Washington State’s online voters guide experiment

Vermont rarely has statewide ballot referenda because they need to be legislatively initiated, but in Washington State this year there are more than a few up for approval. Voters in Washington are almost overwhelmed by nine complex statewide ballot measures, a bond measure for school upgrades, and an effort for their first income tax since the 1930’s. Layered onto this complicated ballot voting situation is this season’s heightened nationwide level of distrust of newspapers, media and government in general. Confusion may rain in Washington come November.
Searching for a solution that would bring in the public and involve them in the process, the University of Washington and the City Club civic group, a Seattle non-profit, searched for a solution and developed an online model

“which aims to spark a civil and objective discussion among Washington voters by letting them work together to write their own voters guide”

. Adapting something along the lines they describe might prove useful here in Vermont given the small media market and struggling local papers. Complex policy information might be examined and debated in a tightly structured public format online. An accessible, organized exploration of the implications of the Challenges for Change process during this last legislative session might have been helpful. The effort and expense would likely be a deterrent, but it might lead to more constructive public involvement than questionable reader’s surveys and online polls have.

The Living Voters Guide (www.livingvotersguide.org) is a twist on the traditional voter's guide, with statements for and against. The tool takes the format of a pro-and-con list. In less than two minutes, users can choose an issue, slide a scale to indicate where they stand, and list pros and cons to support their stance, either by writing their own or picking from points added by others. Each pro or con is limited to just 140 characters, the length of a text message or Twitter update (though a longer, 500-character explanation is optional).
Users must agree to ground rules that include using civil language, representing individual views rather than those of an organization, and registering for only one account.
All this is meant to cut down on the grandstanding, trolling, flaming and other rude behavior that has become the norm on newspaper comment boards or discussion sites, as well as on gaming the system to strategically boost one point of view.