Well if you were looking for a bastion of clear political communications I would think you look anywhere BUT here: congressional Web sites. The Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) watchdog group today announced its “Golden Mouse” report card for congressional Web sites and found them mostly ‘disappointing.” Just for the record Layer 8 thinks the group could have been a little more harsh/snarky in its comments but that’s just me. Among the report’s major criticisms:
* Almost half (49.1% ) do not give sufficient information on contacting the office regarding a problem with a federal agency. * Only 26.4% offered guidance on the best ways to communicate with their offices. * Only 11.4% of House and 5% of Senate Web sites posted their office hours.* 32% do not have links to sponsored or co-sponsored legislation. Of the ones that do, 13.7% did not reference the most current session of Congress. * Overall quality is “disappointing” with over a third of the congressional Web sites earning a substandard or failing grade. The one finding you’d think all elected officials would pay attention to: “The report says that in the 2006 midterm election, Members who received less than 50% of the vote had the highest percentage of sites that scored an “F” (21.1%). This suggests that having an adequate Web site is something voters want and expect-but is not, unfortunately, something enough Member offices now deliver. On the opposite end of the spectrum, those who received more than 55% of the vote had the highest percentage of “D”s. Those with close margins of victory (50-55%) seemed to understand the consequences of not meeting constituent expectationsonline. They earned the highest percentage of “A”s and “B”s. ” That’s saying something. Funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation – The 2006 Gold Mouse Report: Recognizing the Best Web Sites on Capitol Hill – evaluated 615 congressional websites, including those of all Senate and House members and delegates. CMF has been studying congressional websites since 1998 and produced two previous Golden Mouse reports in 2002 and 2003. “What is particularly striking is how few members use the Internet to convey substantial information about how they have voted, and why they have voted the way that they have. This is especially troubling given the potential of the Internet to transform the discussion members have with their constituents about the issues of the day,” said Dr. David Lazer, associate professor of public policy and director of the Program on Networked Governance at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government in a statement.. But the news wasn’t all bad. Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy’s website won a third consecutive Golden Mouse as best congressional Web site. “Al Gore took home an Oscar, but I’ll settle for a Gold Mouse,” said Leahy in a press release.The House Committee on Science and Technology’s minority website from the 109th Congress also was honored as one of the best in Congress.
