MySpace and YouTube have affected election campaigns in simple, but significant, ways. These social networking sites, which are used by a substantial segment of the U.S. voting age population, represent the next Internet generation, which is primarily user driven. They have created benefits such as increasing the potential for candidate exposure at a low cost or no cost, providing lesser known candidates with a viable outlet to divulge their message, and allowing campaigns to raise contributions and recruit volunteers online. In conjunction with these benefits, YouTube and MySpace have also posed a new set of challenges to campaign staff, the most important of which is the reduced level of control that campaigns have over the image and message of the candidate, which is of critical importance to election outcomes. This article discusses these benefits and challenges and the influence of YouTube and MySpace on the 2006 election and future campaigns.

This article looks at the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) and the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) and how they assess seven programs. It establishes that the PART does not adequately consider different program types and has characteristics that create a disconnection between this tool and the GPRA: It does not enter into dialogue with the GPRA regarding the choice of performance indicators; it evaluates programs through criteria that conflict with the programs' statutes or intent and penalizes programs for the degree of explicitness in their authorizing statutes; it uses standardized measures that sometimes overlook the intent of statutes or the discretionary nature of implementation; it employs a different level of analysis from the GPRA; it places a contradictory emphasis on the relationship between programs with similar goals; and it emphasizes different external factors influencing program performance. The article concludes with recommendations on how to improve the PART.

No abstract