Data

General Issues
Governance & Political Institutions
Specific Topics
Administration of Campaigns and Elections
Right to Representation
Collections
OECD Project on Representative Deliberative Processes
Location
Salem
Oregon
United States
Scope of Influence
Regional
Links
CIR Statement for M90
Information on Ballot Measure
Information on Ballot Measure
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
No
Time Limited or Repeated?
A single, defined period of time
Purpose/Goal
Develop the civic capacities of individuals, communities, and/or civil society organizations
Research
Approach
Research
Citizenship building
Spectrum of Public Participation
Inform
Total Number of Participants
18
Open to All or Limited to Some?
Limited to Only Some Groups or Individuals
Recruitment Method for Limited Subset of Population
Stratified Random Sample
General Types of Methods
Deliberative and dialogic process
General Types of Tools/Techniques
Inform, educate and/or raise awareness
Legislation, policy, or frameworks
Recruit or select participants
Specific Methods, Tools & Techniques
Citizens' Initiative Review
Initiative Process
Oregon Citizens' Initiative Review
Deliberation
Legality
Yes
Facilitators
Yes
Facilitator Training
Professional Facilitators
Face-to-Face, Online, or Both
Face-to-Face
Types of Interaction Among Participants
Discussion, Dialogue, or Deliberation
Ask & Answer Questions
Information & Learning Resources
Expert Presentations
Written Briefing Materials
Decision Methods
Voting
If Voting
Majoritarian Voting
Communication of Insights & Outcomes
Public Report
Primary Organizer/Manager
Healthy Democracy
Type of Organizer/Manager
Non-Governmental Organization
Staff
Yes
Volunteers
No

CASE

Oregon Citizens' Initiative Review on Measure 90: Oregon Open Primary Initiative

Participants vote “yes” or “no” during the CIR in 2014. Red and green circles have since been replaced by red and green panels that say “yes” and “no” – Credit: Knowable Magazine
August 4, 2020 Joyce Chen
August 31, 2019 Scott Fletcher Bowlsby
June 10, 2019 jxz305
General Issues
Governance & Political Institutions
Specific Topics
Administration of Campaigns and Elections
Right to Representation
Collections
OECD Project on Representative Deliberative Processes
Location
Salem
Oregon
United States
Scope of Influence
Regional
Links
CIR Statement for M90
Information on Ballot Measure
Information on Ballot Measure
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
No
Time Limited or Repeated?
A single, defined period of time
Purpose/Goal
Develop the civic capacities of individuals, communities, and/or civil society organizations
Research
Approach
Research
Citizenship building
Spectrum of Public Participation
Inform
Total Number of Participants
18
Open to All or Limited to Some?
Limited to Only Some Groups or Individuals
Recruitment Method for Limited Subset of Population
Stratified Random Sample
General Types of Methods
Deliberative and dialogic process
General Types of Tools/Techniques
Inform, educate and/or raise awareness
Legislation, policy, or frameworks
Recruit or select participants
Specific Methods, Tools & Techniques
Citizens' Initiative Review
Initiative Process
Oregon Citizens' Initiative Review
Deliberation
Legality
Yes
Facilitators
Yes
Facilitator Training
Professional Facilitators
Face-to-Face, Online, or Both
Face-to-Face
Types of Interaction Among Participants
Discussion, Dialogue, or Deliberation
Ask & Answer Questions
Information & Learning Resources
Expert Presentations
Written Briefing Materials
Decision Methods
Voting
If Voting
Majoritarian Voting
Communication of Insights & Outcomes
Public Report
Primary Organizer/Manager
Healthy Democracy
Type of Organizer/Manager
Non-Governmental Organization
Staff
Yes
Volunteers
No
This entry was originally added in English. View this entry in its original language. click for more info
The following entry is a stub. Please help us complete it. click for more info

A Citizen's Initiative Review convened in Oregon to deliberate on M90 a ballot measure that would change the primary elections law to a top-two system of general voting. A majority of 14 members of the CIR opposed the measure compared to a minority of 4 members for the measure.


Note the following entry is a stub. Please help us complete it.


Problems and Purpose

Background History and Context

Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities

Participant Recruitment and Selection

Methods and Tools Used

What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation

Influence, Outcomes, and Effects

Analysis and Lessons Learned

See Also

References

External Links

Notes

Edit case