Vague answers from candidates won’t cut it
Published 9:00 pm Saturday, September 25, 2004
Ever wonder how this newspaper’s editorial board decides which candidates to endorse for public office? Or even why we do it?
The answer to the second question is easy. We see it as part of our role as a facilitator of public debate. As close followers of news events and public policy, we offer our recommendations as just one of many bits of information available to voters as they make their own decisions.
How we arrive at those recommendations is trickier. The editorial board, which includes the four people listed in the upper-right corner of this page, is an independent lot without ties to any political party. Each is capable of supporting Democrats or Republicans, but each also tends to favor moderates who think independently and can work constructively with others over strong partisans who aren’t amenable to compromise.
We research each race for which we make an endorsement. We talk to stakeholders on various issues, go over voting records and news accounts, and reflect on our own knowledge of candidates’ records.
Generally, the most enlightening part of our research involves sitting down with the candidates themselves. In state legislative races, we invite all candidates in a particular district to meet with us at the same time. That tends to provide a lively discussion, and often gives us a feel for the depth and temperament of the folks who are seeking to represent you in Olympia.
For the Nov. 2 general election, those interviews get underway this week. Endorsements will begin appearing shortly thereafter.
These interviews give candidates an opportunity to present their views on key issues, but also to show how prepared they are for the job they seek. Incumbents have a natural advantage in their knowledge of how things work in Olympia, and we don’t hold that against challengers. But that doesn’t mean challengers shouldn’t be up to speed on the details and nuances of key issues. When a candidate answers a question with “Well, I’ll have to get there and talk to people and see what can be done about that,” we’re not impressed.
Candidates should have done extensive homework on issues like jobs, growth, education, transportation, health care, taxation and environmental regulation by the time their name appears on a ballot. The issues are too complex and important to start learning about only after you’ve arrived in Olympia.
We, like voters, will be looking for specific, thoughtful ideas from candidates. Vague, slippery answers, or a blind recitation of the party line, shouldn’t score points with voters. They sure won’t score points with us.
