Emb(race): Policy and Legislation Reform

Technology has the power to drive action. And right now, a call to action is needed to eradicate racism. Black lives matter.

We recognize technology alone cannot fix hundreds of years of racial injustice and inequality, but when we put it in the hands of the Black community and their supporters, technology can begin to bridge a gap. To start a dialogue. To identify areas where technology can help pave a road to progress.

This project is an effort to utilize technology to analyze, inform, and develop policy to reform the workplace, products, public safety, and legislation.

This is one of three open source projects underway as part of the Call for Code Emb(race) Spot Challenge led by contributors from IBM and Red Hat.

Goal for this project

The desired outcome of this effort is an open source technology solution that can have a measurable impact on the problem statements and hills below. That solution can then be put to work within IBM and Red Hat, as well as society at large.

This repository is expected to evolve into a piece of technology that can be created and deployed, similar to the steps for other Call for Code starter kits, such as the kit for Community Cooperation or Crisis Communications.

Contribute to this effort

1. Engage

   • Understand the problem statements in this solution starter GitHub repository.
   • Connect with colleagues in Slack to join one of the teams working on solutions to this problem.

2. Envision

   • Imagine the measurable end result of a technology innovation for one of the problem statements.
   • Plot a path from the current situation to that outcome. You can use Mural and Slack to collaborate.

3. Contribute

   • IBMers: Learn about open source and certify before contributing.
   • Open issues, submit pull requests, or edit the wiki for this repository.

Problem statements

1. Citizens don't have a straightforward way of knowing what or how policies and regulations impact them
2. Voting may be impossible or challenging due to burdensome local processes
3. Citizens and lawmakers have difficulty identifying implicit bias

Problem statement 1

Concerned and impacted citizens don't have a straightforward way of knowing what or how policies and regulations impact them or what they can do in response.

Hills (who, what, and wow)

1. Citizens are aware of policy that is being considered that is highly impactful to them, without needing to follow every vote.

2. Citizens are able to understand the specific impact of proposed policy on them without being a legal expert.

3. Citizens are able to share opinions so they can influence policy decisions before they are finalized.

4. Citizens can easily ascertain the voting record themes or trend of their elected officials and political candidates without prior knowledge of who they are. (May overlap with group #3)

5. Policy makers have visibility into how diverse citizenry will be impacted by multiple variations of a proposed policy.

How tech can help

• FiscalNote provides people with a overview of who their elected officials are from local to federal levels.
• GovTrack.us gives overview on how each federal legislator voted on any bills passed or rejected in Congress.

Resources

Datasets

At this time, datasets are provided for reference only. Do not include dataset information in any solutions until further notice.

• Congress Voter Rolls
• Voting records for Congress
• Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump

User personas and stakeholders

1. Citizens

   1. Citizens who are an under represented minorities
   2. Citizens who have access to information via different means
   3. Citizens of different age groups and different socio-economic statuses
   4. Citizens with disabilities

2. Non-affiliated Designated Agency/Entity

   1. Community Groups
   2. Citizen Advocates

3. Policy Makers

   1. Elected Officials
   2. Representatives
   3. "Publisher" in Government printing office
   4. Elected official staff (legal, non-legal)

Problem statement 2

Voting may be impossible or challenging due to burdensome local processes or regulations, which may be worsened by socioeconomic and public health challenges.

Hills (who, what, and wow)

1. Voters are able to get to the correct polling station, quickly and affordably according to their own schedule and needs

2. Voters can view and understand the impact of their vote on every relevant piece of legislation and impact to their community

3. Voters are able to equip themselves with the necessary information and to vote according to the most up to date, local requirements

How tech can help

• LegalMation
• Build a secure e-voting app
• Create a fair evoting application to ensure correct election results with Hyperledger Fabric and IBM Blockchain Platform
• Finding unregistered Voters using Senzing

Resources

Publications

• Voting in Jails
• Hidden history ofthe war on Voting
• Data Analysis of Congressional Data Using IBM Watson
• Online voter registration increases the capture of the eligible of electorate

Documents

• US Voting and Elections
• Georgia’s Botched Election Draws Condemnations, Claims Of Voter Suppression
• US Election Dates & Deadlines
• Gerrymandering
• IBM Internet Pioneer Reveals Why Millions of Votes Don't Get Counted and How Internet Voting Can Strengthen Our Democracy

Datasets

At this time, datasets are provided for reference only. Do not include dataset information in any solutions until further notice.

• Redistricting Data Datasets
• Government, Voting & Polling Data
• Surveys and data
• Voting Records
• Campaign finance data
• Partisan Gerrymandering Historical Data
• State-by-State Redistricting Reform: The Local Routes

User personas and stakeholders

1. Personas

   1. New Voters
   2. Elderly Voters
   3. Disabled Voters
   4. Lower income Voters
   5. Minority Voters
   6. Gen Z and Millennial Voters
   7. Polling staff

2. Stakeholders

   1. Federal and State Election Offices
   2. Federal and State Legislators
   3. Federal and State Government
   4. Candidates
   5. Voting rights advocates and foundation
   6. Political Parties

Problem statement 3

Citizens and lawmakers have difficulty identifying implicit bias within current or proposed policies, which makes it difficult to assess potential negative impacts of those new policies.

Hills (who, what, and wow)

1. Nonprofits and watchdogs can review policy implications so as to prioritize items ahead of major policy decisions.

2. Voters can identify state/federal/local policies that show bias before they are enacted or identify older policies that should be reformed.

3. Voters can identify lawmakers that have voted on policies that show bias against a group.

How tech can help

• TBD

Resources

Publications

• How tech can do better
• Diversity in Policy
• Campaign Zero -ending police violence in America
• Families Against Mandatory Minimums

Documents

• Using behavioural science to improve how governments make decisions (UK)

Datasets

At this time, datasets are provided for reference only. Do not include dataset information in any solutions until further notice.

• Stop and Search

Examples

• Cannot identify implicit Bias in following Laws
  • Crime Bill of 1994 - The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, H.R. 3355, Pub.L. 103–322 is an Act of Congress dealing with crime and law enforcement - exacerbated mass incarceration
  • Stop and Frisk policy in New York (not legislation) - allowed police to stop individuals with little cause, and as a result of institutional bias, black and brown people were disproportionately targeted. Went against due process and provided almost no cause for police to be able to stop and search your person
  • Controlled Substance and Controlled Substance Import and Export Acts, the provisions punishing the presence of a firearm in connection with a crime of violence or drug trafficking offense - example of mandatory minimum sentencing -meaning they have to sentence a minimum of certain years for certain crimes, which can lead to over sentencing
• Mandatory minimum sentencing - unduly impacts black and brown people for 'minor' offenses
• Charge stacking - even if you are cleared of one charge, other minor charges can affect the time you receive

User personas

1. Voters

   1. Low Information Voters -people not typically engaged in the policy making process
   2. Disproportionately affected populations
   3. General voting population

2. Organizations

   1. Non-profit staff engaged in this work (BLM, NAACP, Southern Poverty Law Center)

3. Elected Officials

   1. Federal/State/Local elected officials
   2. Elected official advisors/staffs

Support

Find help on the Support page.

License

This solution starter is made available under the Apache 2 License.