The Citizens' Initiative Review: Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is the the Citizens' Initiative Review 2010 pilot?
2. How will the Citizens' Initiative Review 2010 pilot be funded?
3. Why run another demonstration of the Citizens' Initiative Review?
4. Why does a law need to be passed to run another CIR demonstration?
5. Who would run the Citizens' Initiative Review after the 2010 pilot is completed?
6. Who are the people who participate in the review?
7. How are the participants selected?
8. What makes this process trustworthy and free from political influence?
9. What makes this process fair and balanced?
10. What will the review process specifically entail?
11. What will voters get from Citizens' Initiative Review?
12. Why will CIR have an effect on the initiative process?
13. What makes CIR an effective reform proposal?
14. Do other states have a review process like this one?
1. What is the the Citizens' Initiative Review 2010 pilot? Building upon the successful demonstration of the CIR in 2008, Healthy Democracy Oregon is currently lobbying the Oregon Legislature to pass a bill which would allow for an expanded demonstration of the CIR process on 1-3 measures on the 2010 ballot. Supported by Secretary of State Kate Brown, and sponsored by 25 legislators including Co-Chief Sponsors Sen. Doug Whitsett and Rep. Ben Cannon, HB 2895 would authorize a public/private partnership to convene the reviews. The resulting "Citizens' Statements" would be placed in an official new space in the voters' pamphlet. Following the 2010 CIR pilot a full scale evaluation of the results will be conducted to determine the utility of the "citizens' statements" and to look at how voters use the statewide voters' pamphlet.
2. How will the Citizens' Initiative Review 2010 pilot be funded? If HB 2985 is passed, the expanded pilot project would be funded solely by foundation grants and private contributions, incurring no cost to the state.
3. Why run another demonstration of the Citizens' Initiative Review? The demonstration of the Review run in 2008 on Measure 58 proved that the Review process is fundamentally sound and fair. The purpose of the 2008 demonstration was to show the public, media, and legislature how the process works, which we have now done. The next step in developing the CIR process is to see how the results are received by the public, and to demonstrate the usefulness of the reform to Oregon voters. To do so will require running more than one review during an election and placing the results into a new location in the statewide Voters' Pamphlet so the information is easily accessible. Doing so is necessary to take the next step in evaluating the usefulness of the CIR to voters, which we plan to do with a rigorous evaluation process.
4. Why does a law need to be passed to run another CIR demonstration? In order to properly evaluate the results of the Review the "Citizens' Statement" needs to be placed in the appropriate location within the statewide Voters' Pamphlet. To do so will require a change in Oregon law to allow the Secretary of State to place the results of the CIR alongside the official information that is currently made available by the state. For the 2010 CIR demonstration HB 2895 proposes a one-time change to allow the CIR statement to be included, pending that the review follows strict guidelines for following the CIR process.
5. Who would run the Citizens' Initiative Review after the 2010 pilot is completed? The CIR could be conducted as an independent entity under the Executive Branch of our state government, or as it is being proposed for the 2010 pilot, it could be conducted as a public/private partnership organization. Part of the goal in running an expanded pilot demonstration of the process on 1-3 measures in 2010 is to determine the best organizational arrangement to house and run the Citizens' Initiative Review. With either organizational arrangement oversight by a citizen-based board and a careful evaluation process help to ensure that the CIR will retain its integrity and the necessary degree of independence from partisan politics.
6. Who are the people who participate in the review? For each measure reviewed, 18 - 24 panelists are randomly chosen from the list of registered voters in the state. They are not self selected and they are not selected by campaigners or government officials, rather they are selected through methods of scientific random sampling (much like a jury). As such, individually they represent only themselves, but as a group represent a microcosm of the state of Oregon.
7. How are the participants selected? Citizens will be chosen using scientific methods of random sampling and then contacted to determine if they are willing to participate on the review panel. From those who agree to serve, a large pool of several hundred potential panelists will be identified. From that pool, 18 - 24 panelists and several alternates will be selected to create a microcosm of the state that resembles the citizens of Oregon in terms such as age, gender, ethnicity, education, partisan affiliation and geography. In order to ensure greater participation living-wage stipends will also be provided for all panelists.
8. What makes this process trustworthy and free from political influence? Great care has gone into designing the Citizens' Initiative review. First, the participants are randomly chosen, rather than self-selected or selected by anyone who has a stake in the outcome of the review. Therefore, the panelists are not hindered by having an agenda. Second, the review process is professionally facilitated by trained staff, which has no stake in the outcome. Third, at the conclusion of the review, participants in the review process provide feedback on any perceived bias in the process. This feedback is provided to the public for review and a rigorous evaluation is conducted.
CIR panelists' reports will be trustworthy because they are what they say they are: the result of a group of everyday citizens from across the state conducting an in-depth examination of a state policy problem and its solution as proposed in an initiative. No interest group or political party will be determining what the panelists decide or present to the public; indeed, the panel may be split as to their conclusions for or against a specific initiative, and the reasons for those differences will be presented in the published reports.
9. What makes this process fair and balanced? As was shown during the 2008 demonstration of the CIR process on Measure 58, the opposing sides of an initiative will be given equal opportunity to present their arguments and evidence, and the CIR staff will be professionals whose primary responsibility will be to conduct the citizens panels in a fair and balanced way. The panelists will be asked to participate only a few weeks after they are chosen, and their names will not be released prior to the panel discussions. In addition, like a jury, the panelists will be asked not to discuss with people outside of the process any of the proceedings while they are taking place.
10. What will the review process specifically entail? During the five day hearing, panelists hear from a variety of witnesses selected by the proponents and opponents of the initiative. They may also select to hear from additional background witnesses, policy experts, affected parties, identified by CIR staff in consultation with the advocates and project advisors. The hearings are facilitated by trained staff, with every effort made to insure that the staff does not bias or influence the hearings. The panelists will deliberate and then issue their findings and conclusions.
11. What will voters get from Citizens' Initiative Review? In their report, the panelists will explain why they favor or oppose the initiative. Participants from each position will list the main reasons the panel found for their position, along with additional considerations. These conclusions will be summarized alongside the definition of the ballot measure being review in the Voters Pamphlet and made widely available to the public.
This evaluation will not tell people how to vote. The aim is to show how a microcosm of the public feels about an initiative after having a special opportunity to study it closely.
12. Why will CIR have an effect on the initiative process? The most powerful democratic tool in the hands of citizens is the vote. That is why special interests spend so much money to shape the debate at election time. Public policy is driven by those who are able to control the swing vote. The Citizens' Initiative Review is designed to create a swing vote based upon a reasoned analysis, with the hope that this can counteract the swing vote now driven by sound bytes and questionable information.
Implementing a Citizens' Initiative Review makes it much more likely that ballot measures must be reflective of what a well-informed public actually wants before the measure can pass. Once the CIR process is in place, special interests will begin to recognize that Oregon is a difficult state in which to pass initiative legislation that is out of balance with the public interest.
13. What makes CIR an effective reform proposal? The Citizens' Initiative Review is designed to address a very serious problem in the way we make decisions on ballot measure campaigns. At present, political dialogue often gives way to spin and to misinformation backed by the millions of dollars spent by campaigns and interest groups fighting to win the voter. Since 2000 along, over $100 million has been spent on initiative campaigns in Oregon. The political math is pretty simple-campaigns use the most cost effective and efficient means to win the vote. The impact- poll tested messages comprised of half-truths and political spin dominate the debate at election time. Because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that financial contributions cannot be limited in initiative campaigns, traditional campaign finance reform proposals cannot be applied.
The CIR approaches this glaring problem in the initiative process through increased disclosure and informed deliberation. The CIR is designed to give everyday Oregonians the opportunity to take a close look at what will be on the ballot and then share what they have learned with their fellow voters.
Many voters feel frustrated when faced with complicated and confusing initiatives on the ballot. For these voters, the CIR report in the Voters Pamphlet, drafted by a fair cross-section of Oregon voters with no stake in the outcome, and who have studied the initiative in depth, will be a big help.
14. Do other states have a review process like this one? None of the states that have an initiative process have implemented a citizen-based review of initiatives. The Citizen Jury process itself, upon which the CIR is based, however has been utilized over the past 3 decades to assess public policy in a wide variety of settings. Oregon was the first state to use citizen initiatives, let's make it the first to use the Citizens' Initiative Review.
