Know What Your Representatives Are Doing

January 8, 2005 7:28 PM

GovTrack.US ...Using the Technorati API these folks track not only the votes and speeches of members of the US Congress, but also what's being said about them in the blogosphere. You can track them both with e-mail alerts and RSS feeds. There's even a way to embed info from GovTrack on your site if you are focusing on particular legislation.
posted by nathanrudy (11 comments total)

This looks like it will be really useful (if I can figure out how to use it...).
posted by mudpuppie at 7:54 PM on January 8, 2005

This site seems like a nice idea, but not quite there yet. For example, Nancy Pelosi's statistics don't make any sense:

The following statistics were collected about this representative's work in congress:
Statistic Value Relative to Peers
Missed Votes of Votes Missed Exceedingly Poor
The number of missed votes this session.
Dead Bills Bills Still in Committee Exceedingly Poor
The raw number of sponsored bills that have yet to come to a vote this session.
Successful Bills of Bills Enacted Exceedingly Successful
The number of sponsored bills that have been enacted this session, out of the total number of bills sponsored.

Also, this FPP could have used a few more links. What's a concrete example of useful information provided by the site? How do you know they use the Technorati API and how do they do it? I thought they somehow used the API to track votes and speeches, but it looks like they just use it to track what bloggers say about them. I guess this is obvious (disclaimer: I don't fully get what Technorati is or does), but I still find the post a little too uninformative, even after spending some time researching it.
posted by Turtle at 7:58 PM on January 8, 2005

It's interface is simply horrible, but it's a great start.

What we really need is a US version of They Work for You. Still, this has enormous potential. It just needs a better design (we've got to do something about that awful eyeball pyramid) and a few kinks worked out.
posted by aladfar at 8:03 PM on January 8, 2005

This is great. Of course, some of these stats are worthless since Congress just started a new term.

I applaud every effort to aggregate this type of information about our politicians. Congress.Org is a good site for information regarding our "leaders", their legislation, and the money they receive from PACs.

If you haven't got enough of the Red/Blue National Map, then check out FundRace.Org to see the county by county donations made during the previous election cycle. And for fun, check out Googlerace which allows you to see how President Bush and the Dem nominees are associated with keywords.
posted by dfx at 8:09 PM on January 8, 2005

What we really need is a US version of They Work for You.

Self-referencing isn't as big of a crime during discussion, right?

I've just started a site that initially has a very narrow focus -- a very specific political goal. But,we eventually hope to branch out and accomplish additional goals.

My question: what makes action sites work? (As opposed to MoveOn, which hasn't) What's missing? What's most useful? You don't have to indulge me, but if the answers to those questions happened to be worked into this discussion, I might just do the happy naked dance in your honor.
posted by mudpuppie at 8:25 PM on January 8, 2005

Isn't it odd that the religion (mostly denomination, I guess) of the representative is listed on their profile page?

Other than that, a great idea.
posted by loquax at 9:13 PM on January 8, 2005

My question: what makes action sites work? (As opposed to MoveOn, which hasn't)

How has MoveOn not worked? In my view, it was pretty successful. Unless you consider the re-election of George Bush their failure....
posted by jakeaust at 11:52 PM on January 8, 2005

How has MoveOn not worked? In my view, it was pretty successful. Unless you consider the re-election of George Bush their failure....

It was successful. Given the enormous idiot faction, had MoveOn not made significant progress, Bush would have won by a much larger percentage. That is, assuming there was no fraud involved, assuming that non-voting democrats aren't idiots as well, assuming Nader isn't really an evil front for Bush, etc...
posted by codeofconduct at 12:25 AM on January 9, 2005

Folks seem to be focusing on the web interface to the site, whereas I am more interested in the two other Internet features: RSS and e-mail notifications.

There are tons of sites out there that have aggregated info on legislators, but this one creates a custom RSS feed for yours so I can see when new info comes up right in Sage on Firefox. It also sends an e-mail alert so if I am away it comes up on my Treo.

Most folks probably are not this obsessed with their US Representative, but I want to know.

(PS - just did a spell check on this. Shouldn't RSS be in the dictionary?)
posted by nathanrudy at 7:09 AM on January 9, 2005

Since setting up a number of tracked events, I'm unable to access them on the site. Has anyone else had this problem? It's really frustrating . . .

Perhaps the site is just cracking under the load of its newfound attention.
posted by aladfar at 8:26 AM on January 9, 2005

It was successful. Given the enormous idiot faction, had MoveOn not made significant progress, Bush would have won by a much larger percentage. That is, assuming there was no fraud involved, assuming that non-voting democrats aren't idiots as well, assuming Nader isn't really an evil front for Bush, etc...

Granted, they increased participation. If that was their goal, then they were successful.

Personally, I think what they've been really successful at is raising money and building a name for themselves. They started out opposing Clinton's impeachment (failed). They raised money for 26 candidates in the 2004 election, and four of them won. They threw their considerable weight behind the Dean campaign, without really endorsing him.

Yes, voter turnout was almost certainly higher because of them, but what have they actually accomplished?

They're great at the means to the end, but when it comes to the end, there's no there there.

I'm not trying to be combative. I really hope to be proven wrong. (But mostly am interested in how to get things accomplished.)
posted by mudpuppie at 11:40 AM on January 9, 2005