The presidential campaign has already become nasty. Both candidates knowingly misrepresent the other side’s position, hoping to scare or anger voters. With two months left in the campaign, people already are tired of the lies and distractions. A recent USA Today poll found that 90 million Americans might sit out the election because they are too busy, fed up with the negativism or believe that no matter who wins in November, nothing will change

Given all that, a moderate, sensible approach to a controversial issue was a refreshing change.

The issue was not Medicare or taxes, and the proposal came from a politician who is not running for president. Still, it was encouraging to read a column in the Washington Post co-authored by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, titled “Fracking is too important to foul up.”

Bloomberg took a practical, sensible approach. He acknowledged issues on both sides of the debate, but made a strong case for finding common ground.

Tackling the highly controversial issue of shale gas extraction, Bloomberg noted that “mostly, it’s loud voices at the extremes who are dominating the debate: those who want either no fracking or no additional regulation of it. As usual, the voices in the sensible center are getting drowned out.”

That drowning-out of voices in the sensible center is true for just about every issue debated in Washington these days, from Medicare and taxes to immigration and defense spending.

Echoing most energy experts, Bloomberg writes that fracking for shale gas is “the most significant development in the U.S. energy sector in generations.”

He notes four truths that should help those engaged in the debate find common ground.

Additional natural gas production is lowering the price of gas and also fueling infrastructure projects that create jobs.

Natural gas production boosts employment in the energy sector as well as other industries.

Gas extracted by fracking helps clean the environment by reducing the use of coal in electricity-generating power plants.

Gas-fueled power plants are flexible, allowing integration into the electricity grid of other, renewable energy sources.

Bloomberg doesn’t brush off the downsides, writing, “The rapid expansion of fracking has invited legitimate concerns about its impact on water, air and climate — concerns that the industry has attempted to gloss over.”

Urging better regulation of fracking, he points to the need for full disclosure of chemicals used in fracking as well as better rules for well construction and operation. He also proposes reducing water consumption and better protecting ground water when fracking. He supports improved air pollution controls, including better capturing of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, that can leak from pipes.

As a nonpartisan politician and successful businessman, Bloomberg’s not a pie-in-the-sky dreamer. He’s looking past the shrill voices and immovable positions on the extremes to find solutions to serious problems.

That’s an approach not being heard on the presidential campaign trail these days. If either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama would pick up on Bloomberg’s approach to fracking — and try applying it to taxes, deficit reduction or immigration — more people might see hope and go to the polls to vote in favor of their candidate instead of just voting against the other guy.