The first thing about this section which intrigued me was the use of the word "solved" over something more proactive like "eliminate" or "reduce." Personally I would opt for the word "reduce" only because some of that which ails the U.S. right now cannot possibly be solved in either a 4 or 8 year Presidency. Some of these problem in this nation have either been around for decades or have developed unabated over the course of Decades.

I understand that setting goals are what politicians do but some might consider these to be biting off a bit more than one can chew. Time will tell and I realize that 1/2 the battle is to get some of the solutions in place to allow them to grow and mature which is why I have a slight issue with the word "solve."

Lower Health Care Costs by Investing in Electronic Information Technology Systems - Oh that dreaded Health Care topic. There are the 35,000 foot arguments around whether it should remain privatized or be redesigned after some National Health Care program similar to that of other Countries like Japan, the U.K. and even Canada. To me it is all a double edged sword of sorts.

Where the real problems with Healthcare exist in this country is greed, plain and simple. The cost of healthcare is driven by the almighty dollar and everyone out to make a profit. That is one of the prices that has to be paid by Capitalism. So can technology actually put a dent in this problem?

As an IT Service Management professional, my life revolves around identifying inefficient processes in Technology organizations. There are enough of them to keep an army of ITSM professional occupied for a very long time. It appears this is where the focus of the Obama camp is willing to invest $10 Billion dollars. The paper claims that according to a study performed by the Rand Corporation, an estimated $77 Billion dollars could be saved annually by streamlining Hospital Operations through automation and moving towards a "Paperless" environment.

On one hand I would definitely say this is a dent. At the same time it raises questions about if this is a dent, then OMG the amount of money filing the coffer's of the various medial parasites sucking the life out of all of our bank accounts must be astronomical.

Invest in Climate-Friendly Energy Development and Deployment - In two words, going green in the tank. This one is all about bio-fuels and the next generation of energy. With the dependency on foreign oil both in the tank and in the home, it is something we are all aware of. This is an area that needs to be looked at as a stop-gap measure while more time is spent developing new energy sources that are not so heavily dependent on the environment.

A twist on this is his proposed establishment of a Venture Capitalist Fund fed by $10 Billion in investment. It is not clear where this investment will come from or more importantly the percentage to be provided by the U.S. Government. Another investment is to be one that develops a "digital smart energy grid."

Again, it is vague what this last proposal is, but I can only imagine it has to do with the legacy power grid system that causes the country nightmares when something goes wrong. The distribution of power is inefficient and prone to massive outages in certain events. Sometimes you have to re-wire things from scratch instead of constantly applying band-aids to fix those small nagging issues.

Upgrade Education to Meet the Needs of the 21st Century - Education is definitely one of my highest priorities given the fact that I have two small children who have yet to enter the educational system. As a father I look back at how my own educational experience in some ways failed me. I will not get into that, but my own successes have been primarily an educational effort that I drove myself.

My concerns lie in the same areas as most of this country, however where I think the pain is most felt is that of the plight of teachers. Not all mind you, but definitely the majority. Low pay, over crowded class rooms and limited tools to do the job. This is only on area addressed by the Obama campaign. Other areas are focused on specific technology related ares of Science and Mathematics. Investing in programs, at varying levels of the education process are focused on as a means to prevent the exporting of high tech jobs overseas.

This is where I tend to differ. For me it is very much about the foundation of education. It is about ensuring that the soil at the lowest level of the process is fertile enough to plant the seed that will grow a robust education system. For me that starts at the Pre-K, Elementary level. It is about ensuring that the methods practiced for generations are updated to equip our children with the foundation from which to demand knowledge as they rise through the ranks of the education system.

Yes tools are essential, but unless the hunger to learn is there, we will be repeating the same trends and broken processes that are making it difficult to educate our current population. Another area that needs some serious analysis is that of how the Parents are encouraged to participate more in their children's education. It is easy enough to say that parents are accountable for taking responsibility for their child's education at home, but lets be real for a moment, most people saying that are people who had that as a foundation themselves as children, and the reality is, that many in the lower income band did not have one or both parent available to be engaged in their educations. That is an effect of society and economics and this has to be seriously looked at and addressed for without parental influence, children will wander aimlessly hoping that they get a teacher who cares enough to fill that void.

It is easy to say a focus on education will save jobs from traveling overseas or increase our global competitiveness with the likes of India and Asia but the truth of the matter is that these countries take education seriously due to varying reasons which we are not exposed to. This has to be looked at and addressed at the lowest level of education.

Create New Jobs - This is somewhat a double edged sword in our commercially driven culture. The goal is to create a higher level of skilled worker to prevent work from being exported. The problem is, that higher skilled employees equal higher wages which corporate America is avoiding by exporting work to lower wage countries. So what will a more skilled public contribute to lower the unemployment rate through new jobs? What needs to happen is that businesses will need to somehow be encouraged here at home that it is their best financial interest to not export work overseas. Whether that be through Tax breaks or through export tariffs encouraging or forcing them to keep work here at home. Much is said about the pain we will all have to endure to fix our economy, but is the industrial/corporate world ready to suffer as well? The U.S. needs to be a much stronger exporter of goods, services and products and not jobs.

Modernize Public Safety Networks - Redundant. I can't even go further with this review, there are many redundancies in this White Paper to which I have already reviewed and responded to. Here is the truth of the matter. There are what I would consider a lot of "Common Sense" issues here that are being looked at to be addressed. Until we get into the nitty-gritty of each one during implementation, will we fully comprehend what will and will not be feasible to accomplish.

Part of me wants to applaud the plans laid out here, the other part of me wants to guard myself against the typical political wish-list effect that occurs during every election. These are all serious issues that need to be addressed at some point in time. As a Technologist, Husband, Son and Father I am more than aware that technology can assist in resolving some of the issues that ail America today, however none of them will be solved by technology. That job of providing the solutions has to be driven by each and every one of us.

Successful technology is all about possessing the ability to think outside of the box when we all begin to do this and retain an open mind to alternative ways of looking at the issues will we begin to succeed in solving some of our most complex problems. I am pleased that some of the Obama approaches embrace this technique, I only hope that however things turn out someone takes this all serious and begins to get that ball rolling.

Today, McCain's press guy made the statement that this Election is "not about the issues." I almost spit out my coffee when I heard that comment. As someone who is sick and tired of the bi-partisan bull coming out of Washington, I need this election to be about the issues, I mean WTF?!?!

I am even more convinced now than when I switched from Republican to Democrat that the Republican Party is falling apart and completely out of touch with this once proud Republican's views.

How can anyone in their right mind not realize that the voting public needs their issues addressed? Is this not a clear signal that the only way the McCain camp believes they have a chance is to avoid the issues and embark on character assassination?

I for one am completely beyond the whole Democrat/Republican feud and am more interested in what any candidate is going to do to fix this country's problems a.k.a. Issues. I don't think McCain is a bad candidate, I just think that there are too many "Old School" advisors pushing him down the wrong path.  The Republican Party is the Titanic and I am glad I sold my ticket at the dock.

Upgrade. Upgrade. Upgrade. In a word, that is what this section deals with. It is about upgrading the very infrastructure that criss-crosses this great country. Realistically it is that "Greatness" or "Vastness" that proves to be the largest hurdle to providing more internet access across this country.

But the problem is deeper than whether or not you can get the internet to someone's door. The truth of the matter is that as long as you have a phone in your home you could access the internet albeit quite a painful experience. The issue here is not internet access as much as it is access to Broadband. Bigger pipes, faster speed providing more access to rich media and content.

It seems that the first hurdle is to not define the term "Broadband" but to modify the definition of broadband to reflect what that term really means. Originally it was laid out as anything over 200Kbps. This in and of itself is absurd. 3G Cellular networks provide more speed than this. The truth is, that the definition of "Broadband" will have be defined as a dynamic term that may require modification or review every 'X' number of years if for no other reason than to keep commercial interests honest concerning the services they provide to the public.

Once that is defined you can then begin to analyze the delivery method of that bandwidth to the citizens of this country. What was once an astronomically cost prohibitive challenge when the consideration was limited to a wired infrastructure, can now be looked at more creatively with the newer technologies available. WiFi, Satellite, Microwave, Cable, Fiber all poised to reach more locations in this vast country than anything else previously on the market.

Where the Internet began as a U.S. Government project, it has slipped into the realm of commercial use and control. What will need to occur to fix this is really a true partnership between the Public and Private sectors to "Git 'er done." The strength of Obama to cross party lines to get things done will be further stretched when he begins to take on the commercial interests of the big national infrastructure players like AT&T, Verizon and others. It will take some serious negotiations and planning to accomplish this task of further providing every American the availability of access to the Internet at reasonable costs.

I honestly do not see this as an impossible task, after all, we have managed to provide water and electricity to almost every household in America why not the Internet when you can serve it up via so many different options?

Image the U.S. Government being run like a true Enterprise. To do so would require a huge political undertaking to say the least. That is only on the Business side. On the Technology side you would think it would be much easier. After all, Technology would not differ as greatly as that of the Business of running a Government. There are International Business who undertake a more complex technology environment. You only need look at the likes of GE or any of the major Investment Banks on Wall Street.

They operate in multiple countries around the world with many unique dissimilar business lines all operating on a common infrastructure. Why is it then, that a single government in one country cannot do the same? Politics. That is the only justification I can rationally accept in my own mind. So how does this leap occur? What will it take to run this nation's infrastructure like a single common entity?

I am not naive enough to over simplify this problem at all. I am hoping that it is not being over simplified in the Obama Enterprise either. The plan is to put in place a Chief Technology Officer (CTO) not unlike many of the most successful industries of our nation. The plan is to have this individual/office take complete responsibility of planning an effective strategy to bring together all of the disparate technologies of our nations governmental departments.

I do think it is ironic that we put in place a Director of Homeland Security to ensure that all Federal departments are talking and sharing information for the sake of protecting this country from threat, but yet the infrastructures continue to remain separate to some degree, with each department running on their own Technology budgets, strategy and platforms. It is time to take the Technology serious as a major element to an effective Government instead of a Tool taking a back seat to the business of protecting this country.

This is not by any means an easy task. It means forming relationships and working closely with each departmental CIO to form a single strategy. It also means taking into account the areas of national security that will have to remain isolated to ensure confidentiality. There is also the issue of privacy and protection of information for all of America's citizens while at the same time making other information publicly accessibly under the E-Government Act.

There is also the issue of public safety and fixing the the broken infrastructure required to ensure that first responders can act effectively and immediately to issues of an emergency nature. Natural Disasters are a good example. Not simply getting the word out but keeping that word going despite the lack of standard telecommunication methods. This is were things like Satellite, Wifi, VoIP technologies can be effectively deployed in times of crisis to ensure that communication channels remain open.

The selfish side of me would simply like the U.S. Government to put in place a National Wireless infrastructure for all of its citizens. The only problem with that is the mistrust that some department in Government would use that as a means to monitor our every move. What we don't need is the "Big Brother" watching us when what we really need is "Big Brother" to watch himself.

The old boy network is what I think of when I think of the Federal Government and elected officials. It is almost as if it is a race to get through all of the hard work and struggles of a state level politician to achieve that goal of making it to Washington. Once there all of the reasons and issues that led one there are quickly forgotten or overshadowed by the perks of an elected official in Washington.

That is how I have always viewed it and so have numerous others who have lost their confidence in Washington to look out for those of us who depend on them to do the right thing. What has happened and I venture to believe will continue to happen, is that lobbyists for Big Business will continue to shower these officials with elaborate schemes to "sweeten" the deal for their own interests and deep pockets over that of the "little guy".

This has been able to occur because of the bureaucracy and web of double speak that occurs in Washington that throws up a smoke screen to these questionable activities. Essentially it occurs under the table, radar and whatever else you can think of keeping it all out of sight of the general public.

Obama's Policy Paper attempts to address this issue through the use of Technology. His continued fight against the deceit and vagueness that occurs within government is admirable, however how much would he actually be able to achieve? More importantly, if this information is made available, how much of the voting public would actually pay attention to it and take matters into their own hands to seek out the truth in government?

I am as guilty as the next for only sticking to the headlines as published through the mainstream media. That information is also essentially the opinion or writings of others who may not have the same interests as your or I. To effectively ensure that these officials and special interest groups are held at bay will require the work of all of us. To go beyond the headlines and dig into the data that Mr. Obama intends to make technically available to all of us. I can think of one place in particular that provides an immense amount of information available today on the work being done in the halls of Congress and the Senate. It is called OpenCongress.Org and puts out there for all of us to view each and every Bill put before these governmental bodies.

The beauty of this site in particular is it also puts out there which elected officials Sponsor, support and vote on each and every one of them. The site is thorough providing you with contact information based on your district's representation in these public offices to allow you to voice your opinion directly to these official. It is a very good site for those serious about discovering what issues affect you.

So even though the goal is to create a transparent and connected democracy, it is "We The People" yet again that will have to uphold our side of this deal by taking advantage of the information that is being made transparent. Without such action these efforts are completely for naught.

How can it be a right to have privacy yet live with limits to that privacy? Is that truly a right? I would think it is more of a Guideline to Privacy. Yes ladies and gentlemen this is a tricky one made even more complicated by the numerous stories of Governmental misuse of laws "re-engineered" to allow wire-tapping in the name of terrorism.

Safeguard our Right to Privacy - The internet is truly the information superhighway. At the same time, a large portion of that information is information about you, your neighbors and your family. Every day we are under attack from spammers, hackers, viruses and criminals trying to trick us into voluntarily providing our personal information to some cause or overthrown leader of a West African nation so that they can recover their Family's lost millions, of which you will receive a handsome percentage of. DUH!

Then it gets complicated. Rumors of Corporate Espionage come into play. Companies trying to obtain employee data via cold-calls to unsuspecting and un-informed employees. Stolen electronic devices and laptops containing sensitive corporate information as well as employee information.

Finally it gets down right scary. Governmental information of U.S. Citizens stored in who knows what dungeon within the walls of the C.I.A., FBI or NSA all in the name of National Security. Social Security Numbers lost on laptops left behind in public locations or stolen outright. Yes, we are at war, but not a conventional one.

This is a war of electronic deception that moves at the speed of light. in some cases, set off by the stupidity of the human condition. Data and Information are what they are. There is no code that decides to steal data or lose a laptop. This is all done within the magic realm of the human mind. The one variable that is the most difficult to control, manage or stop.

The good news is, you can educate, inform and put in place serious penalties for those who commit crime or abuse personal information or data. You can even continue to research and implement stronger encryption and algorithms to slow down cyber crime. But you will never stop it. That is the other side of the human condition ingenuity.

We can all sit around and hope someone else comes up with a better mouse-trap, we can even recoil into a face-less existence on-line. As we continue to leverage technology to streamline our daily lives however, pulling away from the net may very well be the equivalent of saving your life's savings within the coils of your mattress at home.

The world is marching unabated into a future that will become more increasingly integrated with the on-line world driven by business and other critical industries we have to deal with on a daily basis. It is nice to see Political figures making efforts to understand and address this, but once again, it is our own responsibility as citizens to understand technology and take steps to protect our own data. In most cases this involves a tad bit more common sense than we have seen in the past; passwords people, passwords!

This is not an Election issue, this is a life issue we all should be very much on top of you have to keep yourself informed, educated and engaged with your government representatives, making sure they do what it is that is in all of our best interest. But you already knew that, didn't you?

As a Parent of two young children who have yet to figure out how to do anything with my computer other than to sneak up and punch keys while I am typing. However, the day will come soon when they are asking for a time-share deal on my hardware. This became evident to me after realizing that at my Daughter's Day Care they actually had a computer in the classroom for the children to "explore," opening another avenue that I will have to patrol as a concerned parent.
Protect Our Children While Preserving the First Amendment The Obama take on this concern is interesting. Going against the general Democratic belief that "Government" is needed to legislate problems out of our lives, Obama is yet again putting the parents under the spot-light for being responsibility for their children's exposure to undesirable content both in the media as well as on the web.

It has been my opinion that for far too long parents have relegated the duty of parenting to schools that are spread too thin and the ultimate baby-sitter, the television. When things go south they look to blame everything else but themselves. I will have to save that discussion for a different post.

One exciting concept is that offered by what is being called "Public Media 2.0." I am only going to assume that the 1.0 version of that was the boob-tube. Version two takes programming provided by the likes of the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) and other children's content providers and migrates it over to the web. The Problem is, it also introduces a whole new way of thinking in regard to how it is selected, rated, and managed. How would content be selected as part of the Public Media 2.0 effort? Would it have to be educationally based? Certified by the Department of Education? What would be the guidelines?

Here is an example of how tricky this can be:

When faced with a decision to put up Wonder Pets or Sponge Bob Squarepants, I always choose Wonder Pets because I feel Sponge Bob is more for entertainment than education. Thanks to the Mrs, TV is scrutinized and managed heavily in our household.

Maybe that one was too easy, here's another:

I was a bit disturbed and shocked by something my Daughter said within ear-shot of myself. She was in the other room and at the age of 3 and a half she said; "My Daddy's going to kill me!" All I could think about is her saying that in a public location and me being hauled in by some Child Services Division for Child Abuse! I immediately went to her and asked her what she said; to confirm my own ears. She repeated it word for word. I had to know where she picked it up from and she said; "from the Little Mermaid Daddy." Wow... Disney.

This is going to be tough. It would be so easy to somehow mandate the FCC to step into the Internet and attempt to regulate this, but everyone knows this is both impossible and would draw huge protests centered around the First Amendment. It would also put us in the realm of that which we are all so quick to criticize the Chinese Government for doing. Dare I say it? Censorship.

I am on board with this Policy's view that true responsibility has to begin where the "rubber meets the road." That is right here at home. Whether it is done with software made easy for the non-technical or through service agreements that providers offer to restrict certain non-child-friendly content through to the home which parents can sign up for. Myself, being in the IT Industry, I plan on implementing strict controls on my machines and leveraging any tools out there to assist me in making sure that I am on top of what my children are doing on-line as much as possible.

One other thing I would want more clarity on is how this proposal intends to handle a means to report, track and apprehend the likes of predators and others conducting improper practices designed to exploit children. As an involved parent, this part of Mr. Obama's Technology Policy Paper has my full attention. Gone are the days where you had to be home before the street lights came on and had to check in each and every hour because you were out playing in the neighborhood. The neighborhood of now is limitless with untold millions of dark alleys where children can be drug into and become exposed to things we, as their parents hadn't encountered until much later in life.

Industries grow and contract like an inch-worm moves through its life. At this point of our own lives, Mr. Obama is concerned that the FCC has been spending more time focused on the consolidation of media outlets and communications pathways. In his view, this has done more harm than good for the small business owner or small media outlet. As local radio/television stations are consumed by these Media giants.

Encourage Diversity in Media Ownership I too am concerned with the mainstream media's monopolization of what content ends up in our lives. However, at the same time I find it interesting that this is an issue at all or that it needed to be raised in a Technology Policy Paper.

I say this because when it comes to Technology, the David to these Goliath's is the very internet itself. Music, News, Podcasts, Video almost every traditional media is being made available to every single person with a computer, microphone, keyboard or camera. The reality is, these large media giants should be scared. The only thing that separates the next block-buster sitcom from coming out of Hollywood vs. Alabama is content and determination.

What will be regulated however is how fast these Media giants begin to buy up these smaller independent content provider or intimidate them into giving up their content. Where the focus will need to be going forward is on a more serious review of the national Copyright process and procedure.

It has to be made a clear and open process to protect ones intellectual rights. That is what is really needed. This information has to be clear, concise, simple and enforced to protect those who provide the diversity this section hopes to protect.

"Ensure the Full and Free Exchange of Information through an Open Internet and Diverse Media Outlets"

This is the full title as written in the Technology Policy Paper released by the Obama team. As with anything else, I am sure there will be more vague terminology such as this from all of the candidates, however it does provide a vague concept to grasp onto. To assist with this, the Policy Paper actually breaks it down into 4 bullet points which i will attempt to translate into my own digestible understanding and thus also opening it up for discussion here.
Protect the Openness of the Internet In one very broad swoop, this section seems to support an "open" concept at two key layers. At first glance, it appears to address the right of free access of content provided on the internet. The second, actual access to the Internet. It is not long in reading before I quickly understood what issue this first section was attempting to address. The issue of Network Provider restrictions and controls over it's customers.

Bandwidth throttling, content filtering and the likes which have made headlines across the web appear to be making the scuttlebutt rounds in Washington. It is here that a support is laid out for keeping these major players in check. Preferential treatment of one favorable client over a lesser client by allocating more bandwidth or worst restricting content or delaying it. That might not mean much to the individual home based surfer, but to a major corporation who needs fat-pipes and faster data flowing through them, having content or data throttled down could be a make or break situation.

It is important however in terms of keeping the home pricing down to allow more individuals to bridge the digital divide and obtain access to the same information that the rest of us who are able to have on-line access at home have. In this space however, I believe competition between carriers will ensure this is kept under control to some degree.

The very last sentence addresses the real concern for the future of content on the internet and that is of free speech and innovation. Two critical areas that are more of a concern to me than whether or not the big Network Providers play fair with corporate America. I would like to know more about this section than a simple one liner provides.

With it being an election year, every pundit on the street has their opinion about the economy, the candidates, the geo-political issues. Much like the general public, politicians who are engaged in an election cycle also begin to become "concerned" or "aware" of the issues of we, the people. These points of public interest are usually addressed by these candidates in their fresh-off-the-press Policy Papers. It would seem there is a policy paper for everything.

This is going to be a blog series that will look at an area that I am well plugged into; Technology. Presidential Candidate Barack Obama has release his own Policy Paper addressing technology. I intend to read through and blog on each section. Might be able to shed some light on where a possible President will see my future going. For now, I leave you with the quote from Mr. Obama's website:

“Let us be the generation that reshapes our economy to compete in the digital age. Let's set high standards for our schools and give them the resources they need to succeed. Let's recruit a new army of teachers, and give them better pay and more support in exchange for more accountability. Let's make college more affordable, and let's invest in scientific research, and let's lay down broadband lines through the heart of inner cities and rural towns all across America.” — Barack Obama Presidential Announcement Speech in Springfield, IL 02/10/07