Bill Statistics

The Middle Class Position

The middle class supports.

How They Voted

87% with middle class
0% against middle class
13% did not vote
Pie Chart

Grades

Grade A
House

The House receives a grade of A for its support of the middle class on this piece of legislation.

376 Representatives voted for the middle-class position; 1 voted against.

H.R. 3548

Plain Language in Government Communications Act of 2008

Introduced:
09.17.2007 [House]
Placed on the Legislative Calendar: 08.01.2008
House: Yea-376, Nay-1
The Legislation: 

The Plain Language in Government Communications Act establishes plain language as the standard style for all government documents that are issued to the public. The legislation defines plain language as “language that the intended audience can readily understand and use because it is clear, concise, well-organized, and follows other best practices of plain language writing.” The plain language standard would apply to any document that explains how to obtain a government benefit or a service and how to file taxes. The standard covers letters, publications, forms, notices, and instructions, but not federal regulations. The bill does not impact existing federal protections regarding access to government services for people with limited English proficiency.

The Middle-Class Position: 

Middle Class Supports. Middle-class Americans should be able to easily understand communications from their government. Yet legalese is not confined to legislation and internal government memoranda. Americans who rely on Social Security benefits or veterans’ benefits to make ends meet, anyone who fills out tax paperwork, and any American who uses medication must interpret the convoluted technical language of benefits and tax documents and medicine warning labels. The audience-focused approach of the plain language standard would make benefits available to more Americans by making both application for federal benefits and eligibility requirement less confusing. Public access and transparency are key elements of good government and using plain, understandable language in government communications is a modest step toward both. The federal government would benefit because individuals and small businesses are more likely to comply with notices and instructions that they are able to understand easily and quickly. Additionally, the standard would reduce the customer support services that federal agencies must employ to explain obscure instructions. In general, the legislation would save time, money, and errors both inside of government and outside, benefiting middle-class Americans who rely on government services that are run effectively and efficiently.

From the Experts: 

“Confusing communication from the government discourages people from complying with requirements or applying for benefits… The cost of poor government communication is incalculable. Agencies have to write second documents to explain the first unclear document. They have to answer calls asking for explanations. They have to chase after people who failed to respond. They may even lose court cases because their communications violated citizens’ rights… The other side of the story is equally compelling. We know that plain language can save the government and the public time and money and help the government fulfill its mission better.”
– Dr. Annetta L. Cheek, Center for Plain Language (February 26, 2008)

“Some people may believe the desirability of using plain language in government communications is so obvious that legislation encouraging such a standard is unnecessary. Unfortunately, there is ample evidence to suggest otherwise. AARP hears everyday from our members who cannot understand the dense writing and legalese in correspondence they receive from the federal government. In most cases, this lack of comprehension is not the fault of the reader but rather reflects the impenetrable writing style of the government agency.”
– Robert Romasco, AARP (February 26, 2008)

Beyond this Bill: 

The Plain Language in Government Communications Act would make application for benefits and payment of taxes easier for many Americans. The fact that the Act does not discriminate against the use of languages other than English or chip away at protections regarding language access is extremely important. The plain language standard in no way establishes English as a national language and in no way complicates the translation of government documents into other languages. The plain language standard must be focused only on an improved relationship between citizens and the government.

Maine New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Rhode Island Connecticut New York New Jersey Pennsylvania Delaware Maryland West Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia Florida Alabama Mississippi Tennessee Virginia Kentucky Ohio Indiana Michigan Illinois Wisconsin Louisiana Arkansas Missouri Iowa Minnesota Oklahoma Kansas Nebraska South Dakota North Dakota Texas Colorado New Mexico Arizona Utah Wyoming Hawaii Alaska Montana Nevada Idaho California Oregon Washington