Candidate Questionaires
As a point of context and reference allow me to explain the issues involved in a rather controversial guest column submitted last week and published on this blog. Since I'm assuming that not everyone who reads this blog is intimately familiar with campaigns and elections I'll take a few moments to explain the issues.
Every advocacy organization, from the National Rifle Association to Planned Parenthood, from Focus on the Family to the National Association for the Reformation of Ice Sculptures (that one's a joke) surveys candidates on the issues important to that particular organization. They use the answers to these questionaires to determine who they will endorse. They also have been used to attack those they choose not to endorse. Candidates receive stacks of these, especially every spring. Some large organizations survey for both primary and general elections though other groups only in the spring and use that for both the primary and general elections. These are important because they are the candidate's stated views, in writing, on the issues. Organizations must rely on the candidates to be truthful so they can accurately judge who to endorse and who not to endorse. Many voters rely on these endorsements when they make their decisions on whom to vote for or against.
The issue involved here this week had to do with one of these smaller organizations. This group grants confidentiality to candidates questionaires. They pledge not to reveal their answers so these candidates won't be attacked for their responses. Unfortunately sometimes this policy can create problems. Let's say, for example, that a candidate wishes to pander to this particular group by answering a key question in a way that may later be interpreted as disingenuous. Now let's assume this same candidate answered the same question from an opposing group distinctively differently. This is why these questionaires are important and why this particular one was requested. All the group had to do was reply in a courteous manner saying the document was confidential and unavailable.
Now I happen to be in possession of this "super secret questionaire." I will not mention, at this time, how I came to be in possession of it, but it's certainly an interesting document.
Every advocacy organization, from the National Rifle Association to Planned Parenthood, from Focus on the Family to the National Association for the Reformation of Ice Sculptures (that one's a joke) surveys candidates on the issues important to that particular organization. They use the answers to these questionaires to determine who they will endorse. They also have been used to attack those they choose not to endorse. Candidates receive stacks of these, especially every spring. Some large organizations survey for both primary and general elections though other groups only in the spring and use that for both the primary and general elections. These are important because they are the candidate's stated views, in writing, on the issues. Organizations must rely on the candidates to be truthful so they can accurately judge who to endorse and who not to endorse. Many voters rely on these endorsements when they make their decisions on whom to vote for or against.
The issue involved here this week had to do with one of these smaller organizations. This group grants confidentiality to candidates questionaires. They pledge not to reveal their answers so these candidates won't be attacked for their responses. Unfortunately sometimes this policy can create problems. Let's say, for example, that a candidate wishes to pander to this particular group by answering a key question in a way that may later be interpreted as disingenuous. Now let's assume this same candidate answered the same question from an opposing group distinctively differently. This is why these questionaires are important and why this particular one was requested. All the group had to do was reply in a courteous manner saying the document was confidential and unavailable.
Now I happen to be in possession of this "super secret questionaire." I will not mention, at this time, how I came to be in possession of it, but it's certainly an interesting document.
posted by PA progressive @ Wednesday, July 12, 2006
<< Home