Beyond their party affiliation, how much do you know about the candidates for whom you vote? Who is funding their campaigns? Have they been in trouble in the past? How do you assess candidates’ integrity and trustworthiness?
For most of us, we have relied on various forms of media to help us make informed voting decisions. Groups like the League of Women Voters will sometimes provide candidate’s answers to basic questions and stands on issues. We see lawn signs and read newspaper articles and endorsements. Yet, we are swayed by commercials, social media, and simplistic sound bites.
What if there was another way to assess candidates? What if an independent organization, unaffiliated with any political party (and not taking money from them), could provide us with a report card on a candidate that would let us know what the candidate has done in the past, things about the candidate’s character and background, thus serving as a neutral credentialing source?
There are several models for this; The Better Business Bureau serves as a vehicle for consumers to assess the trustworthiness of local businesses. They state their mission and vision on their website:
Similarly, Underwriters Laboratories, which I think now only goes by UL, tests products to ensure their safety. Companies pay UL to put their products through rigorous testing both to improve their design and assure customers of the safety and integrity of what they are purchasing. UL states its mission on its website:
While one of these is non-for-profit and the other commercial, they have significant similarities. They are both credentialing entities. Their purpose is to give a seal of integrity to products and businesses. They do not compete against these organizations or advertise for them. Rather, they are an independent impartial entity whose sole job is to help consumers make good choices.
Another example: Consumer Reports magazine tests products and services to help consumers make educated buying decisions. Their magazine is entirely funded by subscriptions and takes no advertising. They are a trusted source of impartial information about almost everything on the market.
One more: Charity Navigator uses a straightforward rating system based on a charity’s financial health and its accountability and transparency. From that, they determine an easy-to-understand star rating. When looking up a charity, they provide a clear explanation about why the charity received the rating it did.
While there is no news source that everyone can agree upon, could a group of people whose political backgrounds span the range of our current landscape come together and find a way to evaluate all candidates? Could they create a rubric upon which candidates would be evaluated that might include:
Where and how they have received money with which to run their campaigns and how they are spending it.
Their educational, political, and job histories; their resumes.
Prior scandals or other issues and their resolutions
If this new organization listed its mission, it might sound a little like the missions of the Better Business Bureau or UL:
- Help create an ethical election where voters and candidates trust each other
- Set standards for election trust
- Encourage and support best practices by engaging with and educating voters and candidates
- Celebrate election role models
- Calling out and addressing substandard election behavior
- Creating a community of trustworthy candidates
- Promote safe, secure, and sustainable election process
- Support candidates who demonstrate integrity by demonstrating respect and ethical behavior, intent, and working toward a fair, inclusive, and equitable election process.
- Improve elections through research and investigation
- Make voting safer, easier, and more trustworthy
- Work with integrity and focus to enhance the trust conveyed by this certification
- Be a good example of election ethics and evaluation.
Our democratic process could benefit from this kind of organization. Yes, building trust would be challenging. Yes, getting buy-in from both candidates and voters would take time and persistence. But the payoff would be massive.
Anyone up for the challenge?
No comments:
Post a Comment