RE: Conventional wisdom
- Archived: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:25:00 -0400 (EDT)
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:19:24 -0400 (EDT)
- From: daniel ziskin <ziskin@jote.org>
- Subject: RE: Conventional wisdom
- X-topic: Introductions/Goals
>The conventional wisdom is that these opportunities are designed
>to take a lot of time, produce no results, and incorporate
>the activist into a formal structure and style in which their
>ability to cause any actual change will be lost...
Yes. I agree that this is the perception. To add to the cynicism, the "conventional wisdom" is that by the time the public is invited to participate the decision has already been made.
Additionally, folks feel like why should they bother getting involved if the ultimate decision is made autocratically (thus nullifying their participation). Examples of this scenario are in the newspaper everyday.
If government agencies are actually interested in public participation then the agencies should show people how their comments have been addressed in current plans. They should also reveal the influence of industry and political pressure. Imagine if all the people that testified on a given topic were sent a letter explaining how the original proposal was modified (or not) to address their concerns. And also, what were some of the competing priorities that made the agency's decision difficult. At least that way people would know why they were ignored. Also, there needs to be some kind of security that the will of the people won't get trumped by the politicians. (umm, maybe that would require a miracle.)
|
|
Date
|