Slow Vote

Excuses for not voting - or voting "fast"

I can't tell you the number of times I've heard people say "I couldn't decide how to vote on (school board, sewer board, water board, community services district or other down ballot race), so I just voted for the first name. That probably wasn't a good idea is it?"

Or they say "I couldn't decide who to vote for on (down ballot race) so I left it blank. Guess I should have done some homework."

Or "I didn't know who to vote for, but I've seen signs around town for (candidate so-and-so) so I just went with him. At least he went out and bought signs."

Or "I didn't vote for (so-and-so) because they called me during dinner. I never vote for someone who calls during dinner." And then they find out the guy who won, the other guy, may not have called them during dinner, but he isn't going to be looking out for their, or the district's, best interests either. 

You've heard all the excuses people have for either not voting, or leaving part of their ballot blank or voting because they saw a sign. the person was the incumbent or they had the same name as their aunt in Bakersfield. Well I have an antidote for that. I call it "Slow Vote" and I got the inspiration from a column in the S.F. Chronicle this week by Caille Millner on "Slow Reading."

Slow Vote

And she got the idea from the Slow Food movement. Slow reading is like taking your time to really read something, a book with substance that makes you think, something you can get real meaning out of, instead of skimming headlines or googling articles on topics of passing interest. Millner didn't invent Slow Reading; she heard about from other articles and just connected with it in a personal way. It made enough of an impression her to dedicate one of her weekly columns to it.

Millner learned that studies have shown that slow reading makes real differences in people's lives. A study published in Science showed that "reading literary fiction makes people more insightful and empathetic, a study in Neurology last year showing that reading helped elderly people avoid memory loss.."

So I had my own little brainstorm and thought "Slow Voting!" or "Slow Vote" (it just sounds better).

With Slow Vote, voters will actually take the time to learn about the candidates on the ballot, not just those at the top of the ticket but the down ballot races too. They will do more than watch the TV ads which are often negative and misleading.

They will do more than glance at the mail from the candidates on the way to the recycling bin. They will do more than see who the local newspaper endorsed.

They will read articles about the candidates from more than one news source. They will attend candidate forums and neighborhood coffees to meet the candidate personally and ask in-depth questions. They will read the campaign mail, all of it, from all sides, even the smaller print underneath the glowing bullet points.

Ideally, they would examine the reports made periodically to the Fair Political Practices Commission to see who has given how much money in each  race.

Will it work?

I'm a campaign consultant, I deal in bullet points and sound bites. When my clients show me their detailed plan for ending homelessness, preserving the environment or improving the District's budget, I distill it into easy to digest large print headlines and dramatic scripted scenes for mail and electronic ads.

But I'd rather send voters the whole package. Show them how smart my client is; how well though out her proposals are (assuming, that is, that they are well thought out and actually accomplishable).

But will it work? Probably not in the foreseeable future. So keep looking for mailers, RV ads and robo calls.  But do read the fine print, especially the disclaimers on the TV ads (if you can; they tend to go by pretty darned fast), and become as informed as you can be before you vote this November.

Take a deep breath and vote slow.