wire. 13 February 2002

(Available via Lexis-Nexis and was accessed on 21 March 2002)

-------------------------------------------------------

Becker, Elizabeth

“Web Site Helped Change Farm Policy” The New York Times 24 February 2002

Obtained via the New York Times on the Internet; www.nytimes.com , accessed 24 February 2002

(Available via Lexis-Nexis)

------------------------------------------------------

EWG

Environmental Working Group website www.ewg.org

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Jansen, Bart

“Farm Bill Supports Dairy Farmers, Conservation” Maine Sunday Telegram. 17 February 2002

Sec: Insight; Washington Politics: page 2C.

(Available via Lexis-Nexis and was accessed on 21 March 2002)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sessions, Jeff. United States Senator. “Senate Farm Bill Would Add Four Alabama Counties To Delta

Regional Authority” Posted at : www.sessions.gov/headlines/farmrelease.htm and last accessed

5 May 2002

----------------------------------------------------------------

Miller, Micheal.

“More Aid Unlikely For NJ Farmers.” The Press of Atlantic City. 25 February 2002

(This article was obtained through it’s posting at: http://sierraactivist.org/article.php?sid=6604 )

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Zremski, Jerry

“Farm Bill Aims for Level Playing Field; Congress is Poised to Correct A Disparity in Federal

Aid That Has Overwhelmingly Favored the South and Midwest.” The Buffalo News.

19 February 2002. Sec: Local, p. B1 (Available via Lexis-Nexis and was accessed on 21 March

2002)

>>>>

END... END .......END ..........END..... END ..........END -----------------------

“Web Site Helped Change Farm Policy”

Becker, Elizabeth.

“Web Site Helped Change Farm Policy”

The New York Times. February 24, 2002

Obtained via the New York Times on the Internet; www.nytimes.com, February 24 2002.

(Available via Lexis-Nexis or by paying the New York Times

"U.S. Web usage hits 54 percent Report: For first time, more" than half of population on Net"

"U.S. Web usage hits 54 percent Report: For first time, more" than half of population on Net"

By Yochi J. Dreazen

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

http://www.msnbc.com/news/699335.asp?0na=x2249150-

WASHINGTON, Feb. 4 — Internet use continued to grow rapidly last year, with new government data showing that the number of Americans using the Web in 2001 passed 50 percent of the population for the first time.

*******
****

"Spam campaigns by Mideast groups damage only themselves"

‘You’ve got hate mail’

"Spam campaigns by Mideast groups damage only themselves"

By Michael Moran
MSNBC

http://www.msnbc.com/news/736217.asp?0na=x227D2G4-

"HonestReporting.com describes itself as "a fast-action Web site dedicated to ensuring that Israel receives fair media coverage."

In fact, it is one of a whole new category of Web sites catering to both sides of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that do what Washington lobbying groups have been doing for decades: general prefabricated mailing campaigns in an effort to sway opinion."

---------------
----------

*** Email Activists Score Major Victory. California Passes Landmark Global Warming Bill

*

LANDMARK GLOBAL WARMING BILL PASSES CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY

Environmentalists scored a major victory over automobile and oil interests as Assembly Bill 1058 (Pavley) narrowly won approval in the state Assembly on January 31, 2002.

The bill, which will enact the first-in-the-nation regulation of carbon dioxide emissions from motor vehicles, inspired a frenzy of last minute lobbying from business interests led by the auto and oil industries intent on killing the bill.

AB 1058 is sponsored by Bluewater Network and the Coalition for Clean Air and supported by a broad coalition which includes the Union of Concerned Scientists, NRDC, the California State Firefighters, the American Lung Association, the California League of Conservation Voters, Environmental Defense and the California Council of Churches.

Coalition member Bob Epstein, a member of a Silicon Valley business group Environmental Entrepreneurs, said the bill "is a precedent setting proposal that puts California in the lead on reducing the economic and environmental threats posed by global climate change."

** Email Activists Score Major Victory. California Passes Landmark Global Warming Bill *** Letters to the California State Assembly from Environmental Defense Action Network activists helped win approval of a bill limiting CO2 pollution from motor vehicles sold in the state. Heat trapping CO2 emissions from the millions of cars and trucks is a major source of greenhouse gas pollution in California. It's now onto the State Senate and the Governor. Stay tuned! For more information, click here: http://actionnetwork.org/ct/.1aLAPK1jcJl/ca_victory

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>.

State meets demand for map data

State meets demand for map data

http://www.fcw.com/geb/articles/2002/0121/web-gis-01-23-02.asp

BY Brian Robinson
Jan. 23, 2002

"Overwhelmed by demands from the public that require manual searches for information, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services

(DES) has turned to the World Wide Web to provide spatial and map-based data. "One of the biggest challenges was trying to decide at what level to present the information," said Chris Simmers, OneStop program manager for the DES. "The use of GIS in-house with GIS-savvy people is one thing, but bringing that to the Web, to make it functional and attractive to the average user, required a major change in philosophy on our part."

++++++++

PC voting software passes test

PC voting software passes test

http://www.fcw.com/geb/articles/2002/0121/web-vote-01-23-02.asp

BY William Matthews
Jan. 23, 2002

"A leading technology testing lab says a software system that permits voting on ordinary desktop computers meets Federal Election Commission standards, a critical step for technology to be deemed usable for public elections.

The finding by Wyle Laboratories Inc. comes as many states and localities seek new technology to replace decades-old voting machines, including controversial punch-card systems. But it is uncertain whether the software package, called VoteHere Platinum Election System, will win approval from many states and localities in time for this fall's congressional, state and local elections."

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

— Cyber-gripers, take heart

http://www.msnbc.com/news/691648.asp?0na=x225C4G4-

‘Sucks’ sites to be doled out for free

Free speech lawyer creates service to encourage criticism

By Bob Sullivan MSNBC

Jan. 21, 2002 — Cyber-gripers, take heart. You and your “ThisCompanySucks.com” Web site have a patron. Free speech lawyer Ed Harvilla is worried that too many “sucks” domains have been taken away from owners and given to their target companies. So he and some silent partners have developed a system to dole out “sucks” Web sites — and he’s given them away for free.

=================

"More women heading home to surf"

"More women heading home to surf"

http://www.msnbc.com/news/690460.asp?0na=x227N2Q0-

By Gwendolyn Mariano

Jan. 18 — Women are logging onto the Internet at home at a faster rate than the overall Web population, according to a report released Friday. Web measurement firm Nielsen/NetRatings said the number of female Web surfers at home rose 9 percent in the United States, from 50.4 million in December 2000 to 55 million in December 2001.

THE OVERALL NUMBER of active home Web surfers grew only 6 percent, from 98.6 million in December 2000 to 104.8 million in December 2001.
Nielsen/NetRatings added that 49.8 million U.S. men surfed the Web at home in December 2001, an increase of only 3 percent from the previous year.

))))))))))))))))))))

===================

US Net users turning to egovernment

eMarketer: US Net users turning to egovernment

http://www.nua.ie/surveys/index.cgi?f=VS&art_id=905357561&rel=true

Jan 16 2002: "According to eMarketer, 55 percent of adult Internet users in the US visited a government website in 2001.

This statistic is from a study conducted by the Robert H Smith School of Business in the University of Maryland.

The study also found that 50 percent of online adults visited a state or local government site, and 33 percent visited a federal government site.

Sixteen percent conducted business with state or local government online, and 11 percent conducted business with federal government online.

In all categories, men were more likely than women to visit government websites and to conduct business on those sites. Suburban users were more likely than urban or rural users to visit a government site, but rural users were the most likely to conduct government business online."

,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,

"100,000 Messages to Congress to Help Farmers Help the Environment"

From an email alert:

Dear Robb Halperin, January 2002 *************************** Action Network from Environmental Defense finding the ways that work *************************** CONTENTS: ACTION NETWORK AT WORK! 2001 YEAR IN REVIEW - Arctic Refuge Wins Reprieve; 100,000 Messages to Congress to Help Farmers Help the Environment;

Offshore Oil Drilling Moratorium Protects Most US Coast TAKE ACTION NOW - Canada Fights Oil Drilling Off Coast ECO-TIP - Stop Catalogues from Flooding your Mailbox ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE'S NEW WEBSITE ***************************** ACTION NETWORK AT WORK! SUCCESS STORIES AND UPDATES: Environmental Defense Action Network activists like you were very active in 2001. In a year marked by the tragic events of September 11, we also can share some notable successes in our efforts to take action online to protect the environment. Together, we now reach nearly 150,000 email activists who sent nearly 1 million pro-environment messages last year. Highlights in 2001 include: *** Arctic Refuge Wins Reprieve...For Now *** Last year, 200,000 messages from email activists helped ensure that the Bush Administration and special interests were unsuccessful in pushing a bad energy bill through the Senate that would have increased our dependence on oil, opened the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil drilling, and more. However, the oil industry and their allies will be at it again with a new push to open the Arctic to oil drilling. Act now to protect the Arctic Refuge and provide true energy security. Take action! http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/energy_senate/w5d3w54p78xwdb *** Helping Farmers Help the Environment *** Nearly 100,000 messages from email activists helped Environmental Defense lead the way in a national campaign to pass a conservation-oriented Farm Bill in Congress. The Senate has delayed consideration of a conservation-oriented Farm bill until early this year, allowing us to mobilize more public support for this important issue. Get more information about the Farm Bill debate and our plans for this year. Stay tuned! Click here: http://actionnetwork.org/ct/cdaLAPK1uPDO/farmbill_update

TERRORISTS SENT FOR WMD, CYBER TRAINING

TERRORISTS SENT FOR WMD, CYBER TRAINING
Middle East Newsline.

Sunday, January 06, 2002

http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2002/january/01_07_1.html

TEL AVIV [MENL] -- Islamic insurgency groups and their Middle East government sponsors are sending agents to the West for training in weapons of mass destruction as well as cyber warfare.

"Domain name speculators are shutting up shop."

"Internet starts to shrink"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1738000/1738496.stm

"Domain name speculators are shutting up shop."
BBC News: Wednesday, 2 January, 2002, 13:19 GMT

"The net has shrunk ever so slightly. For only the second time ever, an authoritative monthly survey of the number of sites on the net has found fewer sites online than in the previous month. The fall has been put down to a drop in the number of registered domains. Despite the drop, the net remains hugely popular, and there are now over 36m sites in cyberspace."

*****************

Cyber-Politics vs. Techno-Politics.

--Original Message Follows----
From: AlanKotok@cs.com
Reply-To: ElectronicGovernment@yahoogroups.com
To: ElectronicGovernment@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [ElectronicGovernment] e-Government Process, Techno-politics
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 10:25:44 EST

Thanks for your note. Glad you found the site. When I thought up the name,

the two finalists were Cyber-Politics and Techno-Politics. I chose

Techno-Politics only because it would cover a broader range of topics (e.g.,

security policy). But your Cyber-Politics was in there right to the end.

Best regards.

Alan Kotok

AlanKotok@cs.com

http://www.technewslit.com/

Editor, , http://www.disa.org/dailywire/

Editor, Techno-Politics,

http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/us_techno_politics

"Internet users more mature" : www.theadvertiser.news.com.au

"Internet users more mature"

www.theadvertiser.news.com.au

01--- jan --02

http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,3518057%255E911,00.html

"AUSTRALIAN Internet users have matured from curious surfers to time savers who use the world wide web to catch up on news, pay bills and do their shopping.

A Neilsen/Netrating study of 10,000 Australians who use the Internet at home found users were primarily interested in accessing sites which supplied new information or allowed users to bank or shop on-line.

Andrew Reid, a senior analyst with Neilsen, said in the past Australians had spent more time on the net but had mostly surfed with no specific focus. "They've now migrated or matured from general surfing habits to one where they're actually using the Internet for real purposes which will save them time and effort," Mr Reid said.

Mr Reid said Internet usage was up 8.6 per cent in Australia over the past 12 months but the time users spent on line had fallen.

"We expect that to accelerate over the next 12 months," he said.

"It's actually become a tool rather than a medium." """"""

The Facts and the Farm Bill @ http://www.movingideas.org/

The Facts and the Farm Bill @ http://www.movingideas.org/

http://www.movingideas.org/activism/networks/020311.html

"Let the facts speak for themselves. That's what the D.C.-based Environmental Working Group hoped to do when they launched a Web site listing federal subsidies sent to every farm in America (www.ewg.org/farm). Now, with stories having appeared in news venues from the Bismarck Tribune to The New York Times, small farmers, environmentalists, and traders at the New York Cotton Exchange are all celebrating a recent Senate amendment to the $45-billion farm bill that would cap annual subsidies at $270,000 per farm. This is a blow to big industrial operations. The proposal's surprise adoption was helped along by the site, which reporters (who love easily searchable databases of local information) and members of Congress have praised."

http://www.movingideas.org/activism/networks/020311.html

E-Government and E-Governance

SOME OTHER peoples BLURBS ON defining the terms

E-Government and E-Governance

"E-governance is beyond the scope of e-government..."

http://www.iadb.org/ict4dev/governance.htm

“E-governance is beyond the scope of e-government. While e-government is defined as a mere delivery of government services and information to the public using electronic means, e-governance allows direct participation of constituents in government activities. Blake Harris summarizes the e-governance as the following; E-governance is not just about government web site and e-mail. It is not just about service delivery over the Internet. It is not just about digital access to government information or electronic payments. It will change how citizens relate to governments as much as it changes how citizens relate to each other. It will bring forth new concepts of citizenship, both in terms of needs and responsibilities. E-governance will allow citizens to communicate with government, participate in the governments' policy-making and citizens to communicate each other. The e-governance will truly allow citizens to participate in the government decision-making process, reflect their true needs and welfare by utilizing e-government as a tool.”

http://www.iadb.org/ict4dev/governance.htm

e-governance

What is e-governance?
http://www.bangaloreit.com/html/egovern/egovern.htm

“E-governance or electronic governance may be defined as delivery of government services and information to the public using electronic means. Such means of delivering information is often referred to as information technology or 'IT' in short form. Use of IT in government facilitates an efficient, speedy and transparent process for disseminating information to the public and other agencies, and for performing government administration activities.”

http://www.bangaloreit.com/html/egovern/egovern.htm

http://www.aspanet.org/solutions/egov.html

What is E-Government?

“E-government is the pragmatic use of the most innovative information and communication technologies, like the internet, to deliver efficient and cost effective services, information and knowledge. It is an unequivocal commitment by decision makers to strengthening the partnership between the private citizen and the public sector. E-gov is a practical and permanent realization of government's vast potential.”

http://www.aspanet.org/solutions/egov.html

http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2000/0612/pol-egov-06-12-00.asp

“Pat O’Neil, deputy assistant secretary for program and data analysis at the VA and chair of the steering committee, stressed the distinction between e-governance and e-government. E-governance entails the processes used to provide services to the public, while e-government is the tool to accomplish e-governance”.

http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2001/1203/news-egov-12-03-01.asp

Center offers e-governance resources

BY Dibya Sarkar
Dec. 3, 2001

The National Academy of Public Administration and the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University intend for the Center for eGovernance (www.napawash.org/ce) to serve as a focal point for the emerging topic of e-governance, said Mike Dunham, who co-directs the center.

Dunham defines e-governance as the "people, processes and policies associated with managing technology," in contrast with the more familiar concept of e-government, which he describes as the technical aspects of putting government services online.

_________________________________END