I generally don’t like the idea of “dumbing down” democracy, but the complexity of ballot questions is a legitimate issue. A lawmaker in Nevada seems to be on the right track.
State Sen. Valerie Wiener, D-Las Vegas, said Monday that she is drafting a bill to require the state to write election ballot questions at an eighth-grade reading level.
Wiener said she received complaints from constituents that some of the questions on the Nov. 2 ballot were simply too complicated to understand.
It’s understandable that voters would have concerns. Nevadans, for example, were offered this language on Ballot Question #8 on Election Day:
Shall the Sales and Use Tax Act of 1955 be amended to revise the exemption from the tax for the sale or use of used vehicles; to provide exemptions from the tax for the sale or use of prescription ophthalmic and ocular devices and appliances, farm machinery and other agricultural equipment, works of fine art for public display, and professional racing vehicles and parts; and to revise the exemption from the tax on the sale or use of aircraft and parts of aircraft used by commercial air carriers?
That’s an 88-word sentence with three commas, two semi-colons, and a question mark at the end. I have a post-grad degree, but I certainly wasn’t clear on what a “yes” vote would mean on this question the first time I read it.
With this in mind, I think Wiener’s approach has merit.
Wiener said she intends to arrive in Carson City three weeks before the Legislature convenes on Feb. 7 and work with representatives from the University of Nevada, Reno and legislative lawyers on drawing up language for the bill.
She said the university system has tests for determining the reading level of words. They could decide on a ninth-grade or higher reading level, although a former constituent suggested an eighth-grade level for ballot questions.
Granted, this idea is not without flaw. Ballot initiatives often include specific legal language that will automatically become part of a state’s constitution if adopted. Such language may not always be pretty, but is necessary for the law to be specific and applied properly. Lawyers who craft the language on these questions are not always trying to confuse people. I get that.
Nevertheless, voters, at a minimum, should understand the words in front of them when they vote. When ambiguous 88-word sentences don’t convey information in any meaningful way, voting on them becomes overly burdensome.
This strikes me as the kind of thing voters would like everywhere. I got a call shortly before the election from my Mom, for example, who lives in Florida and asked for suggestions on how to vote on this ballot initiative:
Proposing amendments to the State Constitution to require the sponsor of a constitutional amendment proposed by citizen initiative to file the initiative petition with the Secretary of State by February 1 of the year of a general election in order to have the measure submitted to the electors for approval or rejection at the following November’s general election, and to require the Florida Supreme Court to render an advisory opinion addressing the validity of an initiative petition by April 1 of the year in which the amendment is to be submitted to the electors.
That’s a 94-word sentence. After reading it once, were you sure what a “yes” vote would do?