While there is a lot to recommend in the
there is also quite a bit of drawback.
It's easy to see the benefits of federalism. You look at all
fifty states tackling fifty different
perspectives of essentially the same problem.
Every state really has the same basket of problems -
how are jobs going to be generated,
how are people going to be protected from harm, how are people going to be kept safe, how are residents going to have their basic needs handled by the market. These are fundamental questions and the US constitution gives all fifty governmental state entities a tremendous amount of leeway in coming up with their own solutions.
What’s so awesome about this setup is that when a solution works really well in one part of the country, it is not a surprise that other state governments start copying and pasting that solution.
Similarly, if a government adopts a system that is a total failure, other state governments sit up and pay attention. They don’t want that to happen to them. They don’t want to go down that road. They don’t want to experience the same letdown and disappointment that happened in that one jurisdiction so they steer clear.
That is what’s so awesome about federalism because you have fifty shots at coming up with a workable solution. Compare this with other countries that have a unitary system. If the central government is corrupt, incompetently run, lacks imagination or moral courage, then the whole country suffers.
the downside to federalism is the different standards imposed in area to area. Of course, there is a flat federal standard.
For example, in interstate commerce and trade between the states, the federal standard has to hold. Federal laws govern interstate trading of securities and other types of activities that go across state lines. However, with that said, there is still a tremendous amount of power reserved to state and local government to do their own thing as far as certain problems are concerned.
Now, here’s the problem. When they come up with solutions, they need data structures. They need forms. They need to present findings. Since everybody is different, at least on paper, there is a temptation to just go your own way.
So, it’s not unusual for state bureaucrats in Mississippi, for example, to come up with their own form. To make matters worse, the different cities and towns that make up the state of Mississippi also have their forms.
Accordingly, when government entities at different levels compare notes, possibly to make things more efficient, to reduce costs, to collaborate on large intrastate projects, things fall apart. It really all boils down to a failure to communicate efficiently.
Make no mistake about it if you fail to communicate in a clear, concise, compact and smooth way on a prolonged basis, it’s going to be very hard to scale up that communication. In other words, if you are involved in a project that will involve millions of data points, it’s very easy for things to get knocked loose, things to fall between the cracks and, eventually, for the gears to grind down and the machine of governance stops.
is dedicated to helping governmental entities, regardless of how big and regardless of small and regardless of their level, to come up with a shared protocol or standards, if you will, for information interchange.
The idea here is to come up with a standard format that can make sense across the board in the United States. This way information produced in Maryland in some small town on a purely rural and local level can be processed easily and quickly without having the need to pick up a phone and get in touch with a flesh-and-blood human being for an explanation.
That may seem like a small thing. It may seem like a fairly superficial concern in the big scheme of things, but don’t be fooled. It is this small stuff that actually scales up as far as headaches are concerned.
If there is any kind of stumbling block or any kind of inefficiency at a local or small-scale level, you can bet that once all data is aggregated and this data is accumulated over an extended period of time that this can have a profound negative effect because the shortfalls, drawbacks and technical flaws of the forms being used become magnified.
It’s kind of like tracking weather. If you make a calculation error of 0.000001, if you are looking at a fairly shallow phenomenon, and the phenomenon happens right in front of you, you probably won’t miss anything. However, if you are looking at the Earth from a long, long ways away, that miscalculation can be huge. In fact, it can be devastating.
The same applies to rocket trajectories. The trajectory being off by 0.0000001 may not mean much if the rocket just took off and landed on Earth. However, if that rocket is going to Pluto or is supposed to go to the part of the galaxy, you can bet that miscalculation will ensure that the rocket will end up somewhere else.
I hope you get my point because there is a huge volume of data involved we need to get down to brass tacks as far as form and data, consistency and protocols are concerned.
The stakes are too high. There are just so many dollars that are going to be wasted. There are just so many projects postponed. In other words, the costs of sticking with the status quo is simply too high.
Join us for a total US standardized data platform that will not only work wonders here but can also benefit people from all four corners of the globe.
This website was actually inspired by a data initiative started in the private corporate world. That initiative is called the Corporate Information Factory or CIF protocol.
The idea here is that the data collection has to fit certain commonly agreed parameters so that regardless of who is accessing that data, they can smoothly, quickly and efficiently handle it to produce the outcome that they are looking for.
In other words, in the private world, standard protocols ensure that everybody plays on a level playing field. It also encourages people to participate more, to create more and otherwise create a robust market.
For example, if the high-speed data transmission protocols in private telecoms were not regulated or were not agreed on, what do you think will happen? Well, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that it would be flat out and total chaos.
It really would because everybody’s protocol is really different. Their devices won’t be talking to each other. The data that they’re creating will conflict. Things will slow to a crawl.
In many cases, things will get really expensive because telecoms players would have to buy different sets of hardware just to service the same consumer base. It’s going to be a flat-out disaster. It’s too expensive, too slow and produces less-than-stellar results.
Well, given the huge amount of money that was to be made in the private sector, it is no surprise that the major players got together and came up with a protocol that everybody agrees to play along with. This has made business so much easier to transact. It has reduced the cost of doing business and this is the reason the telecoms field in the United States is so robust, prices are cheap, data speeds are low, services are quick, so on and so forth.
This also applies in food, agribusiness, food processing or manufacturing. In fact, it applies across the board. Unfortunately, there is one area of the American life where data standardization does not, cannot and, we suspect, intentionally will not work.
We are, of course, talking about the government. In the government, there are many formats. A lot of people take a lot of comfort from the federal government. The US federal government has standardized forms. They have standardized data warehousing and data processing protocols. Good for them!
However, the problem is the federal government is just one of the many governments running the United States. If you were to look at the actual number of governments that run the United States, we can start with the number fifty-one. That’s the fifty states and then the federal states, not to mention overseas territories, special organizations, so on and so forth.
This is a serious problem because it would be great for innovations that started out in one end of the country to be quickly adopted elsewhere. It also would be great for data collected in certain parts of the country to be extrapolated and handled to benefit people from other parts of the nation.
That’s not happening because of a very simple form bottleneck, and it really is some sort of technical bottleneck. It doesn’t have to be this way, and this why the Inmongif project exists. It is a government information protocol format for all players. We’re talking not just state government but also municipal government, special administrative regions, government-owned corporations, government nonprofits, the whole bowl of wax. Everybody needs to get on board so that data can empower everybody who plays a role in helping citizens live better lives.