New York State has been ranked third among all "cyberstates" by the American Electronics Association, which considered home computer and Internet use, tech wages, research and development, and other factors. But that may say more about how poorly the other states are doing. The truth is, New York is way behind where it could be -- and where it needs to be.
Yes, there are signs of life in the state's policies. Currently, there are almost 300 bills in the New York State Legislature dealing with technology, telecommunications, cable or energy. Look at the New York State bill search, and you will see bills to provide technology grants for schools, to assist new high-technology business start-ups, to create programs for the use of high-tech maps, to fund research and development, and to set energy policy.
But there is much more that could be done.
Education
Few people in the know see technology as a replacement for teachers in the classroom; rather, they understand it as an aid to teachers. For example, information technology could be used to match teachers with schools to speed up the hiring process, and to assess the progress of individual students, or even to tutor students who are falling behind. Legislation has been proposed to increase funding for technology in the schools. Naomi Matusow, who is the chair of the Assembly Committee on Libraries and Information Technology, supports the creation of the New York Virtual Electronic Library -- NOVEL -- a "library without walls" for New Yorkers which would help to make accessible a whole range of information for students.
Home Computer and Internet Use
Despite New York State's high ranking as a cyberstate, less than 55 percent of the population logs on from home, which places the state 33rd in home computer and Internet use in relation to other states. New York's poor areas are especially lagging.
The issue is not that everyone should have Internet access from their homes. Rather, community technology centers, libraries, schools, churches and other gathering places could be used for group access. State policies and grants encouraging the development of such centers in poor areas of the city would be a great benefit in making New York truly wired.
High-Speed Internet Access
High-speed Internet access, or "broadband" as it is commonly known, is vital to the increased use of computers and the Internet for business, education, health, government, entertainment and personal communications. Broadband can be provided either by a telecom company such as Verizon, a cable company such as Time Warner Cable or an Internet service provider such as Earthlink.
But, there are still relatively few home users of broadband services. Only approximately one person in ten has high-speed access nationwide. While many New Yorkers may have at work, they may not be getting its full-benefits due to their limited ability to use it for their own education, entertainment or personal communications while at work. Studies show that broadband users go online many, many more times per day than slower dial-up Internet users. Thus, increased broadband access would result in growth in a number of online services.
But, broadband infrastructure is extremely expensive and telecommunications companies are hesitant to shoulder all of the costs without government subsidies or guarantees that they will recapture their investments. In addition, concerns about stealing digital content such as music or movies (think Napster) have arisen due to the lack of technological 'locks' on their property that prevent copying and enforceable laws that prevent stealing on the Internet. This has hampered the growth and distribution of digital content. Thus, access to broadband has not been widespread. However, the State could help to promote increased broadband access in New York City's community technology centers, libraries, schools, and non-governmental organizations. This is an area in which the New York Public Service Commission could assist in promoting competition among broadband providers which would lower the cost of access. With a greater number of New Yorker's using broadband, the city will be able to offer advanced government services online in areas such as health and education.
Economic Development: Research & Development Hubs
Despite stories about the dot.com bust, information technology is still a leading sector for growth in New York City. The state's efforts have been extremely positive in promoting information technology investment in New York State. In fact, recently, the Albany area was chosen as a new research and development hub for computer chips by twelve domestic and international technology companies. While the project is aimed at promoting job growth upstate, it is likely to draw business to New York City in traditional areas of strength such as finance, law, and advertising as new companies come to do business in the State.
This new hub is based on the Silicon Valley model of partnerships between university research centers and private sector manufacturing centers. New York City's universities and surrounding technology companies could also become an important research and development hub for new emerging technologies. State efforts are vital in identifying what kind of research and development hub could be successful in the unique setting New York City provides.
New York City's current high-tech economic development zones have resulted in lower than expected results in part due to the heavy blows of the dot.com crisis and the attacks of September 11. State development of these zones might help to transition the fully-wired office spaces into community technology centers, office space for government employees without adequate access to technology or other facilities that might benefit the public as a whole.
Laura Forlano is a doctoral student studying communication technology policy at Columbia University.
This year, the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications will receive a $7.7 million budget increase, making it the only city agency to escape severe cuts, according to the New York Times. The money will be used in part to implement the 311 centralized call system which will enable one number to be used for all complaints and questions to city agencies.
The 311 system, which is expected to cost $50 million, is supposed to make the city's call centers more efficient and increase the quality of services offered. For example, the new system will include a line with 150 languages. While other city agencies are suffering as a result of cuts, the increased spending on technology aims to benefit all agencies by leveraging resources and making them more autonomous. Bloomberg's close relationship with Commissioner Gino Menchini of the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications, and his career as the head of a high-tech company, drive his strong belief in the benefit of technology for New York City.
Pay Phone Rate Rollback
After increasing pay phone rates to 50 cents in March, Verizon is switching back 14,000 phones on sidewalks and in subway stations to 25 cents. While the 50 cent calls were unlimited in length, Verizon found that customers in New York rarely use pay phones for more than 2.5 minutes. Thus, the increased minutes were not an incentive to use the phones. However, pay phones in hotels and airports will remain at the higher rate. Verizon's decision stems from pressure by 80 other pay phone companies and the increasing use of cell phones.
Internet For The Elderly
This month the Tenantspin channel offered elderly community groups the opportunity to broadcast their own TV show for four days at the New Museum of Contemporary Art. Elderly groups from the Lincoln Square Neighborhood and Henry Street Settlement discussed their ideas. Watch their shows at the SuperChannel Archive.
Security Cameras
Last month, the New York Times reported that the National Park Service began using surveillance cameras with face recognition technology to photograph visitors entering the Statue of Liberty. The pictures are then compared to a database of terror suspects. The increased security was motivated by the warning of a potential attack on the national landmark. Security cameras are becoming more and more pervasive in New York as a result of the attacks of 9-11.
Privacy advocates such as the New York Civil Liberties Union strongly oppose the use of surveillance cameras because they fear it will lead to a lack of privacy. This month, the New Museum of Contemporary Art is featuring an exhibition called Open Source Art Hack which includes walking tours of surveillance cameras in Soho. Similarly, the Electronic Privacy Information Center conducted a postcard campaign in Washington, DC earlier this year using striking images to illustrate the increased using of surveillance cameras. For more information, see Observing Surveillance.
New Diesel Generators In Chelsea
Con Edison reportedly plans to install eight diesel generators in Chelsea in order to prevent potential power failures this summer. The 40-foot long units will provide enough additional power to plug-in 400 homes for an entire year. But, the neighborhood block association and community board are concerned about noise problems, particle emissions and electrical hazards. High increases in energy consumption in Chelsea are cited as the reasons for the additional generators.
Hi-Tech Maps And Community Boards
Last month, I introduced hi-tech maps and their importance in the clean-up and recovery efforts following 9-11. But they have everyday implications as well, for community boards.
In the past eight years, hi-tech maps, or graphical information systems, have become increasingly important in understanding and communicating information about cities. These maps can link information about heath epidemics such as the West Nile virus, crime outbreaks, rat problems or traffic congestion to the basemap of New York City. This map, developed by the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT), commonly called NYCmap (pronounced: nice map), is the Velcro to which up to 500 layers of information, stored in databases, can be attached.
For examples of how these layers can be linked with maps, see the images produced the Community Mapping Assistance Project (CMAP) at the Gotham Gazette Map Archive.
"Graphical Information Systems enables the data to dance," says Al Leidner of the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications. These maps can give answers to complicated questions involved in land use, economic development and public health planning.
Currently, community boards must wrestle with a pile of different paper maps in order to make decisions that affect their neighborhoods. With hi-tech maps, the answer to a question about the number of elementary schools within walking distance to public transportation routes but not near liquor stores could be retrieved almost instantly.
"Limited access to information communication technology has kept [community] boards from fulfilling the role envisioned by the City Charter," Tom Lowenhaupt of Queens Community Board 3 said at the Municipal Art Society on June 13. One organization that is providing free technology training to community groups is the Citizens Committee for New York City.
Community board budgets are usually only around $200,000 and their board members are volunteers, so funds for high-end map software applications are clearly unavailable However, less expensive software such as Microsoft's MapPoint, which costs about $200, can be used to get some of the same functionality.
Still, while the programs have become easier to use in recent years, they require training. To this end, the Municipal Art Society is starting a graphical information systems (GIS) training session for community leaders.
Due to security risks, NYCmap cannot be provided to the general public. However, some examples of hi-tech maps that are available to the public include NYPIRG's OASIS map of open spaces and DoITT's soon-to-go-public MyNeighborhood map, which will include eight layers of information about individual communities.
This year, the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications will receive a $7.7 million budget increase, making it the only city agency to escape severe cuts, according to the New York Times. The money will be used in part to implement the 311 centralized call system which will enable one number to be used for all complaints and questions to city agencies.
The 311 system, which is expected to cost $50 million, is supposed to make the city's call centers more efficient and increase the quality of services offered. For example, the new system will include a line with 150 languages. While other city agencies are suffering as a result of cuts, the increased spending on technology aims to benefit all agencies by leveraging resources and making them more autonomous. Bloomberg's close relationship with Commissioner Gino Menchini of the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications, and his career as the head of a high-tech company, drive his strong belief in the benefit of technology for New York City.
Pay Phone Rate Rollback
After increasing pay phone rates to 50 cents in March, Verizon is switching back 14,000 phones on sidewalks and in subway stations to 25 cents. While the 50 cent calls were unlimited in length, Verizon found that customers in New York rarely use pay phones for more than 2.5 minutes. Thus, the increased minutes were not an incentive to use the phones. However, pay phones in hotels and airports will remain at the higher rate. Verizon's decision stems from pressure by 80 other pay phone companies and the increasing use of cell phones.
Internet For The Elderly
This month the Tenantspin channel offered elderly community groups the opportunity to broadcast their own TV show for four days at the New Museum of Contemporary Art. Elderly groups from the Lincoln Square Neighborhood and Henry Street Settlement discussed their ideas. Watch their shows at the SuperChannel Archive.
Security Cameras
Last month, the New York Times reported that the National Park Service began using surveillance cameras with face recognition technology to photograph visitors entering the Statue of Liberty. The pictures are then compared to a database of terror suspects. The increased security was motivated by the warning of a potential attack on the national landmark. Security cameras are becoming more and more pervasive in New York as a result of the attacks of 9-11.
Privacy advocates such as the New York Civil Liberties Union strongly oppose the use of surveillance cameras because they fear it will lead to a lack of privacy. This month, the New Museum of Contemporary Art is featuring an exhibition called Open Source Art Hack which includes walking tours of surveillance cameras in Soho. Similarly, the Electronic Privacy Information Center conducted a postcard campaign in Washington, DC earlier this year using striking images to illustrate the increased using of surveillance cameras. For more information, see Observing Surveillance.
New Diesel Generators In Chelsea
Con Edison reportedly plans to install eight diesel generators in Chelsea in order to prevent potential power failures this summer. The 40-foot long units will provide enough additional power to plug-in 400 homes for an entire year. But, the neighborhood block association and community board are concerned about noise problems, particle emissions and electrical hazards. High increases in energy consumption in Chelsea are cited as the reasons for the additional generators.
Hi-Tech Maps And Community Boards
Last month, I introduced hi-tech maps and their importance in the clean-up and recovery efforts following 9-11. But they have everyday implications as well, for community boards.
In the past eight years, hi-tech maps, or graphical information systems, have become increasingly important in understanding and communicating information about cities. These maps can link information about heath epidemics such as the West Nile virus, crime outbreaks, rat problems or traffic congestion to the basemap of New York City. This map, developed by the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT), commonly called NYCmap (pronounced: nice map), is the Velcro to which up to 500 layers of information, stored in databases, can be attached.
For examples of how these layers can be linked with maps, see the images produced the Community Mapping Assistance Project (CMAP) at the Gotham Gazette Map Archive.
"Graphical Information Systems enables the data to dance," says Al Leidner of the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications. These maps can give answers to complicated questions involved in land use, economic development and public health planning.
Currently, community boards must wrestle with a pile of different paper maps in order to make decisions that affect their neighborhoods. With hi-tech maps, the answer to a question about the number of elementary schools within walking distance to public transportation routes but not near liquor stores could be retrieved almost instantly.
"Limited access to information communication technology has kept [community] boards from fulfilling the role envisioned by the City Charter," Tom Lowenhaupt of Queens Community Board 3 said at the Municipal Art Society on June 13. One organization that is providing free technology training to community groups is the Citizens Committee for New York City.
Community board budgets are usually only around $200,000 and their board members are volunteers, so funds for high-end map software applications are clearly unavailable However, less expensive software such as Microsoft's MapPoint, which costs about $200, can be used to get some of the same functionality.
Still, while the programs have become easier to use in recent years, they require training. To this end, the Municipal Art Society is starting a graphical information systems (GIS) training session for community leaders.
Due to security risks, NYCmap cannot be provided to the general public. However, some examples of hi-tech maps that are available to the public include NYPIRG's OASIS map of open spaces and DoITT's soon-to-go-public MyNeighborhood map, which will include eight layers of information about individual communities.
Laura Forlano is a doctoral student studying communication technology policy at Columbia University.
Early in June, the mayor proposed a major change in the way the city holds elections. Under the mayor's plan, the city would scrap the current system of primary elections to determine party nominations, followed by a general election. Instead, the city would hold a non-partisan election, with all candidates running together and no party identification on the ballot.
This is not a new idea; many people have proposed making New York's citywide elections non-partisan. Some of the arguments in favor of the idea include: party politics don't work in a municipal setting, party machines wield too much power, too few people have access to the election process, the party primaries are often raucous and ugly.
That last part is, by the way, entirely true.
The proposal's first opponents out of the gate are Democratic party leaders. This is understandable, given they are leaders of the party that enjoys a six-to-one registration advantage in the city.
The current mayor is a Republican, although he switched parties right before the campaign in order to avoid a crowded Democratic primary field. But it is not nearly as simple as saying that Democrats are against this idea and Republicans are in favor of it.
This is a complex issue, and the arguments offered as evidence of why we should change the current system can just as easily be used to defend it.
So one Republican, at least, will go on record as saying this is a bad idea, and here's why:
Argument #1: Partisan politics are inappropriate in a municipal setting. People don't really like partisan politics much anymore. Even the word partisan has a pejorative feel. Bi-partisan, non-partisan, these are good things, or at least better things, most people would agree. And they would say that having a party affiliation (much less a loyalty to a particular party) is considered passe, naive, unenlightened. These days, being politically independent is the "new black," and political moderation is the new vogue.
The truth is, partisan politics are a good thing. Parties force candidates to make choices, to take stands, to make commitments to groups of people with long collective memories and high collective standards. It is a form of public accountability, and it provides discipline, continuity, and posterity to public service.
Whether it is at the national, state, or local level, party politics is a systematic way of making choices on behalf of a larger group of people. In a democracy, it is essential that everyone feel as though he is represented, whether or not he ever serves in public office. The party system gives voters a chance to affiliate themselves with a cause; and that cause, whether it is collective bargaining or education spending or land use planning, is bigger than any candidate could ever possibly be.
People love to say, "I don't vote for the party, I vote for the candidate." But that's not really true. You don't vote for the candidate, or at least not just for the candidate. You vote for her, but also for her ideas and her contributors and what she studied in school and where she worked and her family and friends and worldview and philosophy and reasoning ability and opinions and perspectives and hopes and dreams. A candidate is never just a person, he or she is a package deal, and party affiliation is just one part of that package. But at least with a candidate's party affiliation, you know what you are getting up front.
Argument #2: Not enough people participate in party primaries. It is true that not many people vote in party primaries. These are the elections held to determine who will become the party nominee and run in the general election. In New York, under state law, anyone who is registered with a party can participate in that party's primary. The fact is most people choose not to.
The downside is obvious, fewer people participating in the process. But the upside is, those who vote in local party primaries are also the most active, involved, and well-informed of any pool of voters during any election at any level. Party primaries involve smaller numbers of voters with a higher interest in who will represent them. These are the voters who attend debates, read position papers, and follow the campaign with enthusiasm and intensity.
Not everyone may like the results of a particular primary election, but even detractors must admit that it is a decision made by those who are paying the most attention.
And political primaries are open to anyone who is paying attention. Po litical parties aren't exclusive, exclusionary organizations; they want more new members all the time. They are constantly trying to register new voters to add to their ranks. Parties thrive when more and more people belong.
Political primaries are already open to anyone who wants to participate. There's no reason to think that drastically changing the system will suddenly increase the level of interest necessary to get people to turn out on Election Day.
Argument #3: Parties wield too much power. Candidates of every kind get elected, essentially, by answering the question, "What would you do differently, or better, or more of once elected?" The answer to that question is a candidate's promise, the campaign platform.
Whether or not a candidate fulfills her campaign platform is going to depend on whether those pledges can be enforced. It's true, the looming threat of the next election can be pretty persuasive to a public official, but even more than that, the political party has a way of forcing those in its ranks to stick to the plan. Political parties have a long-term agenda, and they have to look beyond the next election in order to survive. They have a legacy to preserve, and a reputation to protect. They have an interest in making sure those in their party do what they say they'll do once elected
Political parties have influence, yes, but it can be the kind of influence that works to protect voters and preserve accountability. The good kind.
Argument #4: Party nominations are often raucous and ugly. Party primaries can get ugly, absolutely correct. Last fall's Democratic runoff between Mark Green and Fernando Ferrer is a perfect example. But that is no reason to be casual about eliminating the system that has elected our leaders for the city's history.
Elections of every kind, whether partisan or not, will eventually get ugly. Campaigns in which every candidate signs a pledge to "stick to the issues" will get ugly. Publicly funded campaigns overseen by good government groups and monitored by citizen review boards will eventually get ugly. I have worked on campaigns in every part of the country, from Presidential on down, and to this day the ugliest campaign I have ever seen was a non-partisan school board race in a small town in Pennsylvania.
Campaigns can be unpleasant, not because they are partisan, but because they are important. The stakes are high, and the pressure is intense, and the results matter, and sometimes we get carried away. Candidates will say things they shouldn't and do things they wish they hadn't and make decisions that they will live to regret. Not because of their party affiliation, and not because they are evil, but because they are human.
Partisan politics may not gentle. But we wouldn't want it to be.
Although there is something refreshing in any elected official trying to change the system that got him elected in the first place, this idea is not right for New York City. It is an idea that would undoubtedly change things, but to the detriment of the process.
Susan Reefer is a Republican pollster and media strategist. She is based in New York City.