Contrary to popular opinion, it does not take guts to run for public office. What takes guts is running for public office and telling voters where you really stand on important issues. By this standard, about 85 percent of legislative candidates suffered from a courage deficit in 2006, as did 42 percent of Oregon congressional candidates.

That’s our take, anyway, on statistics provided by Project Vote Smart, a nonpartisan group that regularly asks candidates to fill out its Political Courage Tests. The tests, as the name suggests, have two purposes. The first is to determine candidates’ positions on the issues of the day, including taxation, spending priorities, immigration and campaign finance regulation. By collecting such information, Project Vote Smart can help people, um, vote smart.

The second purpose of a Political Courage Test is to gauge candidates’ courage. Those who skip the test presumably have less than those who answer it. Two years ago, only 16 percent of Oregon legislative candidates returned Project Vote Smart’s questionnaires, and only 38 percent of the state’s congressional candidates filled it out.

Why are these numbers so low? Largely because the major parties urge their candidates to abstain, according to Project Vote Smart. Because, we assume, parties do want voters to know where their candidates stand, this advice probably doesn’t arise from a desire to confuse. It’s more likely the result of fear: To take a clear position is to risk having your opponent beat you over the head with it.

This fear is certainly well-founded. But what’s so terrible about your opponent attacking you with a position you truly hold? Nothing. The attacking opponent, meanwhile, has either identified his or her own exploitable positions or refused to take the test, which is itself an exploitable position (cowardice).

And for those candidates who believe such tests are overly crude instruments for measuring nuanced policy positions, the Political Courage Test allows respondents to characterize themselves in their own words. Candidates may also skip up to 30 percent of the test without risking an official “chicken” designation. That leaves just one reason to toss the Political Courage Test in the trash: laziness. Filling it out and sending it back does involve some work. It’s work serious candidates should do eagerly, however.

Project Vote Smart has sent its tests to Oregon’s legislative and congressional candidates, who have until April 30 to respond. Surely, they can do better than 16 percent and 38 percent, respectively.