I recently received a survey from the Democratic National Committee.† Among other things, the survey asks my opinion on the issue of national priorities:
SECTION IV: NATIONAL PRIORITIES
Please rank the following 15 national issues by their level of priority. Mark the appropriate number by each issue, with the number 1 signifying most important and the number 15 signifying least important.
___ Improving America’s Economic Situation
___ Regulating Financial Institutions and Markets
___ Lowering Unemployment
___ Dealing with Iran
___ Protecting Health Care Reform
___ Fighting Terrorism
___ War in Afghanistan
___ Turning Governing Responsibility Over to the Iraqi People
___ Protecting Social Security and Medicare
___ Nuclear Proliferation
___ Immigration
___ Improving Education
___ Energy Independence
___ America’s Image in the World Community
___ Civil Rights
First, let’s just ask the obvious, shall we? Why isn’t “Improve Knowledge of English Grammar and Composition” in this list? Isn’t that the thing we most need as a priority? You see, my first thought on seeing this survey is that without better grammar and composition, the rest of the discussion will take us nowhere pretty darned fast. Really. I’m not just being flippant.
One of the consequences of falling education standards must be incoherent surveys like this one. Some of the items in the list are noun phrases and some are more complete sentences or clauses that at least involve a verb. It may be obvious when a verb is present what’s being asked about, but I’m less certain for the cases of just nouns or noun phrases.
For example, I hope the verb for “Nuclear Proliferation” or “War in Afghanistan” is something like “Reduce.” But even if I’m right in this wild guess, does that mean that I’m also expecting the same verb on “Civil Rights”? Let’s hope not. “Reduce civil rights” doesn’t sound too catchy.
Consider also the issue of “Immigration” raised in that list. If Sam thinks the priority is to reduce immigration, Lauren thinks the priority is to reform it, and Chris thinks the priority is to keep the status quo intact, are these people all in agreement? Should they all say “Immigration” is a high priority and leave it at that. There’s too much wiggle room to interpret nearly anything from the responses.
Basically, this list I’m offered seems to imply that there’s an “obviously right”—or maybe I should say “obviously Left”—verb to go with each of the stray nouns. If the DNC is willing to think that, I don’t know why they waste a stamp asking me. They might as well just assume they know the priority rankings and move on ahead. I think if they want to know what I think, they should ask me in some sort of clear terms that allow me to really answer.
Then again, they’re soliciting donations at the same time as soliciting my opinion. I’m skeptical of that as well. Does that mean if I contribute more money, my answers will count more? I hope not, but fear so.
And, finally, I don’t like that Climate Change is not a national priority just now, but I understand it. But why on God’s green earth (at least for now), is “Develop a Comprehensive Plan for Aggressively Responding to Climate Change” not at least one of the items I can prioritize? I can understand that it is not a priority for some just now, given the immediacy of the problems with the Economy and Jobs. But not adding it as a potential priority? That’s hard to excuse. I can only assume that whoever made up this list was not adequately informed about the seriousness of the Climate Change matter and the importance of asking where its priority should be.
So yes, “Improving Education.” Let’s make education not only a high priority but an urgent one.
If you got value from this post, please "rate" it.
†Regular readers may notice that I actually count myself a political independent. I recently voted in the Democratic primary and had to declare a party temporarily to do so. This seemed to get me on some mailing list for the DNC’s literature. And anyway, independent though I may count myself, the Democrats are so far the only viable game in town. The Republicans have pitched their tent so far to the Right I couldn't possibly go there, and there's not yet a credible third party offering.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
RomanticPoetess
Sandra Stephens
old new lefty
marytkelly
oaxacangringa
CoyoteOldStyle
Salon.com
Comments
Just imagine if they'd listed tax levels as a choice. I think they're too low but I'd match well with the tea partiers if asked whether "tax levels" is an important priority.
My favorite is "Protecting Health Care Reform." It should read: Enacting Health Care Reform.
The point of this mailer isn't to solicit your opinion so that it may be applied towards policy. The object is to make you think they care what you think.
Send it back with a check enclosed and it will be treated like a televangelist treats Prayer Requests -- the check goes to the bank and the form goes into the dumpster.
This sort of "thinking" assumes that you can actually prioritize things. You can't. They are simply too inter-related. To cite just one obvious example, how in the name of reason do you separate Improving America's Economic Situation from Energy Independence? Is the former a 15 and the latter a 1? Or vice versa?
Silly, silly, silly -- and it plays into the hands of those who imagine this is a "meaningful" discussion of the issues. It's pure hogwash.
Jane, interesting story about the use of inflection in the poll. Things like that could really bias a poll even if you could see the text of the question asked.
Bernadine, thanks, I'll check out William's posts.
Tom, my real instant reaction was that the omission of Climate Change was beyond my comprehension. And I had started to lead with that. But as I did, I realized that the survey itself was in such tatters that I figured it would be somehow more conversationally interesting to lead with that. Those things said, though, I do agree with you it's a sham conversation they're trying to have and as has already been mentioned above, it's surely just about getting money.
And if you respond, they know that they've got a fish, and they go for more solicitations.
They're not looking for your opinion. That's a feint. Grammar interferes with misdirection.
They're looking for your dollars and votes -- and your checkmark beside a response they'll interpret later. Look, 50,000 people have backed our Immigration Plan as a high priority, including Kent Pitman!
They can't do that with a proper elucidation of the question, and they might even annoy you to the point where you won't send them your hard-earned dollars, and you MIGHT even remember it at the ballot box.
Really, the information they want from this survey, to the extent they want information is -- HOW EMOTIONAL are you on the issue.
The Republicans are even better at this game than the Democrats.
If my political dollars are going anywhere, it's NOT going to be to a party central committee, no matter how much they beg or what they promise.
Who wants to fill out an infuriating and biased GOP survey?
"I think if they want to know what I think, they should ask me in some sort of clear terms that allow me to really answer."
I agree with all who point out the intentional meaninglessness of this; the only real intent is, as you point out, to garner contributions. Who makes up this list? What criteria are used to determine "priorities" like this?
Doesn't this just reflect the entire political process? We have little voice in determining anything. Instead, we are thrown several somewhat meaningless choices and we choose; kind of like carnival animal doing its tricks for the masters.
RATED
Rick, I've often said that if given the choice between a vote and the ability to frame the vote (or even the ability to simply address the voters beforehand), I'd take the non-vote option. Votes have some power, but really it's the weakest form of power.
Good work Kent!
Dan, I hadn't considered whether it might be a push poll. Maybe. Usually those are more specific, although they never come labeled as such, so maybe it's me that doesn't know. I rather tend to agree with those who have said that this is some variant of same where the game is not to get you to take a specific position but rather merely to get you to “feel engaged” because that means you're contributing to something you feel you have chosen. That is, I assume, why organizations I've contributed to send me membership cards when all I've done is give them money one time. I don't think of myself as joining, merely as having done a favor. If they told me I was going to be a member, I might not have done it. I still remember when computer tracking of stuff got engaged because I had bought a knife set from a company (I remember it's name but think I'll decline to do it the courtesy of mentioning it here) that then deluged me with mail the gist of which was “KENT, you have been a loyal customer ever since your purchase of A KNIFE BLOCK in DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR.” It was the idiocy of thinking you could measure loyalty from a single datapoint that let me instantly alerted to the scam. But clearly, there is some psychological theory that says people contribute to their own family/club/clan/pack/herd. And by getting me involved in how I want my organization to be run (remember my footnote above—it very specifically isn't my organization, but they don't know that, and they think they're reminding me of something I have voluntarily joined, so they're only “pushing” lightly), they hope to extract money.
(I and I suspect many others in both parties don't give to big purposeless organizations like the DNC. It's funny because it exposes the lie in the Republican rhetoric that the Democrats just like bloated government. The DNC is a form of government, just as the RNC is actually. It's sort of a fractal recreation of the problems we have in the large. I think Democrats are just as likely to be distrustful of these centralized messes as Republicans, and just as likely to see benefits in them for some things. Surely there are some who embrace the DNC but there are some Republicans that embrace the RNC and others that think it's big and bloated. It isn't really what divides us. It's just overly-repeated tired rhetoric that has led us to think this is the reality.)