Accountability Framework
Don’t take my word for any of this.
Every issue on this site includes a proposal, and every proposal includes my best current thinking on how we’d know whether it’s actually working — specific goals, ways to measure them, and a plan for revisiting them once we see real results. But “best current thinking” is the operative phrase.
What I’m asking for isn’t trust. It’s engagement. Read what I’ve proposed. Tell me where the goal is wrong, where the metric doesn’t measure what it claims to, where I’ve missed a consequence I should have seen. That feedback doesn’t get filed away — it’s how these proposals are supposed to improve, in public, before and after they become law.
Every issue page carries the same five-part structure so that critique has somewhere specific to land — instead of a vague objection to a vague plan, you can point at a specific goal, a specific number, a specific trigger, and say “this one’s wrong, and here’s why.” That’s the point. Here’s what each piece is for.
Goals
What is this proposal actually trying to accomplish — stated specifically enough that someone could check, in a few years, whether it happened? If a goal is too vague to fail, it’s too vague to be useful, and I’d rather hear that now than after it’s law.
Metrics
How would we measure whether a goal was met — what’s the number, and where does it come from? If you know of a better data source, a more honest metric, or a way the one I’ve picked could be gamed or misread, that’s exactly the kind of critique this is built for.
Review
How often should we check in, and what result should trigger a second look? I’ve proposed a cadence and a condition for each provision — not because I’m confident I picked the right ones, but because a specific, wrong proposal is easier to correct than a vague, unfalsifiable one.
Severability
Every proposal is made of smaller parts, and I don’t expect all of them to be equally right. Severability means each piece is written to be judged, fixed, or dropped on its own — so a flawed provision doesn’t have to drag down the parts that are working, and a good idea from one plan can survive even if the rest of it needs rework.
Sunset
Nothing here is meant to be permanent by default. Each provision includes when it would need to be actively renewed, and what evidence that renewal should rest on — so that if we got something wrong, the fix is already built into the plan, rather than something we’d need a whole new law to accomplish.
This is what I mean by collaborative governance: not a finished set of answers I’m asking you to ratify, but a specific, verifiable starting point I’m asking you to help me get right. Where I haven’t worked out the details yet, the page says so plainly — that’s not a gap to be papered over, it’s an open invitation to help fill it in.