Transparency for Massachusetts

With the onset of election season for Massachusetts’s gubernatorial race comes the candidates’ search for support from interest groups and other organizations. Many organizations send questionnaires to candidates to gauge their positions; politicians likewise use these questionnaires to make promises about actions they will take if elected.

While Democrat Juliette Kayyem and Republican Charlie Baker have promised in the name of transparency to reveal all questionnaires they complete, other gubernatorial candidates have determined that they would prefer a level of secrecy, revealing none or only some of their questionnaires. We support those politicians who have chosen the path of transparency, and urge those who have not yet promised to reveal all of their answers to do so.

It is the candidates’ duty to express their positions clearly to voters prior to the election. Voters should be made fully aware of all of the stances that candidates have promised to uphold. This would enable citizens to best make informed and educated choices for governor, as well as to know what type of leadership and policy changes they can expect to be implemented.

Even if the questionnaires discuss topics already detailed in the candidates’ platforms, voters should have the opportunity to learn about candidates’ prioritization of these issues. At a minimum, no special groups should have greater access than the general public. While it is understandable that candidates may believe that full openness will alienate voters with different priorities, it is nevertheless critical that all voters have access to this knowledge, so that they can vote in accordance with their own preferences.

Moreover, given that very influential interest groups are involved, it is particularly imperative that voters have the most complete picture possible. Otherwise, the relationships between candidates and interest groups may remain shady and unclear, and the influence that interest groups hold on the candidates may become too strong.

It is true that it is difficult for candidates to fully articulate their positions on some of the questionnaires, especially if asked to rank how they feel about issues on a numerical scale. But if that is the issue, then candidates and interest groups could simply work to expand the questionnaires to a more detailed level. After all, if the average resident would struggle interpreting the numbers on a nuanced level, it stands to reason that interest groups would face the same problem.

Regarding the final concern that positions elaborated through questionnaires would be taken out of context, the same can be said for any speech or candidate publication. Freely publishing the questionnaires in their entirety would allow voters to see a fuller picture of a candidate’s views, as well as his or her sidebar commitments to outside spending groups. That would lead to more transparent campaigns, which would serve the people of Massachusetts well.