By Jared Duval (VT ’04)

Just over five years ago Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast, creating a challenge of epic proportions for the public leaders responsible for the rescues, recovery, and rebuilding of New Orleans. I open my forthcoming book, Next Generation Democracy (Nov. 9, Bloomsbury), with the stories of the rescue and recovery efforts, exploring those that largely failed (namely FEMA), those that worked (the Coast Guard most of all), and what separated the two.

Perhaps the most interesting interview I conducted for my opening chapter, however, was not about the immediate rescue efforts but longer-term rebuilding. A year after the storm hit, New Orleans was still without a citywide rebuilding plan, a requirement for federal aid to start flowing in earnest. The Mayor’s effort to create such a plan had failed because of the public outcry that erupted after he cut citizens out of the process and hired outside “experts” who proposed turning low-lying neighborhoods – which also happened to be the poorest and most African American neighborhoods – into green space.

Into the void stepped AmericaSpeaks, an organization whose mission is to engage citizens in governance. Through a series of three 21^st Century Town Meetings, over ten thousand New Orleanians demographically representative of the city by race and income deliberated with their neighbors to work through the challenges facing their city. Using keypad polling, these “Community Congresses” created the “Unified New Orleans Plan.” The plan included some ideas suggested directly by citizens and came to win overwhelming public support, finally providing a path forward for the city.  

One of the leaders who facilitated community engagement for the Unified New Orleans Plan was Vera Triplett.  I asked Vera how the process of creating the plan changed her outlook about government.  What she told me opened my eyes to a whole new vision of democracy and public leadership:

“At the end of the day,” she said, “it’s about letting people who are impacted by something be a part of the decision-making process ... For a long time, our city elected people who thought of us as too stupid to make our own decisions. But now I’ve begun deciding who to vote for based on whether they are willing to have us actually be a part of the problem-solving process. Before, we would give them votes or money. Now we want to give them evidence and case studies, and we want them to make decisions on the ground with us, not from some isolated and untouchable ivory tower.”

Vera’s view of a more collaborative and directly democratic form of government seems to me long overdue. Many of the assumptions that necessitated a more republican form of government, based on a clear division between citizens and elected officials, no longer hold true. Compared to the late 1700’s we have incredibly high literacy rates and access to education. And with the great invention of the 20^th century - the Internet – we also now have near instant and increasingly widespread access to information and communications costs are nearing zero. Altogether, the prohibitive factors that once prevented citizens from effectively playing a more direct role in government problem solving efforts are disappearing.

Another story I tell in the book is that of the Internet startup company SeeClickFix, a web-based tool for “turning residents into citizens.” Built on a Google maps platform, the site allows anyone to report non-emergency issues in their community (ranging from potholes to drug dealing to an area of town lacking a supermarket) with a message, picture, or video. Through the site’s discussion forums citizens can explore the complexities of the issue with other citizens and with government officials. The amazing thing about SeeClickFix is that it is not only a more transparent and effective reporting service aimed at government, but also a tool for collaboration, with or without our government.

It’s not a coincidence that Ben Berkowitz, the co-founder and CEO of SeeClickFix, is only 32 years old. The Millennial generation (those of us born roughly between the late ‘70s and late ‘90s) has markedly different views than our elders about both the role of government and how we want to interact with it. Consider that one of the largest generation gaps in American politics today is on the question of “the proper role of government.” According to Pew, 69 percent of Millennials “favor an expanded role for government, agreeing that it should do more to solve problems.” Yet among older generations, not one age group registers majority support for that statement.

I believe that what Millennials really care about though isn’t so much the size of government but rather our process of governance. Consider that, according to polling from Harvard’s Institute of Politics, fully a third of Millennials express an interest in “internet collaboration with government.” So while we may be fairly agnostic about the size of that more active government we desire, it’s clear that we want to be able to do far more than just vote and donate money.

In this context, I think we need a new concept of what leadership means for public servants. It can’t be about “vote for me and I’ll solve your problems for you.” After all, the “I’m the decider” model is patronizing and uninspiring to a public with web 2.0 inspired inclinations to directly engage in problem-solving efforts. Effective public service leadership for our time should be more about facilitation and engagement. As Vera Triplett said, it’s time for our next generation of democracy to be about “letting people who are impacted by something be a part of the decision-making process.”

Jared Duval (VT ’04) is a Fellow at Demos and the author of Next Generation Democracy: What the Open-Source Revolution Means for Power, Politics, and Change (Nov. 9^th, 2010, Bloomsbury). For those in DC, the launch event for his book will be Nov. 8^th at 6:30 at the Busboys & Poets at 5^th & K.