---

What we know about writing ballot questions that give voters confidence

When we ask voters about their voting experience, they often say that they find ballot questions confusing. They worry that the complex text is meant to deliberately trick them into voting in a way that does not match their opinion.

If we ask voters to weigh in on important issues, we should write the question clearly so they understand their options and make their voice heard with confidence.

Using plain language for ballot questions is common sense. And it’s backed by research showing that plain language helps people vote with greater confidence that their vote reflects their own opinion.

• Voters recognize the difference between plain language and traditional language ballots and prefer those written in plain language.  
• With plain language, voters vote more accurately and quickly and are more likely to vote on questions

Writing a ballot question isn’t as hard as it sounds.

The problem is that ballot questions are written with all the jargon of the law by people steeped in legalese and familiar with legislation. But, most voters don’t read legal text very often and prefer straightforward information. Here are a few tips for writing a ballot question in clear, understandable language.

Start with a title that introduces the topic

Too many ballot questions are identified as something like “Constitutional Amendment” or “Question 1.” Adding a short, informative, active title helps voters see what the question is about. The title can also serve as the question, but the format should be consistent in a state. Here’s a few examples 

• Increasing funding for public schools
• Right to reproductive freedom
• Filling vacancies in the General Assembly
• Should the State legalize cannabis?

Focus the question on the result or impact 

Voters want to know what the question will do, not the legal mechanisms. The ultimate goal is not to amend a constitution or repeal a law, but to make a change. Tell voters what the change will be.

In 2016, the UK took a momentous step through a question presented to voters in just 16 words:  

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

Some ballot questions are more prosaic or stuck with a program title no one understands. It’s better to ask the question simply, and introduce the official title in the description. This example is from a question asking to renew a successful program with a complicated title. If you start with a clear question, the explanation makes more sense. 

Should the County renew a 10-year program to clear abandoned cars off the streets? The Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program removes abandoned or wrecked cars and trucks from county streets. It is funded by a $1 per vehicle registration fee ($2 for some commercial vehicles). 

At a minimum, the text should explain the result of a question passing.

Should members of the State General Assembly live in the district they represent? This would require candidates to live in their primary home in the district they wish to represent for at least 6 months before the election. (Or, if the district is new, as long as the district has existed.)

Explain what each voting option will do

Even when voters have clear opinions, it may still be hard to decide which option matches the way they want to vote. This happens for a lot of reasons. Some questions have a double negative, asking voters to vote to repeal a law to make a change. Others are confusing because they include a list of exceptions or legal requirements that add complexity. 

When voters approved adding reproductive freedom to the Maryland Declaration of Rights, the text on the ballot started out by clearly identifying the right it proposed, but then got bogged down in legal jargon and a mix of positive and negative statements that confused even engaged, experienced voters: 

Right to reproductive freedom The proposed amendment confirms an individual’s fundamental right to an individual’s own reproductive liberty and provides that the State may not, directly or indirectly, deny, burden, or abridge the right unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.

One way to help voters untangle this question is to tell them what each option means. What if that question was followed by an explanation like this:

A vote IN FAVOR creates a right to reproductive liberty in Maryland

A vote AGAINST means there will be no changes to the current law

Keep it simple, active, and positive 

Write for voters, not legal experts. These basic plain language guidelines help make the text easier to read. 

• Use words voters will understand. Avoid legal jargon.
• Write in the positive. Focus on what will happen if the question passes.
• Make it active. Say who will do what.  
• No double negatives. Don’t make voters untangle the logic.
• Break up long sentences.

Some content guidelines depend on context

Explaining “before and after”

Every ballot question suggests a change in policy. Sometimes it can be helpful to explain the current situation.

Here’s two ways to do that:

Tribal casinos in the State can offer poker, bingo, and other games. If this proposition passes, it would also legalize sports betting, roulette, and dice games in tribal casinos.

Currently, the government uses money raised by the Name Act to fund public education. If this law passes, public schools would also receive additional funding from commercial gaming (gambling).

Setting word limits

We know that, in general, shorter is better: how much can we reasonably expect voters to read while standing in a voting booth? Some states and election offices want strict word limits to conserve ballot space. But some questions need a more detailed explanation. This decision may depend on what kinds of questions each state allows (or requires).

• Social policy questions can be short. 
• Fiscal questions may need to identify what new taxes will be used for.

Requiring a reading level

Readability scoring tools can be helpful in drafting a question, but do not work well for determining how hard the text is to read. The questions may need to use less common words, like constitution, registration, infrastructure.  We recommend that readability scores only be used as a guide for reviewers, rather than setting a legal limit. In experimentation, we found it too easy to game the scoring systems without increasing clarity.

What we’re researching  

Plain language ballot questions are clearly better for voters. But there are still open questions about which formats and approaches work best and why. We’re conducting research to find out.

Our current research is testing how structure, style, and length affect voter understanding of ballot questions. 

It’s not just what’s on the ballot

An opportunity for public comment

Some ballot questions are routine and uncontroversial. A public comment period allows advocates to decide which questions to pay attention to (or even file a lawsuit to change). Public review should be conducted well before the deadline for printing ballots.

Voter guides and ballot question explainers

Complex social or policy questions may not fit easily into the small space available on a ballot. A small voter guide that is sent to voters, available on the website, posted in polling places, or enclosed with a mail ballot is an opportunity to provide voters with more information about each question. The elements that voters in our research found helpful:

• A summary that explained the issues in the question without taking sides
• Statements from advocates for and against the question
• A short list of groups that supported or opposed the question
• Links to the full text of the law or petition

More reading

Jarrett, C, & Redish, G. (2019) Readability Formulas: 7 Reasons to Avoid Them and What to Do Instead. UXMatters

Johnson, S.I (2023) Explaining ballot questions in plain language. The Clarity Journal #85

Johnson, S.I.; Quesenbery, W. (2021) Making ballot envelopes clear and understandable: The impact of plain language on voter signature forms

Redish, J. and Laskowski, S. (2009), Guidelines for Writing Clear Instructions and Messages for Voters and Poll Workers, (NISTIR 7596) National Institute of Standards and Technology

Reilly, S., & Richey, S. (2009). Ballot question readability and roll-off: The impact of language complexity. Political Research Quarterly, 64(1), 59–67.