I'm perpetually amused at the naive optimism and latent arrogance that infuses the notion that government technology is outdated because of (in)competence or bureaucracy. The root of the problems with government technology, at basically any level, is that government technology is procured by a system run by politicians (or bureaucrats who are appointed by politicians, many of whom have their own political ambitions or agenda). It has almost nothing to do with a lack of competence or supply of capable and otherwise willing companies to tackle the problems.

The nightmarish process of getting government contracts is a feature of this system; not a bug that politicians are going to willingly or easily part with. It's part and parcel of the machinery that allows them to bring home the bacon, as it were.

Contracting for government, at any level, is almost always more about who you know, how long you've known them, and (or) how much money you already have to throw at officials' bank accounts/campaigns. So, I hope the fund investors understand that the problems to be solved in this space are more about lobbying and networking than about doing anything that's actually IT related.

I get the feeling that this is an unpopular opinion here, but this kind of thing just rubs me the wrong way. It feels like a different face for corporatocracy. In my heart, I just want the government to do less. And I want the rest of us to do more.

Perhaps this is just a cynical view from an American life, but I don't think of myself as a cynic. I feel very optimistic. Nevertheless, I don't trust government actors and I do find that, inevitably, government motivation is different from true civic motivation.

On the other hand, I much more OK with local governments trying out big projects, so maybe this (and other ventures like it) will turn out OK.

This is not a "civic tech" fund. This is a fund for companies that are looking for profit from government contracts.

Civic tech encourages citizen engagement. This does nothing of that nature.

This is just a fund for companies and investors looking to make a profit off of our tax dollars. The article leaves a foul taste in my mouth. These people are no more pro-citizen than Northrop and Boeing.

Last successful outcome of such a relationship between governmental needs and technology was Silicon Valley and before that DARPA leading to the internet and CERN leading to HTML.

I believe the government should be as small as possible but disagree that this as bad as some of the other commenters seem to think.