Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1994 11:01:29 -0700 From: Jim Warren Subject: GovAccess.032: Online U.S.Reps; SF data; NY Legis online; WA groups Apr.11, 1994 For back-issues of GovAccess, you might ftp-browse cpsr.org . (Will try to post more detailed information in a future issue. --swamped jim) &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& RESET! CALIF. GOV. PETE WILSON IS APPARENTLY *NOT* ON NETCOM I sent a test message to the alleged petewilson@netcom.com. It bounced: >From openlink!MAILER-DAEMON Sun Apr 10 21:03:48 1994 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem ... While talking to mail2.netcom.com: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown Additionally, net-twiddler Bob Evans fingered Netcom for Wilson and found none named Pete. Oh well, at least it matches his refusal to file his campaign-finance disclosures in digital form (matching chief-rival Kathleen Brown's refusal). &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HAS 16 PUBLICLY-MODERN MEMBERS (OUT OF 435) [But sadly, nary a one represents backwater Silicon Valley. --jim] >From tharper22@aol.com Sun Apr 10 22:54:31 1994 JIM: I received the following message in response to my request addressed to: comments@hr.house.gov Regards, Troy Harper Subj: Welcome to the Constituent Electronic Mail System Date: 94-03-25 21:21:54 est From: CONGRESS@HR.HOUSE.GOV To: Tharper22 UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CONSTITUENT ELECTRONIC MAIL SYSTEM We welcome your inquiry to the House of Representatives Constituent Electronic Mail System. Currently, sixteen Members of the U.S. House of Representatives have been assigned public electronic mailboxes that may be accessed by their constituents. The results of the six month public mail pilot have been very encouraging. The nature and character of the incoming electronic mail has demonstrated that this capability will be an invaluable source of information on constituent opinion. We are now in the process of expanding the project to other Members of Congress, as technical, budgetary and staffing constraints allow. A number of House committees have also been assigned public electronic mailboxes. The names and electronic mailbox addresses of these committees are listed below after the information about participating Representatives. Please review the list of participating Representatives below, and if the Congressional District in which you reside is listed, follow the instructions below to begin communicating by electronic mail with your Representative. If your Representative is not yet on-line, please be patient. U.S. REPRESENTATIVES PARTICIPATING IN THE CONSTITUENT ELECTRONIC MAIL SYSTEM. Hon. Dave Camp 4th Congressional District, Michigan Rm. 137 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 DAVECAMP@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Maria Cantwell 1st Congressional District, Washington Rm. 1520 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 CANTWELL@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. John Conyers, Jr. 14th Congressional District, Michigan Rm. 2426 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 JCONYERS@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Sam Coppersmith 1st Congressional District, Arizona 1607 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 SAMAZ01@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Jay Dickey 4th Congressional District, Arkansas Rm. 1338 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 JDICKEY@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Vernon Ehlers 3rd Congressional District, Michigan Rm. 1526 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 CONGEHLR@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Elizabeth Furse 1st Congressional District, Oregon Rm. 316 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 FURSEOR1@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Sam Gejdenson 2nd Congressional District, Connecticut Rm. 2416 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 BOZRAH@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Newton Gingrich 6th Congressional District, Georgia Rm. 2428 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 GEORGIA6@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Dennis Hastert 14th Congressional District, Illinois Rm. 2453 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 DHASTERT@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Martin Hoke 2nd Congressional District, Ohio Rm. 212 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 HOKEMAIL@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. George Miller 7th Congressional District, California Rm. 2205 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 GEORGEM@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Charlie Rose 7th Congressional District, North Carolina Rm. 2230 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 CROSE@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Karen Shepherd 2nd Congressional District, Utah Rm. 414 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 SHEPHERD@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. 'Pete' Stark 13th Congressional District, California Rm. 239 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 PETEMAIL@HR.HOUSE.GOV Hon. Mel Watt 12th Congressional District, North Carolina Rm. 1232 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 MELMAIL@HR.HOUSE.GOV INSTRUCTIONS FOR CONSTITUENTS The list above includes the electronic mail addresses of members who are participating in the program. However, if your Representative is taking part in the project, we request that you send a letter or postcard by U.S. Mail to that Representative at the address listed above with your name and internet address, followed by your postal (geographical) address. The primary goal of this program is to allow Members to better serve their CONSTITUENTS, and this postal contact is the only sure method currently available of verifying that a user is a resident of a particular congressional district. In addition, constituents who communicate with their Representative by electronic mail should be aware that Members will sometimes respond to their messages by way of the U.S. Postal Service. This method of reply will help to ensure confidentiality, a concern that is of upmost importance to the House of Representatives. COMMITTEES OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PARTICIPATING IN THE ELECTRONIC MAIL SYSTEM. Committee on Natural Resources 1324 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 NATRES@HR.HOUSE.GOV Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 2320 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 HOUSESST@HR.HOUSE.GOV COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Please feel free to send electronic mail comments about our new service to the Congressional Comment Desk, at COMMENTS@HR.HOUSE.GOV We will make every effort to integrate suggestions into forthcoming updates of our system. Thank you again for contacting the House of Representatives' Constituent Electronic Mail System. We are excited about the possibilities that e-mail has to offer, and will be working hard to bring more Members on-line and to expand our services. This message will be updated as necessary. Honorable Charlie Rose (D-NC) Chairman Committee on House Administration &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& SAN FRANCISCO EXPANDS PUBLIC ACCESS, REDUCES DATA-PEDDLING GOVT PROFITS From gnu@cygnus.com Wed Feb 23 18:07:44 1994 From: John Gilmore Subject: Bay Guardian covers SF Sunshine Ordinance forcing city data at cost B'guardian, 23 Feb 94, page 10. DATA WILL GET CHEAPER High price of tapes may have violated Sunshine Law The San Francisco Assessor's Office has apparently broken the city's Sunshine Law by overcharging citizens for copies of computerized public records. A self-described "electronic activist", however, has forced Assessor Doris Ward to reduce the price of computer data tapes -- at least for the time being -- from $2,000 to $90. Jim Stevens, who requested copies of two computer data tapes of property records from the Assessor's Office, was told they would cost him plenty. "As a taxpayer, I feel I have already paid them to acquire this information," Stevens told the Bay Guardian. "You can imagine my surprise when they told me to pay $2,000 to get a copy of it." Since the Sunshine Ordinance became law on Dec. 16, public records, including computerized information, must be made available to the public at the cost of duplication. "It is the intent of the act that the public have this [information] as inexpensively as possible without the public agency incurring any costs", said California First Amendment Coalition director Terry Francke, who authored the law. He added that "even $500 seems awfully high." Only after the Bay Guardian began an investigation into the matter last week did the Assessor's Office agree to lower the price. New prices for computerized data have not yet been set, but Ward told the Bay Guardian that, meanwhile, data tapes will be sold for $90. "We're going to lose a lot of money [under the Sunshine Law]", Ward said. "We were selling some of our data to Realtors for as much as $8,000. Of course the people that pay $8,000 are not little ordinary citizens. They're from corporations like Transamerica." The Assessor's Office master tapes list the ownership and assessed value of every property in San Francisco. Stevens hopes to use the data to scrutinize the real estate holdings of politicians whose decisions might be biased by their financial holdings. The data are also valuable to political campaigns that want to direct their mail at specific demographic groups. Stevens, treasurer of the 1990 Waterfront Initiative campaign, said that a campaign backed by big business could afford to pay $2,000 while a grassroots campaign could not. Bill Mesler &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& NEW YORK STATE TIP-TOES TOWARDS ONLINE PUBLIC LEGISLATIVE ACCESS From nylegis@aol.com Thu Mar 31 18:09:16 1994 Sorry, too tired to flesh out details. Just a little over 25 hours to our state budget deadline. What follows speaks for itself. I'll get back to you after sanity breaks out. (I guess I'd live a longer and healthier life if I smoked, drank and ate fried foods but my quality of life demands that I do this for a living) [The entire bill is online apparently only in all caps. Its unreadability illustrates a computer-format to *not* use.. -jim] S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K ________________________________________________________________________ 10035 I N A S S E M B L Y March 1, 1994 ___________ Introduced by M. of A. DIAZ, GREENE, COOK, BARRAGA -- Multi-Sponsored by -- M. of A. BALBONI, CLARK, Del TORO, HOCHBERG, JENKINS, LAFAYETTE, RAMIREZ -- read once and referred to the Committee on Governmental Operations ... BILL NUMBER: A10035 PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA: TO FACILITATE GREATER PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION VIA COMPUTER MODEM AND COOPERATIVE PUBLIC COMPUTER NETWORKS. SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS: THE BILL AMENDS THE PUBLIC OFFICERS LAW BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 88-A TO PROVIDE THAT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION SHALL BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC IN ELECTRONIC FORM VIA COMPUTER MODEM BY WAY OF THE LARGEST NONPROPRIETARY, NONPROFIT COOPERATIVE PUBLIC COMPUTER NETWORK: A- THE MOST RECENT ASSEMBLY DAILY FILE AND MOST RECENT SENATE DAILY FILE. B- THE TEXT OF EACH BILL INTRODUCED IN EACH CURRENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION, INCLUDING ALL AMENDED FORMS OF THE BILL. C- THE BILL HISTORY OF EACH BILL INTRODUCED AND AMENDED IN EACH CURRENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION. D- THE BILL STATUS OF EACH BILL INTRODUCED AND AMENDED IN EACH CURRENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION. E- ALL BILL ANALYSES AND MEMORANDA PREPARED IN CONNECTION WITH EACH BILL IN EACH CURRENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION. F- ALL VOTE INFORMATION CONCERNING EACH BILL IN EACH LEGISLATIVE SESSION. G- MESSAGES RECEIVED FROM THE GOVERNOR OR THE OTHER HOUSE OF THE LEGISLATURE, AND HOME RULE MESSAGES CONCERNING EACH BILL IN EACH CURRENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION. H- THE CONSOLIDATED LAWS OF NEW YORK. I- UNCONSOLIDATED LAWS OF NEW YORK. J- THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. K- ALL UNCODIFIED STATUTE OR SESSION LAWS EITHER NOT PART OF THE CONSOLIDATED LAWS OR THE CONSTITUTION OF NEW YORK ENACTED AFTER THIS ACT SHALL HAVE TAKEN EFFECT. L- DOCUMENTATION THAT IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND MAINTAINED IN COMPUTERIZED FORM WHICH DESCRIBES THE COMPUTERIZED DIGITAL FORMATS OF THE FILES CONTAINING THE AFOREMENTIONED MATERIALS. THE BILL ALSO PROVIDES, WHILE PROTECTING COPYRIGHT INTERESTS OF THE STATE, THAT THE ABOVE MENTIONED INFORMATION WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC NO LATER THAN ONE DAY AFTER ANY REVISION OR ADDITION AS MAINTAINED BY AN AUTHORIZED ENTITY OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE SUCH AS THE LEGISLATIVE BILL DRAFTING COMMISSION. ADDITIONALLY, THE BILL STIPULATES THAT NO INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY MAY CHARGE A FEE FOR THE INFORMATION WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION OF THE TEMPORARY PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE AND THE SPEAKER OF THE ASSEMBLY OR THEIR DESIGNEE. JUSTIFICATION : In addition to facilitating greater public access to information by using electronics and computers, this bill, if it becomes law, would allow timely information to be distributed to a greater number of people in a shorter amount of time. The public would be able to access information immediately after it became part of the public computer network. The system would work similar to the ACOM, (Assembly Communications), and LRS, (Legislative Retrieval System), systems that Assemblymembers have in their offices. PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: This is a new bill. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS : None. EFFECTIVE DATE : The act shall take effect on the first day of January next succeeding the date on which it shall have become a law. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& WASH STATE PURSUES INTERNET USER GROUP, COUNTY FREE-NET, ONLINE LIBRARIES From bobb@pacifier.rain.com Thu Mar 31 18:15:22 1994 From: Bob Brewer Subject: Re: INTERNET SIG FLIERS ... My vision for the INTERNET USER GROUP is patterned after the North Texas PC User Group (everything is bigger in Texas). They meet 1 Saturday per month. There are approximately 3000 -> 5000 members at each meeting. They have 3 Sigs running every hour from 9am to 4pm. The large General Meeting is at 11:00 am. There is a large computer swap meet with approximately 100 vendors. Members that tire of SIGS go to the swap to shop. There is a restaurant on site, so food is always available. Each of the SIGS is run by a team of knowledgeable people. There are approximately 30 separate SIGS and their audience ranges from 10 to 50 attendees each. There is a concentrated training program for new users which takes 16 class room hours to complete. Homework is required to be completed. The reason I say all of this is, I feel there is much more interest in the Internet by the general public than there ever has been for computers. Therefore, I feel that the need for an INTERNET USER GROUP is much greater than it is for a COMPUTER USER GROUP. The INTERNET GROUP will focus not only on Hardware and Software, but also on Informational Topics. There is so much information out there that we do not even know exists. By meeting on a regular basis, we can learn from each other what information is available. There is talk and planning among Clark County leaders to establish a Clark County Free-Net. This will provide limited Internet access to all citizens of Clark County. I would like you to encourage any community leader you know to campaign for not only a Free-Net, but also for a *FREE-NET FACILITY*. Our Fort Vancouver Library system has already decided to build a new library in Cascade Park. Other community leaders are discussing the construction of a large Convention Facility. I feel our public money would be better spent on a Free-Net Facility. The cost of books could be avoided. Computers and phone lines could be purchased with this money. All of our citizens could use the facility to learn how to get Information off the NET. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& WASHINGTON POST LEGI-SLATE'S FEES FOR ACCESS TO CONGRESSIONAL INFO From OGCGXR@uccvma.ucop.edu Thu Feb 24 08:09:42 1994 From: Gail Riley OGCGXR @ UCCVMA [reposted with her permission] I asked the LEGI-SLATE folks folks if you planned to charge, when they'd be up, etc: Here's the response. *** Forwarding note from aeh --merit.ed 02/23/94 20:23 *** ... Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 23:23:20 EST From: Legislate ID To: ogcgxr@uccvma.ucop.edu Subject: LEGI-SLATE Gopher Gail, I apologize for the delay in responding to your e-mail. The response to our Gopher has been overwhelming and I'm a bit behind in replying to the e-mail it has generated! The answer to your question (Do we intend to charge?) is 'yes' and 'no.' We do intend for some portion of the information in our Gopher to be available free of charge over the Internet. No final decisions have been made yet as to exactly what will be included in the "free" LEGI-SLATE Gopher Service. As for the "complete" service, a site license will be required which, for one annual fee, will provide unlimited access to the L-S Gopher Service to users of a campus network. Costs will be determined by FTE and it looks like the price range for this product will be from $1900 (for enrollments less than 1000) to $6900 (for enrollments 20,000 or larger). Discounts will be available to subscribers of LEGI-SLATE's current mainframe service, university systems, consortiums and regional networks. I will be glad to forward further details as soon as they are finalized. As to the firmness of the 7/1/94 start date, it's as firm as it can be at this time. We are working with the University of Minnesota for the initial development of our Gopher and there is a TON of data to get sent and organized. We anticipate writing contracts with a 7/1 start date but will provide a full 12 months of service from the actual delivery date of the completed product. Thanks for taking a look at our Gopher! Please let me know if you have any further questions. Ann - Ann E. Harris Internet: aeh@legislate.com Manager, Academic Division Voice: (202) 898-2325 LEGI-SLATE (800) 733-1131 x 2325 777 North Capitol Street Fax: (202) 898-3030 Washington, D.C. 20002 HOTLINE: (800) 877-6999 &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Delay is the deadliest form of denial. -- C. Northcote Parkinson [from rlm@helen.surfcty.com] Mo' as it Is. --jim Jim Warren, columnist for MicroTimes, Government Technology, BoardWatch, etc. 345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax/415-851-2814 >> To join or drop the GovAccess list, email to jwarren@well.sf.ca.us .<< >> Permission herewith granted for unlimited reposting and recirculation.<< Jose M. daLuz KnowledgeQuest Online Research jmdaluz@kquest.com (508)996-6101(vox)/(508)996-6215(fax)