By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Feds must stop writing gibberish under new law
plainlaunguage
The government employee handbook on writing plainly.

Online:

Federal plain language guidelines: http://www.plainlanguage.gov/howto/guidelines/bigdoc/fullbigdoc.pdf

Center for Plain Language: http://centerforplainlanguage.org

 

 

WASHINGTON - The federal government is rolling out a new official language of sorts: plain English.

That's right: Pursuant to regulations promulgated thereunder and commencing in accordance with a statute signed herein by President Barack Obama, the government shall be precluded from writing the pompous gibberish heretofore evidenced, to the extent practicable.

That sentence contains 11 new language no-nos.

Obama signed the Plain Writing Act last fall after decades of effort by a cadre of passionate grammarians in the civil service to jettison the jargon.

It takes full effect in October, when federal agencies must start writing plainly in all new or substantially revised documents produced for the public. The government will still be allowed to write nonsensically to itself.

Ahead then, if the law works, is a culture change for an enterprise that turns out reams of confusing benefit forms, tangled rules and foggy pronouncements. Not to mention a Pentagon brownie recipe that went on for 26 pages about "regulations promulgated thereunder," ''flow rates of thermoplastics by extrusion plastometer" and a commandment that ingredients "shall be examined organoleptically."

That means look at, smell, touch or taste.

By July, each agency must have a senior official overseeing plain writing, a section of its website devoted to the effort and employee training under way.

"It is important to emphasize that agencies should communicate with the public in a way that is clear, simple, meaningful and jargon-free," says Cass Sunstein, a White House information and regulation administrator who gave guidance to federal agencies in April on how to implement the law.

Bad writing by the government, he says, discourages people from applying for benefits they should get, makes federal rules hard to follow and wastes money because of all the time spent fixing mistakes and explaining things to a baffled populace.

But can clarity and good grammar be legislated?

That remains to be seen. The law lacks teeth. You won't be able to sue the government for making your head spin after October. And regulations are exempted.

Annetta Cheek, a leader of the plain language movement for much of her 27-year career in government and now chairwoman of the Center for Plain Language, says the impulse to be vague and officious is hard to overcome because federal employees tend to write with their bosses and agency lawyers in mind, not the public.

Still, she predicts significant improvement. And she points to successes in Britain, Portugal, South Africa and elsewhere, where governments set out years ago to reinvent their communications with the public. "It's hard to find a high-level document in Sweden you can't understand," she says.

Cheek was one of the authors of the government's guidelines for plain writing, surely one of the breeziest federal documents around. It's packed with dos and don'ts for the coming transformation.

"Federal writers are not supposed to be creating great literature," the guidelines say. "You are communicating requirements, how to get benefits, how to stay safe and healthy, and other information to help people in their lives.

"While there is no problem with being expressive, most federal writing has no place for literary flair. People do not curl up in front of the fire with a nice federal regulation to have a relaxing read."

But it might be a friendlier read.

In one striking change, the government is becoming "we" and citizens are becoming "you."

So expect fewer statements like this:

"Before an individual can be determined eligible for Disaster Unemployment Assistance, it must be established that the individual is not eligible for regular unemployment insurance benefits."

And more like this:

"You can get financial help from Disaster Unemployment Assistance if your job was lost or interrupted as a direct result of a major disaster declared by the president of the United States."

Instead of this advice:

"Timely preparation, including structural and non-structural mitigation measures to avoid the impacts of severe winter weather, can avert heavy personal, business and government expenditures. Experts agree that the following measures can be effective in dealing with the challenges of severe winter weather."

Expect more like this advice:

"Severe winter weather can be extremely dangerous. Consider these safety tips to protect your property and yourself."

Instead of the government saying, "It is requested," expect the government to say "please."

And "It is required" is becoming "You must." This is a favorite of the Internal Revenue Service. One of its account notices has been revised so that it now strikes completely comprehensible terror in the recipient. "What you need to do immediately," it says.

The effort to have the government make more sense in its public dealings gained traction during the Clinton administration when Vice President Al Gore took on the task of "reinventing government." Cheek, a writer of federal regulations, became the chief plain language expert on Gore's team as it spread the gospel agency by agency, making incremental inroads until Obama signed the law.

"Most of what the government writes has too much stuff," she says. People just want to know, "What are you doing for me today?" Or, TO me.

The idea now is to purge a long list of words, phrases and grammatical practices that governments and lawyers love, and ordinary people don't. "Shall" is a prime target. It's seen as stuffy and obsolete.

Begone, too, with "pursuant, "promulgated," '' thereunder," ''commencing," ''in accordance with," ''herein," ''precluded," ''heretofore," ''evidenced" and "practicable," to name just a sampling of the no-nos.

Some of the revisions are downright chatty.

"Cook the stuffing separately - it's MUCH safer!" the government says in turkey guidance reworked in the Clinton era. "Measure the temperature of both the turkey and stuffing! Don't just trust a pop-up indicator!"

But do not expect "LOL" from the feds anytime soon. Especially, of course, at the IRS.

 

Sign up for our e-newsletters
Book review: Author digs into mining's complicated past and present in 'River of Lost Souls'
95ea3fecbc0a64e4f05e88f3376fb1889a1fe7caae34e3144ec2b2c8665a17dd
Jonathan Thompson will speak about his book "River of Lost Souls" at the King's English Bookshop on Tuesday, April 3 at 7 p.m. - photo by Amanda Olson
"RIVER OF LOST SOULS: The Science, Politics, and Greed Behind the Gold King Mine Spill," by Jonathan Thompson, Torrey House Press, 275 pages (nf)

Plenty has been written about the very small world of a mining town and the very broad reach of a beleaguered industry. From Loretta Lynns iconic song "Coal Miners Daughter," to the 2010 nail-biting coverage of 33 trapped Chilean miners, to the hit Broadway musicals "Paint Your Wagon" and "Billy Elliot," mining is a global story, and its one of heartbreak, hard work and hard times.

Jonathan Thompsons "River of Lost Souls" examines the many facets of risk involved in taking resources from below the earths surface. An environmental journalist, Thompson has reported on southwest Colorado for over 20 years. This book is special, however, because the Four Corners area of Colorado is his current and ancestral home. Thompson is writing about minings ecological, social, financial and political impact on his land, his landscape, his water, his people. That makes "River of Lost Souls" more than a regular reporting job.

Thompson begins with the Gold King Mine wastewater disaster of 2015, which the EPA caused while attempting to drain water near the mines entrance. The spill sent 3 million gallons of waste and tailings into Cement Creek, a tributary of the Animas River and part of the San Juan River watershed which drains into the Colorado, affecting the Utah, Colorado and New Mexico parts of that watershed as well as the Navajo Nation.

From there, Thompson jumps into far stretches of time to 1765, when a Spanish explorer named the Animas River; to 10,000 years earlier, when Paleo-Indians roamed the rivers valley; to the meridian of time, when the ancestors of the Zuni, Hopi and Rio Grande Pueblo people inhabited the land for 500 years; to the mid-1800s and the Swedes who came to Silverton, Colorado, to mine.

Its a grand scope, but telling any story of landscape is telling a very grand story.

It also makes a complex story difficult to follow. Thompsons time warps are important, but they are jarring. His time jumps need clear dates, and Thompson doesnt always make them available. A map would also be useful. Thompsons writing is good, but his sentences can be dense and require readers to do their own mining for the riches the writing embeds. The work is worthwhile, however, as there are many moving parts in any story about mines land, culture, policy, history, money, inevitable disaster and Thompson works to examine all of them.

"River of Lost Souls" is a thoughtful read, but not a quick one. Because Thompsons writings come from 20 years of his newspaper reports, the overall feeling can be disjointed and sparse, which is distracting if one is expecting to follow a tenable thread. This is not a typical narrative with a cast of characters and a traditional story arc. Readers should approach this text as the investigation it is: puzzle pieces of a larger-than-life story that is eons old. If you are the kind of reader who wants it laid out cleanly, this is not that book. But, to Thompsons point, nothing is clean about mining that has never been the case.

Thompsons best writing is in his descriptions of people and places. His telling of how he came to Silverton is familiar and engaging. If readers approach the book with care and attention, they will be rewarded with savoring these descriptive passages when they happen.
Latest Obituaries