As voters read through their three- or four-page ballot this October, cross-referencing the state’s Blue Book with the ballot language, considering local initiatives and regional sales taxes, we hope they find everything crystal clear.
Unfortunately, the ballot is full of complex language, needlessly making important issues very confusing. Yes, the constitutionally required Blue Book that is mailed to every registered voter is remarkably clear and concise, but not all voters will have access to the book while casting this monster ballot.
so it is easy to understand. We think this is a good idea.
Take, for example, Proposition NN.
In simple terms, we would have preferred to see on the ballot something like this: “Shall the state reduce tax refunds to spend more on K-12 education?” That question is written at a 7th-grade reading level according to a Microsoft Word score.
The ballot, however, is about as clear as mud: “Shall state investment in K-12 education increase two percent each year for the next ten years with investments used to increase teacher pay, improve teacher retention, lower class sizes, and increase access to career and technical courses without raising taxes but instead funded by raising the annual limit on state fiscal year spending … ?”
That ballot question is so complex that Microsoft Office predicts someone would need a post-doctorate level of education to understand.
Coloradans are increasingly being asked to participate in direct democracy. Dozens of complex laws and amendments are brought straight to voters on ballots every year.
We do not think all voters will understand that “funded by raising the annual limit on state fiscal year spending” really means reducing their Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) refunds every year, nor do we think all voters understand what TABOR is, but do understand they get a larger refund for checking a box on their taxes most years.
The one downside to writing ballot questions in the easiest-to-understand language possible, is that many of the granular details will be cut. Voters who want to get into the details will have to go to their blue book or the exact language of the proposed law change online to learn that Prop. NN decreases TABOR refunds by increasing the spending cap by $4.5 billion in the first year and then 2% every year after that for 10 years, increasing taxes by about $500 million the first year. But voters also didn’t get that information from the complex ballot language used now.
The state Title Board works hard to craft the ballot language every year, but their product must be simplified and streamlined.
Proposition 135, for example, says “Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes modifying existing law by prohibiting surgery on a minor for the purpose of altering the minor’s biological sex, and, in connection therewith …?”
Why doesn’t it just read: “Shall a new law ban sex-change surgeries on children under the age of 18?”
According to Microsoft Word’s Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score, the first version is written at a level for college-educated adults, while the second version, which says the same thing, is written at a 6th-grade reading level.
Voters can always seek out more information if they feel they need it to make an educated decision. The ballot will never be able to include all of the details in these extraordinarily complex legal questions. But what limited information is on the ballot needs to be understandable by every voter so that those who do not have the time or ability to seek out more information can be guaranteed to know what they are voting for or against without mistakes or confusion.
Far more important than having the exact details of where the money will go or a long list of people who are barred from performing sex-change surgery is understanding the bottom-line effect of both measures.
We want voters to know that a “yes” on Proposition NN takes away tax refunds they would otherwise receive and that the money will be used to fund education, and we want voters to know that Prop. 135 bans sex-change surgery on children. The way the questions are written makes both facts less-than-clear to many Coloradans.
Voters can demand such simple language on future ballots.
Now if only Amendment 85 had been written at an 8th-grade level instead of at a level for people with a college degree, perhaps voters would be more likely to say “yes.”
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
