Speaking out: Slate of ballot measures shows how ballot language matters

We just wrapped up a major election, and there's lots to digest. There's no shortage of opinions on the national election outcomes, but what can we learn from our state election? How can we channel any insights gained into improving our political realities and future North Dakota elections?

With five statewide ballot measures, this week's election was particularly measure-heavy. I don't see this as a problem - North Dakotans can handle several measures at a time - but the language used on our ballots can be a problem.

Using Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level scores, I determined the reading level for each measure. This score uses words per sentence and syllables per word - essentially sentence and word lengths - to identify the reading level of a particular text. Following, I identify the measures in order of grade level and discuss implications.

The ballot language for Measure 1 relating to replacing outdated disabilities terminology in the state constitution had the lowest reading level. It scored 11.4, an 11th-12th grade reading level. Anecdotally, this measure also seemed easier for voters to understand because it was a relatively straightforward change with a fairly obvious rationale.

Measure 3 relating to the state's Legacy Fund had ballot language that scored 11.6, also an 11th-12th grade reading level. However, my anecdotal experience is that many voters found the purpose of this measure unclear. While a low reading level is certainly helpful and more accessible for voters, a complex measure with few vocal public proponents is bound to remain confusing. While legislators brought Measure 3 to our ballots, very few of them did anything to help us understand why they sought our 'Yes' votes.

The ballot language of Measure 5 relating to cannabis legalization had a score of 13.5 - a college reading level. While this is a higher reading level than is ideal, voters generally knew where they stood on cannabis legalization and most voted based on their overall attitude toward legalization rather than the policy details.

Next, the ballot language of Measure 2 relating to the rules and processes for initiated measures scored 14.0, also a college reading level. In policy terms, this measure was especially complex as it dealt with several very different aspects of initiated measures (ironic given one of its aims was to force future initiated measures into a "single subject").The high reading level combined with the complexity of the proposed policy changes surely confused a number of voters.

Finally, Measure 4 related to property taxes had the most complex ballot language of all. Its language scored 15.9, representing a graduate student reading level. It was also very complex in terms of policy. So, on its own, the ballot language was insufficient to guide most voters toward a decision. Fortunately for voters, there were active campaigns by both proponents and opponents, allowing many voters to know where they stood without relying exclusively on the complex ballot language.

The reading level of measures' ballot language is only one contributor to voters' understanding of measures. The content of the policies matters, as does the level of campaigning of proponents and opponents of measures. The Legislature and citizens alike will continue to bring forth measures, and some will live or die on their own policy merit alone. However, we can improve our election processes by considering ways to make ballot language more accessible and to help voters understand measures before they even see their ballots.

I believe in the capacity of North Dakota Secretary of State Michael Howe and his team to collaborate with both the Legislature and citizens to improve voters' understanding of ballot measures. With the 2024 election behind us, let's strive to make ballot language and information about measures more accessible than ever.

Ellie Shockley is a political psychologist, social scientist and education researcher. This column represents her personal views and not the views of any organization. She completed a doctorate at the University of Chicago and a postdoctorate at Nebraska. She lives in Mandan. Find her past columns at EllieShockley.com .