Voting question

Bolding mine.

You & I want voters educated who can then make an informed choice. Many politicians do not want voters to be able to think for themselves. The informed voter may not vote “correctly”.

A lot of times, a candidate will have a voter guide for other down ballot issues. So if you know you are going to vote for candidate X for mayor, s/he might have a guide on referenda and down ballot candidates. I also try to stay informed throughout the year, but I confess, I’ve come across an issue on election day I didn’t know anything about, I skip that issue.

Damned few. It’s a joke that Americans elect so many office-holders on so many different levels (federal, state, county, township, municipal, school board, mosquito abatement district, blah blah blah). No other country does this.

Abstain.

“Incomprehensible legalese” is an oxymoron. So-called legalese differs from ordinary speech in that it’s specifically designed to be comprehensible. The problem is that we’re not used to reading for comprehension. Usually, people just read through enough of a text to be able to make a pretty good guess of what the author probably meant, but guesses aren’t good enough for the law. That means that you actually have to read what the author meant, a task that is often impossible with ordinary language.

At least, that’s how it works for actual legalese. What’s even worse than ordinary language, though, is when an author misunderstands the purpose of legalese, and thinks it’s supposed to be a shibboleth to prevent understanding by the uninitiated. If that’s what you have in your ballot measures, then I can sympathize, but one doesn’t actually encounter that too often coming from professionals.