This Is Disclosure
Cheat sheet · Politicians and public officials

Cheat sheet for politicians and public officials.

Public office is power held in trust. Much of the test is how you treat the people who can do the least for you, and who will never know whether you noticed.

Not every hardship is a test, and nothing here is graded.

A black and white woodcut of an empty council chamber at night, where an official in a plain coat has stepped down from the dais to sit on a wooden bench beside one tired resident, listening, with rows of empty chairs and a high window of lamplight behind them.
  1. Tell people the true thing when it costs you, and correct yourself in public.
    When you learn you were wrong, say so plainly and say what you will do now. Skip the long defense.
    Say"I told you that last spring. I was mistaken, and here is the correct number."
  2. Answer the person who cannot help your career.
    Reply to the unheard letter, the small casework request, and the constituent who did not vote for you. Treat the dull problem as seriously as the one that might make news.
    Say"I don't know yet, but I will find out and call you back by Friday."
  3. Describe your opponents' views so they would recognize them.
    Before you criticize a position, state it the way its holders would. Then answer that version. If you can, say: "On this point, they are right, and I'm glad they pushed."
  4. Turn down fear and contempt as a tactic, even when it works.
    Make the case for what you would do without making your audience afraid of or scornful toward a neighbor. When your own side jeers at someone, don't join in. You can disagree hard and still leave people their dignity.
  5. Disclose your money and your conflicts before anyone asks.
    Publish where support comes from, what you own that your work could touch, and who has met with you. Step back from a decision when you have a stake in it.
    Say"I have an interest here, so I'm leaving this vote to others."
  6. Make one decision for people who cannot vote or pay you.
    Ask who is not in the room: children, people not yet born, the poor, the far away. Give their interest real weight in one choice this month, even if no one will thank you.
  7. Do one job with no cameras.
    Visit, listen, and sit with someone, and tell no one. Let the person talk until they are done.
    Say"Tell me what it's been like. I'm not here to fix it tonight, just to hear it."

The evidence behind this sheet

Field experiments show that legislators do not always answer every constituent equally, and lab experiments link uncivil political exchanges to lower trust. Evidence on what restores trust is thinner and mixed, and none of it shows that any single act by one official changes outcomes.

OECD Recommendation of the Council on Public IntegrityThe OECD Council adopted this Recommendation on 26 January 2017, setting out 13 principles for public integrity that a secondary summary groups under system, culture, and accountability.official · OECD Legal InstrumentsDo Politicians Racially Discriminate Against Constituents? A Field Experiment on State LegislatorsIn an email field experiment on state legislators, requests for help registering to vote from a putatively black alias received fewer replies than those from a putatively white alias, even when the emails signaled partisanship.study · American Journal of Political Science (Butler and Broockman, 2011, via Yale ISPS)The New Videomalaise: Effects of Televised Incivility on Political TrustIn three laboratory experiments, televised political disagreement alone did not lower trust, but trust fell as the incivility of the exchange rose.study · American Political Science Review (Mutz and Reeves, 2005)How Incivility on Partisan Media (De-)Polarizes the ElectorateThe authors report from a survey experiment that incivility from a same-party source moved partisans toward the middle while incivility from the other party's source pushed them apart, so effects depend on who delivers it.study · Northwestern Institute for Policy Research working paper (Druckman, Gubitz, Levendusky, and Lloyd)An Effect of Storytelling on Attitude Changes in Deliberative Mini-PublicsIn a small study of 65 participants in a deliberative-poll-style event in Japan, the authors note that earlier work disagrees on whether higher-quality deliberation produces attitude change, and their own storytelling effects were inconsistent and weakly supported.skeptical · Journal of Deliberative Democracy (Nakazawa and colleagues, 2024)OECD Trust Survey 2024: governments must better engage all citizens to tackle growing gaps in trustIn the OECD's 30-country survey, 44% of respondents reported low or no trust in their national government versus 39% reporting high or moderately high trust, and trust was far higher among those who felt they had a say.official · OECD press release
Where the evidence is thin. Responsiveness experiments measure replies to one kind of request in one place and time, and lab studies of incivility use short exposures that may not match real campaigns. Trust surveys show correlations, not that a politician's behavior changed them, and deliberation research is mixed on why opinions shift. These sheets do not claim that any single action reliably improves results.
If you only do one thing this week
Answer one letter you didn't have to, name one thing an opponent got right, and spend an hour listening with no cameras.

This sheet is for anyone in public life, of any party or country, and it takes no side on any policy. Power in public office is held in trust, so the bar is higher than it is for most people. Nothing here is legal or ethical advice. Rules about gifts, disclosure, and conduct differ by place, so follow the ones that apply to you and ask your ethics office when unsure.

This is practical, not religious. I think what you show with your choices is what counts. Share it freely.

thisisdisclosure.com/cheat-sheets · A free message, nothing to buy or join · Share freely