P1: C-152-Gronke
Gronke WL040/Bidgoli-Vol III-Ch-07 July 11, 2003 11:45 Char Count= 0
CONCLUSION 93regulations in the year 2010. Rather than simply schedul-
ing a public comment session in Washington, anyone is
allowed to register opinions via Internet teleconferenc-
ing. Local citizens, concerned politicians, and informed
observers play on a level playing field with the moneyed
interests and high-powered lobbyists who so often seem
to dominate federal decision making.
Alternatively, imagine a world (already in place) where
broadband could provide the electorate insider access to
all levels of government. C-SPAN already provides gavel-
to-gavel coverage of congressional debates and hearings.
Audiovisual technologies might replace e-mails to a con-
gressman, which usually receive an automatic response
reply, with short question and answer sessions conducted
live over Internet teleconferencing (with a congressional
aide, if not with the congressman himself).
The most groundbreaking aspect of the Internet might
be the ability of citizens to express their opinionsdirectly,
bypassing parties and interest groups. Political scientists
have long realized that citizens vary in their preference for
different “modes” of political participation. Some vote,
others attend rallies, still others prefer to write letters.
This is precisely what we would expect when individu-
als vary so much in their access to political resources
and their integration into social networks (Rosenstone &
Hansen, 1993). What difference might the Internet make?
In a wired world, it is far easier (perhaps too easy) to
dash off an e-mail to a member of Congress or offending
bureaucrat. At the same time, just as members have had
to contend with reams of postcards generated by grass-
roots lobbying efforts, universal access to e-mail is likely
to reduce its impact. Ironically, then, the Internet and
e-mail have made the old-fashioned handwritten and
signed letter far more effective, simply by contrast.
Are these visions likely to become a reality? Due to the
stipulations of the 1974 Administrative Procedures Act
(A.P.A.), these agencies are obligated to hear from every-
one who would like to speak on an issue facing the agency
prior to the agency’s ruling. The procedure further states
the agency must take all arguments into account when
rendering a ruling and provide reasons for its decision.
Currently, speaking before an agency like the E.P.A. carries
the high costs of a trip to Washington D.C. With the advent
of e-mail and the World Wide Web, citizens can easily col-
lect information and express their opinions on new regu-
lations and public laws. Once the aforementioned tech-
nological enhancements become commonplace, it may
even be possible for “teletestimony” to be given at con-
gressional hearings and agency public comment sessions.
Some optimists, such as Andrew Shapiro, further pre-
dict that individualizedcontrolover the means and modes
of contact with government will empower individuals
(Shapiro, 1999). As Kevin Hill and John Hughes point out,
the Internet’s low costs have created tremendous new op-
portunities for fringe groups seeking to become more rec-
ognized. A fringe political group with limited resources
can create a Web page that differs little in quality from a
Web site for a well-financed political party (Hill & Hughes,
1998, p. 134). This logic also applies to fringe group par-
ticipation in local, state, and federal political activities.
Via Internet teleconferencing, a radical environmentalist
group operating on a budget of $10,000 a year could affordto present its ideas before the E.P.A. in the same manner
as the Sierra Club.
In addition to fringe groups, teleconferencing also aids
those political activists confined by the costs of mobility.
This group includes stay-at-home mothers and fathers, se-
nior citizens who are unable to travel without assistance,
and the disabled. Assuming that a person in one of these
groups was politically motivated yet constrained by his or
her situation, teleconferencing could mobilize that citizen
by allowing him or her to participate. In theory, the mo-
bilizing effects of ubiquitous high-speed Internet access
and enhanced audio/visual capabilities could create an
even more powerful lobbying force for organizations such
as the A.A.R.P. or women’s rights movements, assuming
that these organizations are stripped of some influence by
“immobile” members who might otherwise directly par-
ticipate in lobbying, protesting, or debating before a gov-
ernmental body.CONCLUSION
E-commerce was supposed to revolutionize the business
world, making “bricks” a thing of the past. The post-
Internet hangover has demonstrated the importance of
the “old rules” of investment and the preference among
consumers for bricks over clicks. Similarly, the “old rules”
of politics, the basic relationships between individual mo-
tivations, organizational effort, and political action, have
remained stubbornly resistant to the lure of computer
revolution. Picnics and pig pickin’s, state fairs, and out-
door rallies remain an important part of the “retail center”
of American politics. Most candidates still spend the vast
bulk of their advertising dollars on traditional media out-
lets (television, radio, and newspapers) or direct mail
contacts, rather then choosing to contact voters via the
Internet. Most political parties continue to spend tens of
millions of dollars each campaign cycle on traditional po-
litical activities, such as voter registration drives, political
canvassing, and “get out the vote” efforts. Even so-called
“high-tech lobbying” efforts (West & Loomis, 1998), al-
though taking full advantage of electronic technologies in
order to educate citizens and mobilize participants, con-
tinue to focus their efforts on traditional media outlets,
grassroots organizing, and old-fashioned lobbying in the
halls of the Capitol.
The Internethasbecome a central tool for mobilization
efforts by political organizations, as the rational choice
approach to voting would predict. The individual has lit-
tle incentive to get involved politically, but organizations
have great incentives to mobilize. The increase in elec-
tronic mail and Web access, the growth in broadband ac-
cess, and the seeming inevitability of Internet commerce,
has opened up a new frontier for both citizens and elites.
Enhancements in audiovisual capabilities could lower the
costs of participation for groups that previously could not
overcome the high costs of transportation to Washington.
Candidates could attract new political participation via
“stickier” Web sites. The promise of online voting remains
unproven, but given the rapid expanse of Internet access
and computer ownership, online voting and referenda
could mobilize previously underrepresented portions of
the population.