From the Heartland

By Stephen Earl Bennett

In my last column for Public Opinion Pros, I want to call attention to something Erik Severeid—longtime journalist and commentator for the CBS evening news—wrote. To paraphrase Severeid’s observation: Never overestimate what the American public knows about public affairs, and never underestimate the public’s ability to make sense of what it does know. To someone who believes in popular government—in which public opinion ought to have some impact on policy—but has written many times about the average citizen’s colossal ignorance of public affairs, Severeid’s notion will always be apropos.

It takes little effort to document the public’s profound ignorance of politics. Michael Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter’s 1996 book, What Americans Know about Politics, and Why It Matters, revealed that ordinary citizens have been ignorant of politics for decades. Jeffrey Friedman, editor of Critical Review, has published many studies that show mind-boggling ignorance of politics, and assess its implications for democracy.

The Pew Research Center for The People & The Press’s report of April 15, 2007, is one of the most recent revelations of Americans’ ignorance of politics. Asked twenty-three questions tapping information about many facets of public affairs, the typical respondent answered slightly over twelve correctly. If Americans were graded on the standard academic scale—90 percent or better equals A, less than 60 percent equals F, and so forth—nearly half would have failed the test, and only 6 percent would have received a B or an A. (The Pew Center’s update of this report, written by Scott Keeter and Robert Suls and released on September 24, 2007, has a somewhat more positive take on Americans’ knowledge of public affairs, but leaves unanswered many questions about the replication’s validity.)

Why are Americans ignorant of politics? There are many reasons, of course, but lack of interest in public affairs is foremost. As University of Texas professor Robert Luskin wrote, “We learn about the things we care about.” Surveys have repeatedly shown that when Americans are asked to rank the personal importance of a plethora of concerns, such as family and friends, entertainment, occupations and careers, personal health, and so on, government and public affairs come in dead last. If, for most Americans most of the time, public affairs are matters of tertiary concern, should we be surprised if the public is also woefully ignorant of government and politics?

Okay, so grassroots ignorance of politics is easily demonstrated; where does the second half of Severeid’s assertion—that we should not underestimate the public’s ability to make sense of what it knows—come in? Although the case is not perfect, consider the results when the Gallup Poll has asked, “What is the most important problem facing this country today?” Prior to 9/11, several polls between 1998 and 2000 resulted in somewhere between a quarter and nearly two-fifths of the public mentioning “economic problems.” International issues or problems and military and defense trailed badly. Terrorism, or related topics, did not register, period.

After 9/11, things changed, a lot. In a Gallup Poll taken in early November 2001, 37 percent of the public mentioned terrorism, and 9 percent said “national security.” Economic issues fell to less than one-fifth of respondents. In early December 2001, another Gallup Poll found that roughly a quarter of the public thought terrorism was the country’s most important problem, and 6 percent mentioned “national security.” Just under a fifth mentioned “the economy in general.”

Concern with terrorism as the nation’s most important problem persisted for some time after 9/11. Gallup polls in August, October, and November 2002 found that terrorism and national security remained central concerns, although economic issues in general rivaled and later even exceeded them.

Gallup polls provide a second illustration in support of Severeid. On a baker’s dozen occasions between April 1995 and the end of November 2001, Gallup’s interviewers asked random samples of American adults the same question: “How worried are you that you or someone in your family will become a victim of a terrorist attack—very worried, somewhat worried, not too worried, or not worried at all?” Between April 1995 and April 2000, the proportion of the public that was ”worried” fell from two-fifths to one-quarter. Between 9/11 and mid-October 2001, somewhere between half and three-fifths of the public claimed to be worried. Between late October and late November 2001, worries about being the victim of a terrorist attack fell, but were still at least as high as they had been prior to 9/11.

Most Americans have notoriously short memories, and some analysts contend that public opinion can be fickle even on topics thought to be major national problems.

Nevertheless, the speed with which—in the aftermath of 9/11—domestic matters in general, and economic concerns in particular, faded as perceived problems, to be superseded by worries about terrorism, national security, defense, and war, should serve as a sign of the continuing applicability of Severeid’s second contention.

Those of us who write about Americans’ lack of information about government and public affairs should be reminded from time to time that the public is much like the proverbial Missouri mule, which was capable of rapidly focusing its attention appropriately. So long as Severeid’s second point holds, popular government may have an optimistic future.

Stephen Earl Bennett is adjunct professor of political science at the University of Southern Indiana.