2002 NLPES-Fall Training Conference Notes
Reconnecting Government and Citizens Through Evaluation
Keynote Address by Deborah Jones Merritt
Director, The John Glenn Institute for Public Service & Public
Policy
The Ohio State University
Ms. Merritt began her address with the alarming pronouncement, "democracy
is in danger." She was not referring to threats from terrorists or terrorist
states. She addressed the threats from within - civic inattention and negative
media coverage of government.
She focused on three areas:
Negative trends in civic engagement - and some countertrends;
Change in how citizens participate in government and the trends toward
direct democracy from representative democracy; and
Using program evaluation to build on this shift and reconnect citizens
with government.
Decline in Civic Engagement
Voter Participation - Ms. Merritt referred to voting participation
as "shockingly low," especially among young people. Less than one third
of voting-age citizens have voted in recent Presidential elections. Only
50 percent of young people between 15- and 25-years old believe voting
is important. 49 percent do not.
Nevertheless, Ms. Merritt points out, America's history of voter participation
is sketchy. In the first five presidential elections, only 4 to 6 percent
of eligible voters exercised their franchise. That was in a day when most
of the population was not even eligible to vote. The Jacksonian Era increased
participation to 27 percent in 1824, when John Quincy Adams won the Presidency.
Andrew Jackson's 1828 election included 57 percent of eligible voters and
that percentage rose to 80 percent by 1840, when William Henry Harrison
ousted President Martin Van Buren.
Trust in government - By 1999, only 21 percent of Americans surveyed
trusted the national government "a great deal" or "quite a lot." Thirty-three
percent had the same level of trust in their state government and 35 percent
similarly trusted their local government. By contrast, 59 percent had "a
great deal," or "quite a lot" of trust in the military, a figure that Ms.
Merritt surmised has risen since September 11, 2001.
The same 1999 study found that only 25 percent of those surveyed believe
that government pursues "the people's agenda." Much more agreed with the
statement that, "Many in government are crooked."
On the other hand, young people are more positive about the effectiveness
of government. Of those under 30-years old, 69 percent say government should
do more to help people.
Negativity in Media - The news media and prime time television
programs are increasingly negative in their coverage of government. Media
stories on performance audits in California, Colorado, Michigan, Oregon,
and Texas revealed that over a 7-year period, only 2 of 57 stories were
positive. Even those 2 stories reminded the public of previous negative
reports and were tempered in their praise. However, there may be a new
mood in the media. Ms. Merritt stated that the media has responded "seriously"
to September 11. She added that between 1998 and 2001, three of four television
episodes referring to the government were positive.
Counter Trends
Ms. Merritt noted that people want to create a stronger community.
Baby boomers say their parents were more involved in their communities
and believe we are worse off for having lost that involvement. Young citizens
want to be involved. Eighty-one percent favor a year of national service.
Sixty-six percent favored requiring Civics in high school. A new draft
for either military or civilian service was favored by 61 percent of young
people.
Volunteerism has increased - College freshmen are volunteering
more. About 72 percent of young people between 15- to 25-years old report
that they have donated to charity. Helping the community is listed as a
"top priority" by 33 percent of that group.
According to Ms. Merritt, this is significant because studies show that
volunteers vote more and are more politically engaged.
Student involvement - Sixty percent of students surveyed are
active in community service, yet only 7 percent report taking part in a
political campaign. Forty-nine percent said helping the community was most
important to them while only 12 percent listed involvement in government
as "most important."
Changes in Participation
Association Membership - Ms. Merritt stated that there is rising
membership in private organizations such as the National Rifle Association,
American Association of Retired People, and similar organizations. She
noted the trend toward membership in organizations that do not have meetings
or form social bonds, but lobby for political causes.
Ms. Merritt opined that voting and joining an association have similar
components. They are both collective and symbolic actions. It is a method
of combining one's views with others to seek a collective result and it
is a way to express one's identity. Membership in a political party expresses
identity as a Republican or Democrat. Members of the NRA or AARP express
their identity in their membership. Voters combine their vote with others
to reach a result, while association members combine their money with others
in pursuit of a result.
Ballot Initiatives - Twenty-four states allow statutory or constitutional
change through the ballot initiative process. The most active states are
Arizona, California, Colorado, North Dakota, and Oregon. Ms. Merritt stated
that even the threat of an initiative petition affects legislative action.
She said increased ballot initiatives use is one indication of the trend
toward direct democracy and away from representative democracy.
Public Opinion Polls - Polls are a part of civic engagement,
Ms. Merritt said. They are ubiquitous, she added. She claimed a similarity
between polls and voting by pointing out that political parties initiate
voter turnout and voters choose among limited options. Similarly, survey
respondents respond to telephone calls and choose among limited options.
Polls and elections register collective choices. Ms. Merritt pointed out
that polls cannot have the real impact of elections. However, citizens
do respond to reported results from scientifically determined samples.
What the Trends Mean
Ms. Merritt believes the public trends toward private association membership
and direct democracy are rational responses to bad government. She noted
that scandals breed distrust. She also said that while the public supports
campaign finance reform, it distrusts the government to implement it. Additionally,
Ms. Merritt stated that ours is the most individualistic society every
assembled. She also argued that the belief in self-reliance and that the
government should do less is another reason for waning government participation.
The decline in representative democracy has been evidenced in various
populist movements, the Supreme Court's "one person - one vote" ruling,
ballot initiatives and term limits.
Ms. Merritt said that today we want our representatives to reflect our
exact views. We are less tolerant of those who vote against our views on
even one issue.
The rise of direct democracy can be seen in the decline in voting rates,
distrust of government, negative media coverage of government, increased
volunteerism, a desire (especially among young people) to reconnect with
government, the rise in ballot initiatives, growth in public opinion polls,
and increased membership in associations.
Ms. Merritt warned that the risks of direct democracy include uninformed
decision-makers, the loss of deliberation, the lack of compromise, and
a concentration of power. For example, uninformed decision-makers are more
prone to making superficial or unstable decisions. Additionally, direct
democracy does not lend itself to the deliberative process. The loss of
deliberation limits the ability or desire to compromise. Furthermore, ballot
initiatives and association membership are increasingly seen as the special
interests of concentrated power, which, when combined with the other risks
of direct democracy, lead to a further concentration of power.
Using Program Evaluation to Reconnect Citizens and Government
Ms. Merritt stated program evaluations contain elements the public respects.
Like a public interested in direct democracy, program evaluations focus
on issues. Additionally, evaluators have hands-on involvement with the
programs they evaluate and affect those programs through their findings
and recommendations. Finally, the public respects social science and professional
methods and thus, trusts independent program evaluators.
According to Ms. Merritt, program evaluation can bridge the gap between
the private sector and government programs. She argued that evaluations
could change public opinion of the efficacy of government. She stated that
many citizens do not know what government does. Only 17 percent of young
adults understand government's role in creating the Internet or medical
cures. She opined that understanding government's role in society increases
confidence in government. Ms. Merritt believes program evaluators should
provide information that increases public understanding of government and
reduces the flaws of direct democracy. She further stated that program
evaluation forces citizens to think more deeply about programs, reconsidering
existing programs, and developing thoughtful habits when considering government's
role.
Next, Ms. Merritt suggested that we use evaluations to generate deliberation.
She said that program evaluation "embodies the spirit of the early 21st
century."
She said evaluators should:
-
Raise the profile of evaluation;
-
Make explicit links between evaluation in the public and private sectors;
-
Distribute evaluation results widely and stimulate discussion;
-
Involve citizens in evaluation; and
-
Cultivate a culture of evaluation.
Ms. Merritt added that evaluators could do several things to promote those
ideas. For example:
-
Establish an NLPES standing committee on public information. She
said the NLPES should publicize its awards program. She encouraged organizations
to develop press packets and educational materials. NLPES should name local
liaisons to the committee and share innovative methods with its members.
-
Develop strategic alliances. Ms. Merritt stated that evaluators
should share information with "civic engagement" and "civic education"
groups. She added that there is grant money that groups should tap for
developing educational materials. Additionally, she stated that evaluation
organizations should develop state level alliances. Moreover, they should
establish links to non-profit organizations that conduct evaluations.
-
Develop materials for high schools and colleges. Ms. Merritt believes
evaluation groups should provide sample evaluations to high school and
college students and teach evaluation skills. Finally, they should involve
students in the process.
Service Learning
Ms. Merritt promoted service learning as a way to reconnect the public
to its government. She said community service should be tied to academic
curriculum. That, she argued, reinforces classroom learning, provides an
application to the "real" world, and improves civic involvement. Those
involved in service learning provide real service to the community. She
opined that service learning creates "citizens for life." That, she said,
translates into increased civic participation and voting. By allowing students
to identify the community need and design the responsive action, students
are more likely to stay involved. Finally, service learning ends with assessment
and reflection, allowing students to determine the success of the process
and worth of the project.
Ms. Merritt ended by saying that bringing professional evaluation into
the classroom, providing materials to read, skills to learn and processes
to practice, you will create new, engaged citizens.
 2002
Fall Training Conference Notes
|
