Mr. Dreier. Our next witness is Professor Stephen Frantzich, Chair of the Department of Political Science at the U.S. Naval Academy. He has written widely on the social organization and political impact of technology on political institutions. As the President of Congressional Data Associates, he has served as a consultant to the Congress and a variety of foreign legislatures. His latest book, The C-SPAN Revolution, is due for publication this summer. We look forward to that. And he is recognized as one of the very few people who has written and gotten into the depth of all the technological changes taking place in legislatures.

We are pleased to have you with us, Professor. You can summarize, so that we can get into the discussion, and we look forward to that.

STATEMENT OF STEPHEN FRANTZICH, CHAIR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, U.S. NAVAL ACADEMY

Mr. Frantzich. Let me start off by complimenting the committee for looking at the social, political, and organizational impacts of technology. In 25 years of looking at this, I have seen Congress only sporadically worrying about the impact. They have rushed off into technology or avoided technology without thinking about the implications. So I compliment the committee for looking at this.

We are talking today primarily about information technologies which is appropriate, because information processing is the core technology of Congress. Congress doesn't produce anything of substance. They do not produce widgets; they produce information and manipulate information, using "manipulate" in a neutral sense.

They are at the vortex of three information flows: As a representative body, they are receivers of information; as a deliberative body, they are transmitters of information among the Members and constituent units; and as a public institution, they are disseminators of information; committee reports, The Congressional Record, legislation and those sorts of things. So if we are talking about the core technology of an institution, the likelihood it is going to have an impact is greater than if we are talking about technologies at the margins.

I believe Congress has to walk a fine line when it looks at adopting technology. On the one hand, it has to avoid the uncritical enthusiasm that, "we have to try it because it is there." The law of the instrument, most simply stated, "if you give a child a hammer, the whole world becomes a nail." That is dangerous.

On the other hand, they have to avoid the intransigent hanging on to the past by saying, "We have never done it that way before, and Thomas Jefferson didn't use television and we are not going to use television." Somewhere in the middle there is what I would call a demand driven approach, that is, take a look at what the demands are. What are our needs today? What are the problems? What can't we solve? And how can technology move in and help us solve those particular problems? All the time leaving the opportunity for what I call the unlocking effect, Congress doing something it hasn't done in the past, or Members doing something they have not done in the past because it was not technologically feasible.

We have to recognize that specific technologies, the kinds of things we are talking about today, television, digitized television, the Internet, e-mail, computers, fax machines, all of those sorts of things affect who gets what information, when, and how.

We have to look beyond specific technologies. We also and realize there is a general pattern. The technologies we are looking at, first of all, tend to increase the speed and efficiency by which we get information. They tend to increase the ability to find and retrieve information. They reduce, as we have seen this morning, the limits of time and space. And they change the substance of what is transmitted and who controls what is received in the process.

Now, we can look at a number of impacts that have already become evident in Congress. Let me roll through a couple of these. One process implication we have seen this this morning with the use of videoconferencing. We have changed the ability of who can participate and what the impact was on their work schedule.

I compliment the committee. It is easy to talk the talk. We have tried to walk the walk this morning in terms of technology. We have had a couple of glitches, but not major ones. We have to recognize is as party of the costs of going to a new technology area. So there are process implications.

There are power implications. Congress is a political institution where power is important. Speaker Gingrich probably wouldn't be Speaker today and Mr. Dreier probably wouldn't be Chair of this committee if it weren't for the fact that a decade ago Speaker Gingrich and a number of his colleagues learned how to use C-SPAN. They learned how to use Special Orders and how to use television to get their message across. So technology changes power for those people who are willing to use it creatively.

Technology changes structure. Twenty years ago, less than 10 percent of the congressional staffs were in the district offices; today 40 percent or so of congressional staff work from the district. They couldn't have done that if it weren't for the computer and the fax machines. Those technologies allow them to be full operatives.

When I first started looking at Congress, if you were in the district office that was Siberia. You were totally out of touch. Today you are sometimes more in touch than the people who are right down the hall from the Member. So there are structural implications.

There are also policy consequences. We have had some discussion this morning already of Internet-created discussion groups, Internet-created interest groups out there who organize almost instantaneously and push for a piece of legislation. Technology can change the outcome of the policy process.

Congress' role has always been one of establishing institutional and social priorities for our society, and I think it has to do with the same when it comes to information technology and issues of information technology. Let me suggest a couple of goals or priorities.

First, I think Congress has an important responsibility to remain as an effective disseminator and user of information. Congress can't get bypassed. The separation of powers process should not be diluted because of information technologies. Congress has to be in the middle of this information flux.

Secondly, Congress has to look at some of the possibilities for increasing efficiency, and we have already talked about print-on-demand and some of the sorts of things that can save some money in the process. More important to me is that Congress has to use technology in a way that it evens the political playing field rather than exacerbating some of the inequalities in the process. We need a wider spread of information throughout the country, a wider group of people that can be involved and can be involved in a timely manner.

In politics, information delayed is information denied. If you don't get it for a week or a month and everybody else who is a key actor get its immediately, you are at a disadvantage. I am concerned, for example, that congressional voting is now electrified, but you cannot get it for 24 hours to find out how your individual Member voted. I think we need to change that rule so there can be immediate access.

I am concerned that the committees have a fair amount of control of what they disseminate and when they disseminate it and there is no one-stop shopping. As wonderful as THOMAS is, there are a number of gaps in that information safety net where people can't get information in a timely manner.

It is very important that we plan. Technologies don't impact on organizations like two ships colliding at night. There is no inexorable calculation of what the impact is going to be. Technological consequences get transmitted through the various traditions and the goals of the organization that is involved. So we have to look at it in the context of Congress.

I think it is important for us to look at potential consequences. Organizations which plan and look at the potential impact have a much higher likelihood of being able to guide that impact in a positive direction rather than all of a sudden waking up one morning and finding out that the technology is there and we haven't thought about the consequences.

Those are very general comments. I look forward to some of the discussion we will have this morning. I also look forward to both agreeing and disagreeing with some of my colleagues in the things they have said.

Mr. Dreier. Thank you very much, Professor. We appreciate your helpful testimony and the quarter of century of work_effort that you have put into this.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Frantzich follows:]

The Prepared Statement of Stephen E. Frantzich, Chair of the Department of Political Science at the U.S. Naval Academy

The Informational Context

As a representative and decision making body, Congress depends on and is depended on for timely, comprehensive and reliable information. Information processing is the core technology of Congress. Congress and its Members stand at the vortex of three information flows. Congress receives information from outside groups and individuals, transmits information among its Members and staff, and disseminates information to the wider society in the form of reports, laws and regulations. Changes in the core technology of any institution have a high likelihood of affecting its social norms, organizational structure, power relationships and productive outputs. Modern information technology is more than a mechanical shifting of the techniques by which we gather, package, present and receive information. Many new technologies force its users and analysts to shift paradigms, assess the new opportunities, evaluate possible detriments and analyze potential social, organizational and/or power shifts. Organizations which self consciously attempt to assess implications of new technology for themselves and their Members are in a better position to direct technological change in a positive direction.

Information is not useful unless the potential user knows it exists and can access it. Technology has changed the questions one asks and the ease with which one can find the answers. Regardless of the technological format, the basic question remains, "what information is available." In hard copy format, the key question for users involved physical access "How can I get my hands on an up to date copy." To a large degree the Depository Library System assured a wide geographic dissemination of hard copy congressional documents. The Library of Congress, committee and personal staff, and CRS established routines for identifying information of relevance to Members of Congress and measures to secure physical access. The application of computer technology expanded the ability to search for sources, but more importantly shifted the emphasis from physical access to content access. The new question is "How can I find needed information which is buried in either specific documents or unknown sources?" Full text and indexed searching allow users of electronic formats to find the information they need and in some cases to follow links to other relevant sections or documents.

Assessing the Impact of Technology on Congress and its Operations

Congress has only sporadically assessed how various waves of technology might affect its operations. Two decades ago, Congress spent a considerable amount of time attempting to determine if televising chamber procedures would affect the institution. While not all the predictions were correct, they did help guide the application of the new technology and avoid some of the most serious pitfalls. Assessing technology impact is tricky. Technologies tend to take on the character of the institution into which they are introduced. Organizations also attempt to affect the nature of technological impact. Easy answers to the questions of impact are often wrong answers. Proponents of televising Congress attempted to affect Congress' lack of popularity and worked on the premise that "to know us is to love us." Contemporary poll results indicating that C SPAN watchers are some of the most critical members of the citizenry seem to indicate that the premise should have been "familiarity breeds contempt." The more realistic answer is somewhat more complex. Regular viewers of congressional proceedings are more critical of individual Member shortcomings, but do not summarily discount all Members or the institution as a whole. The good news is that regular watchers of Congress stand ready to be convinced that well meaning Members are working to improve both the institution and its output. On a more operational level, televising Congress has provided Members and staff with a new tool for time management planning, increased the importance of floor debate for informing the public, and provided opportunities to use creativity in harnessing new technology to gain power, such as the current Speaker of the House.

Considerably less attention was paid to Congress' stake in the first wave of computer technology. Now that word processing, fax machines, e mail, computer simulations and mail processing systems are well entrenched, it is clear they have dramatically changed how Congress does its business. At a minimum, the first three of these technologies allowed a dramatic shift of congressional staff from Washington D.C. to district offices. Computer simulations of such areas as tax codes have sharpened the issues in policy debates and focused attention on empirical evidence. Computerized mail handling systems have made it possible to more effectively manage the flood of incoming mail, while the capacity to create mailing lists has encouraged more outgoing mail.

It is encouraging to see that the Rules Committee is seriously attempting to assess the social, political and organizational implications of the next wave of computer based technologies.

The Nature of Emerging Technologies

New and emerging technologies with particular applicability to Congress such as the Internet, e mail, videoconferencing, and digitized television have some common inherent characteristics which will affect their general impact. These include:

(1) Reducing limits of time and space: A number of emerging technologies allow information to be transferred without the traditional limitation that participants can not be in two places at the same time. By linking individuals through videoconferencing or online discussions, they can interact in an almost face to face manner and yet be separated by thousands of miles.

(2) Increasing speed and efficiency: The technologies in question often provide "real time" access to information, or at a minimum reduce the gap between information production and transmission. Information can be transmitted to numerous receivers simultaneously, bypassing intermediaries whose presence adds both inefficiency and the potential for distortion. Instant information can add excitement, but also reduces the role of intermediary institutions in interpreting and cooling passions surrounding new information.

(3) Increasing institutional transparency: Some of the new monitoring technologies help individuals find, analyze, interpret and pass on information about the operations of institutions and their members. Once "behind the scenes" behavior can now be captured and analyzed. This reduces the ability of institutions to remain impenetrable to inquisitive observers and opens the door for evaluating their actions.

(4) Expanding sender and receiver control: Not all potential participants want or need all information. Many technologies allow the sender to target particular recipients, and the receivers to control the quantity and quality of information they choose to receive. This has the potential for reducing the shared information base. The explosion of choices for securing information through shifts like the dramatic expansion of television channels, the explosion of intentionally biased talk radio venues, the idiosyncratic paths of acquiring information on the Internet and other data bases allow individuals to become their own information "programmers." A limited number of almost identical commercial television channels and a limited number of printed sources helped assure that most Americans had a relatively similar base of political information. As information recipients increasingly specialize, the shared base of common knowledge which facilitates communication and consensus decline.

(5) Highlighting access and utilization limitations: Information technologies often require expensive equipment and user training, raising a barrier to access. The technologies to be discussed could be used either to limit information access and exacerbate information equity or to increase information access and equity.

(6) Discriminating against certain types of information: The technologies under consideration are vehicles for transmitting information. Different vehicles vary in terms of information they best transmit. Some of these differences are based on the inherent characteristics of the technology, while others emanate from human choices of how to use particular vehicles. Television excels in the transmission of single dimension visual images. It is not commonly used for sophisticated multi variable analysis. Individual attention span for television is dependent on continuous action. Computers are most effective in their ability to manipulate and transmit empirical data. Most individuals, however, find it difficult to concentrate on a computer screen and prefer a hard copy printout on which to make notes and comments.

(7) Capturing more information and increasing retrievability: Many of the new technologies allow permanent capture of what was once transitory information. This allows for future physical access and review. Some of the technologies facilitate indexing and/or full text retrieval, which enhances content access.

(8) Blurring the lines between types of information: The emerging age of multi media encourages viewing information as a generic tool for understanding phenomena and discourages the distinctions between audio, video and textual presentations.

(9) Serving as a power resource: Throughout history political leaders have used new technologies to promote their careers and the causes to which they are committed. Information technology stands ready to be "used" by skillful and creative practitioners. Speaker Gingrich probably would not be in that office if he and his colleagues had not seen the advantages of using C SPAN coverage of Special Orders to promote their agenda.

Some Benchmarks for Evaluating New Congressional Applications of Technology

In assessing congressional use of new technology, Congress should consider the following basic principles:

(1) The decision to use new information technologies for internal congressional use should not denigrate existing public information services.

(2) Information technology should be used to level the information playing field as opposed to exacerbating inequalities.

(3) The needs of Congress and the public must prevail over commercial stakeholders when considering the application of new technologies.

(4) In politics, information delayed may well be information denied. Political information is time sensitive. Learning about a hearing or vote the day after it occurs may acceptable to the political historian but not for the citizen activist. Congress has been hesitant to electronically provide some information, such as individual votes, in a timely manner. As a basic principle, Congress should consider providing all public information in the most timely manner possible consistent with the need to assure accuracy and completeness.

(5) The potential contribution of new technologies to promote more effective and democratic government should prevail over maintaining existing power relationships, personal career ambitions, hesitancy to upset standard operating procedures, and cost factors.

(6) As a primary branch of government, Congress is called to responsibly apply new technology in order to maintain its position and serve the public. Information technology, like all tools, can be used or abused. Technological development will not stand still. The choices Congress makes about its own use of information technology not only send a signal to the rest of government as to what is appropriate, but also may well determine the kind of democracy we are likely to see during the third century of our ongoing experiment with public control of government.

Assessing Technology Impact

The impact of most technologies is at the margins. Institutions and their inhabitants are resistant to change their basic character. The extreme optimism of reformers and the excessive claim of opponents are seldom borne out. New technologies tend to be adopted in such ways that they exacerbate traditional characteristics more than to immediately undermine standard operating procedures and power structures. Technologies do not impact on organizations like two ships colliding at night, but rather are filtered through the norms, rules, and traditions of the target organization.

To some degree, Congress can determine the technological playing field within which it operates through the technologies it chooses to adopt. To an increasing degree Congress is a pawn in a changing information environment, affected by technological changes in other realms, yet having little control. When Congress is the adopting agent, some principles should be considered. Congress needs to walk a fine line, on the one hand, between becoming so enamored with technology that its main purposes get lost and, on the other hand, summarily rejecting technological change in a hopeless grasp of the past. The "Law of the Instrument"_simple stated as "give and child a hammer and the whole world becomes a nail"_in which technology is randomly applied and misapplied for its own sake is wasteful and disruptive. Failing to take advantage of appropriate technology is irresponsible and wasteful in its own right. In most cases, technology should be "demand" rather than "supply" driven. The existence of a technology is not enough to demand its use. The uninformed adoption of a new technology just to seem modern or "with it" seldom leads to either the desired public relations or practical benefits. Congress should match its needs and perceived shortcomings with the potential contributions of technological solutions. Some room needs to be left for the "unlocking effect' of technologies_the ability of an adopted technology to allow the user to do things that would not have been possible in the past. For example, the application of mail management systems to congressional mail flow allowed the sorting of potential recipients into multitudes of categories for targeted mailings, a task that would have been too onerous to attempt in the pre computer age.

For those external technological changes over which Congress has little or no control, Congress' task lies in finding ways to assure that they will not undermine its role and basic operations. At times technological changes in other institutions of society require a congressional response. For all its hesitancy to move into the television age, Congress would have become the invisible branch of government if it did not follow the lead of society in general and the presidency in particular regarding their heavy reliance on television. Other technological changes are best dealt with by benign neglect. The trick, of course, is to know the difference.

Some Continuing Congressional Information Challenges

Congress as an Information Receiver

As a representative decision making body, Congress needs a steady stream of comprehensive, representative, timely and accurate information about the state of the national society and options for improvement. Not all Members or sub units of Congress need the same information. Individual Members may want it sorted by congressional district, while committees are more likely to want it sorted by subject matter area. Some congressional tasks require careful monitoring of the effects of past actions and others depend on projecting future consequences of contemporary actions.

Congress as an Internal Information Transmitter

In order to perform its legislative and representational tasks, Members of Congress and their staffs must communicate internally and coordinate their efforts. "Heads up" information on upcoming events and decision points is critical. With the dispersion of staffs to district offices and the expanded travel schedules of key participants, effective communication capabilities are increasingly important.

Congress as an Information Disseminator

At a minimum, Congress and its Members want to be heard. They have an institutional responsibility and personal desire not to be silenced by lack of access to the dominant information channels of contemporary society. Any democracy deserving the name is based on a well informed public. As a source of information, Congress has long provided a basic "safety net" of core documents such as the Congressional Record, the Congressional Directory, committee reports and bill status information allowing individual citizens and organized groups the ability to monitor and effect policy making. Ideally Congress should facilitate "one stop information shopping", allowing interested citizens the ability to easily acquire the full range of congressional documentation through a simple search strategy. As Congress attempts to compete with the other branches of government in an era of open access to information, lack of aggressiveness in disseminating its message through all means possible can only have negative repercussions for the institution and its members. The future lies in increased openness even if it means increased scrutiny.

The Political Overlay

Proponents of new technologies are often naive about the political context of Congress. At its heart, Congress is_and should be_a political institution. Technologies will not be accepted if they blatantly advantage one political group over another. On the other hand, the motivation for adopting a new technology is greatly diminished unless potential proponents see some political benefit.

New and Emerging Technologies and their Potential Impact

It is impossible in this brief paper to chronicle all the emerging technologies and their possible impact on Congress as an institution. The discussion which follows simply focuses on a few and raises potential implications responsible Members of Congress must consider.

Electronic Access to On line Congressional Information

Computer searchable and retrievable databases of congressional information on line or via the Internet hold considerable potential for enhancing the public's desire for timely congressional information. During the first decade of computer databases, public demand for access to congressional data was largely served by commercial vendors. These vendors still service the high end customer desiring value added searching software and access to related information. More recently Congress itself has joined of Gopher and World Wide Web providers of free information on line. Congress' Thomas system has been a major step in providing basic congressional information to the public. However the system remains limited in its breadth, timeliness and searching capabilities. For example, key documents such as committee reports, support agency studies and background information on Members is not currently available. Its content and capabilities will need to be continually upgraded to maintain a favorable position in the information marketplace. There is no hard evidence that the existence of Thomas has enhanced Congress' reputation, although press and user reaction has been positive. Congress has traditionally been responsible for providing documents in printed form. Rather than expanding funding for the printing and storing copies of documents which may never be used, expanded print on demand capabilities available in libraries or information kiosks could eventually save money and increase the timeliness of delivery.

Democracy is based on the assumption of equal opportunity in educational, political and economic realms. While not everyone desires electronically enhanced congressional information, large blocks of individuals should not be summarily denied such information based on lack of skills, equipment or access fees. Congress' contemporary task lies in assuring the information technology does not create an increasingly uneven playing field as potential users either have access to technology supported search and retrieval or are relegated to less useful documents. Since individuals and organizations in need of information vary widely in their technological capacity, it is important that Congress retain redundant delivery formats. Dropping printed formats as soon as electronic formats are available turns citizens lacking the needed technology into information eunuchs. While times of budgetary pressure might encourage relying on the lowest common denominator dissemination format, such a position is shortsighted. Congress must position itself to deliver information in the most useful format.

A majority of the public lacks the knowledge, equipment and/or resources to surf the Internet. By early next century this could be reversed. Congress has a responsibility to augment access by individuals sitting home on their computer with other access venues. Some individuals will have to use their public library to tap into electronic congressional information while others will gain access through public information kiosks. While cooperation with commercial vendors contributes to a better informed citizenry, Congress must find ways to augment commercial access for the majority who can not afford its high price tag.

As direct access to congressional information increases, traditional gatekeepers of information such as committees and individual Members may begin to feel the loss. Current access to Thomas does not allow Member offices to gather mailing list information as to who is interested in which topic, or to build constituency credits by stamping an acquired congressional document with the statement "compliments of Congressman." Committees required to submit documents electronically in timely fashion lose some control over when and how the information is disseminated.

Members of Congress and their staffs have become increasing dependent on in house and commercial databases to gather the information they need. The ability to monitor the status of bills, find the results of the most recent research or acquire projections specifying the impact of changes in the tax codes has been greatly facilitated by information search and retrieval technology. Evening the political playing field within Congress has contributed to internal democracy and undermined power based solely on position or tradition.

Internet, World Wide Web and E mail Access to Congress

As receivers of information, Members of Congress need to recognize the fact that format should not overwhelm source and content. New technologies often have an appeal which enhances their message. Many individuals attend to their e mail first thing each day, perhaps based on ease or its remaining novelty status. Congressional offices putting up Web pages are often so enamored with the new format that they forget that each of these technologies are simply delivery systems which do not relieve the recipient of the task of evaluating the message. Relying on e mail or Web page responses to capture public opinion is no more accurate than relying on phone calls, regular mail, or chance encounters in the airport. The vehicle for communicating with Congress affects who will communicate. Electronic communicators deserve to be heard, but recipients must recognize that the ease of transmitting a message reduces the ability to evaluate the depth of their commitment in the same way one can compare the differences in concern between a constituent who writes a brief postcard and one who crafts a long fact filled letter. Congressional offices need to recognize that new technologies affect who participates more than the number of participants.

Videoconferencing

Videoconferencign of committee hearings, staff meetings and/or constituency forums has the potential for efficiently expanding the pool of participants, increasing the efficient use of participant's time and increasing the timeliness of information transfer. Geography becomes less of a barrier to exploring issues with a full range of participants. On the other hand, videoconferencing is expensive, changes the quality of the meeting, and could be challenged as an inappropriate incumbent perk.

Cable Television Expansion, Talk Radio and Digitized Video

As the number of cable channels increases, so will the number of spots available for public affairs programming. C SPAN has already opened much of the congressional process and stands ready to open more. With a third channel focusing more on committee hearings on the drawing boards, C SPAN is ready for Congress to back up its recent rules changes on committee access with the installation of equipment such as robotic cameras in all hearing rooms. The consequences of today's relatively limited televising of congressional activities have largely been positive and expanded television would probably expand these advantages.

As we move toward more "real time" information the range of public pressures on Congress will increase, but the equity of access will be enhanced. Looking over the shoulder of Members of Congress in committee or on the floor was once the domain of a few sophisticated lobbyists. As a result the window has now been opened a bit and the close monitoring by lobbyists is augmented with similar monitoring by a wider range of citizens. Members of Congress have become accustomed to telephone calls and faxes during debates with constituents commenting, "I have been watching you on C SPAN and I hope you will vote for the amendment which is on the floor right now." In this regard, Jefferson's hope that elected officials (at least Senators) would be the "cooling saucers" for popular passions is facing a severe technological challenge.

The emergence of talk radio and talk television also tend to increase the immediacy and divisiveness of congressional politics. Words spoken on the floor or in committee in the morning immediately feed unchecked and unencumbered by contextual information into the talk show circuit to become widely disseminated in a matter of hours. Eschewing objectivity, most talk shows pride themselves in being "journalists with an attitude." Audiences choose talk shows less to be educated than to receive reinforcement to support the policy positions they already hold. Democracy is based on offering competing options and needs divisiveness to operate, but it also needs some common ground where those with differing opinions find areas of agreement. The fragmentation of audiences into narrow ideological "echo chambers" spurring each other on makes it increasingly difficult for Congress to forge compromise on key societal issues over which reasonable individuals legitimately disagree.

For much of the history of both television and radio, the constant stream of information was so massive that it became transitory. Some attempts by commercial databases to index electronic media have made partial search and retrieval possible. The Purdue Public Affairs Video Archives indexes the full text of most congressional proceedings. The move toward digitized audio and video will increase the ability to index and retrieve the audio and visual record of Congress. On demand access to digitized indexed video would provide the content access which would turn the stream of audio and video data into more useful information. Congress may well have to go one step further than its recent changes in the "revision and extensions" rules for floor debate and seriously consider whether the written record should remain as the official record of proceedings.

Each of the above technological trends have the potential of holding public officials more accountable for a broader range of behaviors. On the other hand, increased public exposure could be disruptive to the policy process, making it more difficult to make tough choices outside the glare of the television lights.

Multi media

New technologies break down the traditional barriers of space and distance. In the long run, it is probable that virtually everyone will be on the Internet in the same way that telephones and television have penetrated almost all of society. The Internet of the future will blur the lines between voice, graphic and textual transmission of information. Individuals will move seamlessly from a video clip, to a chart, to a document and back to an audio explanation of a phenomenon. In order to effectively receive modern communications, Congress will need to increasingly upgrade its Members offices, committee rooms and chamber capabilities. While Congress for the foreseeable future will remain an "oral culture," future generations will be more familiar with the power and utility of multi media format. In order to remain being heard outside the institution, congressional will need to master the delivery of integrated multi media to both constituents and journalists covering Congress. Hard copy press releases will look pretty archaic next to digitized multi media hand outs. Pure oratory on the floor will lack the impact of a multi media presentation. Floor debates now augmented with charts and graphs will be replaced by more interactive data shows and visual persuasion techniques.

Conclusion

For the social analyst the progressive waves of new technology are interesting phenomena. Congress is living through the ancient curse "may you live in interesting times," and is called to act responsibly in a way that will protect the institution, facilitate the goals of its participants and support the principles of democratic government. Congress has cast its lot with expanding information access for both its Members and the public. There is little chance to turn back without raising serious questions about what Congress is trying to hide or how it is disadvantaging some Members and causes. The task is immense and ever changing. The good news is that some participants in the process have begun to recognize that the impact of technology can not be ignored or simply assumed. A careful analysis of the potential social, organization and political impact of technology will position Congress for a more creative response.