Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label government. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Government Is Using Algorithms — Is It Assessing Bias?; Government Technology, December 10, 2018

Michaelle Bond, Government Technology; Government Is Using Algorithms — Is It Assessing Bias?

"“Data science is here to stay. It holds tremendous promise to improve things,” said Julia Stoyanovich, an assistant professor at New York University and former assistant professor in ethical data management at Drexel University. But policymakers need to use it responsibly.

“The first thing we need to teach people is to be skeptical about technology,” she said.

Data review boards, toolkits and software that cities, universities, and data analysts are starting to develop are steps in the right direction to spur policymakers to think critically about data, researchers said."

Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Ben Carson Defends Buying $31,000 Dining Set to Congress: ‘I Left It to My Wife’; New York Times, March 20, 2018

Glenn Thrush, New York Times; Ben Carson Defends Buying $31,000 Dining Set to Congress: ‘I Left It to My Wife’

[Kip Currier: HUD Secretary Ben Carson's statement in the excerpt below is the money quote take-away from this article.

Ethics is not only about the substantive impacts of actions but also about how those actions look to other people: The messages--both spoken and unspoken--that  our actions communicate about our own values.

A phrase often heard regarding ethical issues is "air of impropriety", meaning that an action has a sense of not seeming "right", of not being "above board", of not looking good. Even if an action may technically be legal or ethical.

Good ethical decision-making includes consideration of our own internal compasses and the external signals that our actions send to other people. Not just in the current buzzphrase sense of "the optics" of something, but what we are communicating about our priorities and values.

Ethical leadership--especially public service--is concerned with promoting trust in the integrity of our leaders, our institutions, our democratic values and ideals. Being mindful about how something looks--the example we set for others--is an integral component of ethical leadership. That's worth thinking about.]


"On Tuesday, Mr. Carson defended that decision, saying that his son had not profited from his father’s government post.

“HUD’s ethics counsel suggested it might look funny, but I’m not a person who spends a lot of time thinking about how something looks,” Mr. Carson said."

Sunday, July 2, 2017

Fight for privacy only beginning; Sun Sentinel, June 30, 2017

Sun Sentinel Editorial Board; Fight for privacy only beginning

"How much of your privacy are you willing to surrender in exchange for security? How concerned are you that the government has the capacity to trace your comings and goings? How bothered are you by license tag readers, surveillance cameras, red light monitors, websites that track your movements, retailers that collect and share your buying habits?...

In this age of the ubiquitous surveillance camera and the airport pat down, have we surrendered our expectation of privacy?
Is it too late to get it back? Do we feel safer without it?
Do we have a choice?"

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Trump doesn’t understand how to be president. The Comey story shows why.; Washington Post, June 7, 2017

E.J. Dionne Jr., Washington Post; Trump doesn’t understand how to be president. The Comey story shows why.

"Here are the things Trump still doesn’t get: (1) Comey is his own person concerned with his own reputation and standing. (2) A president, unlike a despot, can’t unilaterally change the rules that surround a legal investigation. (3) People in government don’t work only for the president; their primary obligation is to the public. (4) Personal relationships matter a great deal in government, but they aren’t everything; Comey could not go soft on Michael Flynn just because Trump likes Flynn or fears what Flynn might say. (5) Because of 1, 2, 3 and 4, Comey was not going to do what Trump asked, even if this meant being fired...

There has been a lively debate among Trump critics about whether he’s dangerous because he’s inclined toward authoritarianism or because he’s incompetent. The Comey episode allows us to reach a higher synthesis in this discussion: Trump is incompetent precisely because he believes he can act like an autocrat in a constitutional democracy. This doesn’t work, and it makes him do stupid things."

Sunday, November 13, 2016

About 100 million people couldn’t be bothered to vote this year; Washington Post, 11/12/16

Christopher Ingraham, Washington Post; About 100 million people couldn’t be bothered to vote this year:
"That means that 100 million people who have the legal right to vote simply decided it wasn't worth the hassle this year.
Some of these non-voters may have been discouraged by long lines or policies designed to suppress participation among certain demographic groups, like minority voters. But the research, like a 2014 study from the Government Accountability Office, suggests these policies can at most affect turnout rates by a percentage point or two.
In close elections these small differences matter greatly. But in the context of 100 million people deciding to sit it out, they don't mean much. We could be generous and say that inadequate access to the vote could account for say, 5 million of those non-participating voters. What excuse, then, do the other 95 million have?...
If voters in a democracy get the government they deserve, perhaps in the U.S. we deserve a government that doesn't bother to show up."