VOTER EDUCATION IS CRITICAL TO THE HEALTH OF DEMOCRATIC RULE

Durham Herald-Sun
Chris Shaw and Tara Purohit

Monday, May 24, 2004

With all the stage-managing and spinning that surrounds political campaigns these days it's hard for voters to see the candidates as they are, devoid of the obligatory clutter. One may hear the candidates' sound-bite answer on an issue many times, but where does the candidate really stand? How are voters expected to participate in a system that is becoming increasingly inaccessible and find the information necessary to make informed decisions?

There is a lack of attention paid to voter education on both the state and national levels. Until recently, there was no mandate for voter education in North Carolina, which often left voters not knowing where to turn for reliable information about elections. Civic groups jumped in, but this responsibility cannot be primarily their burden.

Fortunately, the recently passed Help America Vote Act (HAVA) does require states to develop a voter education program. HAVA was passed in 2002 at the federal level, but as part of its implementation, it required states to pass plans explaining how they would comply with the federal legislation. Areas of compliance include voter identification, provisional balloting and creating a voter education program. HAVA provided an impetus for states to develop a comprehensive voter education program. But such efforts are undercut by the unfortunate condition of a far more visible form of voter education -- the presidential debates. Reforming presidential debates is vital to the health of our democracy because it would create better informed and more engaged voters.

At the national level, The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) sponsors stilted bi-partisan press conferences that are promoted as debates. In the 2000 Bush-Gore events the candidates agreed close to 40% of the time, hardly a debate. There was no critical discussion of many issues of national importance with specific local relevance. “Free trade” was not mentioned once, despite its tremendous impact on North Carolina. When Pillowtex closed last summer, 4,800 North Carolinians were laid off. Those workers deserved to have the candidates honestly debate the issue of trade.

The CPD does such an abysmal job promoting an honest discussion of the issues because its primary purpose is not to educate voters on candidates' views or promote discussion between voters and candidates. After all, it is run by democratic and republican party loyalists. The CPD allows the major party candidates to secretly negotiate the formats of the debates. This arrangement leads to candidates superficially glazing over the issues by reciting a series of rehearsed soundbites. Viable independent candidates have also been arbitrarily excluded, like Ross Perot in 1996, further reducing the discussion of important issues.

With six million eligible voters in North Carolina, a million of them unregistered, and a growing number of independent voters, North Carolina is representative of a national trend. More and more people are turned off by politics, and the structure of the presidential debates does little to encourage their participation.

Voter education is of vital importance to the health of our democracy. As the political forums that reach the most people, the presidential debates need to be sponsored by an organization that takes voter education seriously. Reforms such as rules requiring candidate-to-candidate questioning, rebuttals, and follow-up questions need to be instituted.

The recently formed Citizens' Debate Commission will introduce such reforms. Changing the structure of national debates will have far-reaching local impact as more voters have access to the kind of information they need in order to effectively participate. More than 50 civic organizations from across the nation endorse debate reform. The Citizens' Debate Commission has board members who are conservatives, liberals, and centrists. They are united by a belief that voter education is too important to play a secondary role in the debates.

Tara Purohit is voting rights project director at the Institute for Southern Studies in Durham

Chris Shaw is organizing director for Open Debates, based in Washington, D.C.