This column is an illogical attempt to explain away the disastrous national results for Democrats in the just completed elections. The Pew Research Survey was done the year before Barack Obama won the 2008 election and Democrats added to their majorities in the House and Senate. The year before the Pew Survey, Democrats took control of the US House and Senate so they were exactly as uninformed at that time as well. Voters knew nothing about Barack Obama when they elected him in 2008. That was the immediate problem, not the civics question. After just 3 months of the Obama administration the Tea Party formed and has served as a citizen primer of concentrated civics resulting in the average American knowing far more in 2010 than they did in 2007. After 2 years of his administration they knew that what he and the Democrats were doing was a disaster, from watching, listening and living the nightmare. Democrats were handed a defeat not seen in this country since 1948 because the voters were outraged at the corrupt waste of massive spending, the bail outs, stimulus, take overs and bills passed with thousands of pages, that no one read, to take over huge slices of the economy and make them government projects. The present trajectory of spending and borrowing makes it clear that the country will be broken financially within a very few years if nothing were done to stop it. It was apparent to nearly everyone that the only way to stop what has been going on in Washington was to throw out the people who were doing it. This they have done and it is all to their credit with whatever level of information that they had. The American people deserve a great big round of applause for saving themselves and the nation from even greater ruin than has already been inflicted by the Obama administration. The people who watch Fox are as informed as are people who watch the network news, so that is an unfair statement. People aren’t being informed by Colbert and Stewart, they are already informed through actively educating themselves, not passively watching entertainment..so that is also a mistaken conclusion. Everyone surveyed could be better informed and unfortunately the greatest lack of knowledge of civics for the largest demographic group according to the Pew 2007 Survey was women of all ages who rated 25% high level of knowledge, 33% Medium level and 42% low level. For men the numbers were 45% high level knowledge, 29% medium and 26% low level. Your column would better be titled, According to the Pew 2007 Research Survey Men Nearly Twice As Informed On Civics As Women. Since this was a major conclusion, do you recommend taking the vote away from women? Women are more likely to vote for Democrats and they are as a group are the least informed…can you make a judgment based on this information?

“The same Pew survey found that the Americans most in tune with political events and the structure of government are those who read major daily newspapers, and those who watch Comedy Central’s The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Such a poll cannot prove causation, however, the fact remains that major broadcast and cable television networks — from which the majority of Americans get their news — rated far behind the other sources. The highly popular Fox News Channel ranked in virtually last place, and CNN only did slightly better.”

You may want to proofread occasionally…did the survey rank Americans or the news channels?

Of course the voters were equally ill-informed when they voted for Obama and Democrats two years ago. It’s why the Founders chose to create a republic rather than a democracy. They wanted people to elect the better prepared, better informed to make the actual decisions. “Reforms” in the past century or so have undermined this to some extent, such as primaries and same-day registration, as well as the media and election expenses that have tightened the grip of voters on representatives.

The question is whether anyone can be sufficiently well-informed today. I feel certain few in the House or Senate fully understood Obamacare, let alone the general public. I am not suggesting any kind of call for elitism or rejection of democracy — a sense of genuine engagement is crucial, for without it, we would probably have had rebellion instead of voting in response to government arrogance. But it’s a problem nevertheless.

Our Founding Fathers were just as concerned about democracy as monarchy… hence our Republic. At one time in Vermont, one could not vote unless one had a personal stake in the community, evidenced either by residing in the village or owning property outside of it.

We have made progress expanding suffrage to people beyond landowners, yet we will fail without educated, knowledgeable, informed voters. The idea of a civics class is excellent, but for all people and not just Dartmouth students; at one time this was a standard part of the secondary school curriculum.

We require new immigrants to pass a citizenship test; should we not do the same for all people before allowing them to vote? Of course this suggestion is offered with an awareness of the very real problem that tests might, intentionally or not, unfairly exclude deserving people. If we could solve this problem, we could make a meaningful distinction between “residents” entitled to basic human rights and “citizens” with additional obligations and privileges.

<On a national level, the problem could be addressed by mandating a universal curriculum of civics education in American schools.>

Why would that be any more successful than the mandated math, English and geography classes that leave graduates illiterate, innumerate and geographically ignorant?

The problem of ignorant voters is not solved by offering civics education; it is solved by requiring that one must competently pass the courses before voting. Some lessons on basic economics should also be included.

While there will be class dropouts who remain illiterate and ignorant, in all subject areas there should be no “graduates” allowed without first demonstrating competency.

The founders put such severe restrictions on the actions of the government, that they called it a “Constitutional Republic.” The word Constitutional preceding the word Republic, means that it is the primary concept, Republic then, is the ancillary.

If the people elected, who are more informed, also followed the Constitution there would be few problems with which to be concerned. The problem is precisely that the informed and uninformed either know what the Constitution allows and ignore it, or are ignorant of the Constitutions' limitation on their actions and act in criminal violation of it. Ignorance of the law is not a defense for law breaking. National politicians take an oath to protect and defend the U. S. Constitution and they break that oath every single day. The Constitution does not allow for anyone, for any reason to be treated unequally under the law. It doesn't matter if they are part of a group or not, it doesn't matter what they do for a living or how much money they make or whether or not they have a pimple on Mondays. The Constitution prohibits discriminatory treatment for or against anyone for any reason. Think about that civics lesson.

The author should consider academic exploration of his topic. Try Campbell et al. 1960; Fiorina 1981; Key 1966; Carmines and Stimson 1980; Petrocik 1996. These would serve as a legitimate framework for the author’s discussion, instead of the (misleadingly) simple conclusions he arrives at:

Campbell, Angus, Warren E. Miller, Philip E. Converse, Donald E. Stokes, Philip E. Converse. 1980. The American Voter, unabridged edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Fiorina, Morris. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. Yale University Press.

Carmines, Edward G., and James A. Stimson. 1980. “The Two Faces of Issue Voting.” American Political Science Review 74:78-91.

Petrocik, John R. 1996. “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study.” American Journal of Political Science. 40(3):825–50.

Key, V. O., Jr. 1966. The Responsible Electorate. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.