We are
continually attempting to become Critical Thinkers,
to look at issues from both to make informed decisions. This naturally,
to me anyway, would include a critical examination of candidates for political
office. John Stuart Mill in his essay, On Liberty, made the very point
when he said that to be a contributing citizen one must know both sides of
issues and be able to argue them either way at a moment’s notice
(paraphrased). Would we expect any less than an informed vote from an
informed voter?
From the site, Project Vote Smart:
“In a very real sense, the need for Project Vote Smart was born during the Constitutional Convention. Concerned that unbridled power would corrupt, that ‘factions’ might deform their vision and turn it to serve selfish interests, and that an informed people was essential to success, the founders adopted a number of administrative protections, chief amongst them a system of checks and balances and the Bill of Rights. Had they been able to witness the great fortune of their design, our founders would be pleased. However, had they also been able to witness the future ability of 'factions' to torture truth and undermine the purpose of their creation by effectively frustrating the people's ability to be informed, they clearly would have created Project Vote Smart or something very much like it.What we eventually decided upon remains the heart of Project Vote Smart today. We would acquire from every candidate, with or without their cooperation, a detailed application of employment -- the same kind of information, in the same categories that an employer would insist upon from one applying for any job. We asked ourselves: what does an employer need to know in order to hire prudently?"
What's New @ SWC Library