government performance seems to be sagging

Voting. In 1996, with three viable candidates in the race, fewer than half of all voting-age
Americans decided who would lead the nation into the next millennium. The turnout in the 1996
Presidential election represented a decline of nearly 14 percentage points from the 1960 election.
Participation in off-year Congressional and local elections has declined by roughly the same
proportion. In sum, out of every 100 voters who went to the polls in 1960, only 75 do so today.
5

The decline is especially puzzling given that, since the 1960s, barriers to voting have been razed
and factors associated with higher voting rates, such as college education and wealth, have
become more widespread. An analysis by political scientists Warren E. Miller and J. Merrill
Shanks
6
 found that nearly all the decline in voting is attributable to generational replacement.
Simply put, the young adults of today do not vote in anywhere near the same numbers as the
young adults of yesteryear.
Political Attention. Survey data going back to 1974 has tracked a steady decline in Americans’
interest in politics and current affairs.
7
 Cutting through the natural ebbs and flows that correspond
to news events, the fraction of Americans who care about public affairs has dropped by roughly
20% over the past 25 years. As with voting, the decline in attention to public affairs is largely
generational and likely linked to the parallel decline in newspaper readership.
Political Expression. Reflecting this general psychic disengagement, Americans are considerably
less likely to render their opinions on important matters of the day. There has been a decline of
more than 20% in the fraction of Americans who write their member of Congress or Senator in
any given year, and a similar decline in the fraction of Americans who sign petitions. There has
been a smaller but still marked drop in the propensity to write letters to the editor or newspaper
articles.
Some political theorists claim that increasing the quantity of political expression, whether voting
or speaking out, would not aid our democracy. Their argument dates to Aristotle’s time, when
governance was considered the rightful province of a small group of especially knowledgeable
and virtuous people. While we agree that knowledge and virtue are important foundations for
self-governance, we nonetheless believe pragmatically that more expression is better, irrespective
of whether we become more virtuous individuals first. The decline in voter turnout and other
forms of political communication is a problem precisely because it leads to confusion over what
the American people want. If voters do not register their preferences, those elected cannot claim a
“mandate” to do the people’s bidding  – whether it be expanding the government safety net or
reducing government regulation. If we don’t speak, they can’t lead.
These indicators of civic health – voting, speaking out, paying attention – are largely individua
pursuits, which don’t require interaction with other citizens. The declines are even starker when
we look at the forms of participation that depend on regular interaction with others.
Campaign Work. The fraction of Americans who volunteer for a political party – never high to
begin with – has dropped by more than half since the early 1970s. This has accompanied, and
may ironically be the product of, the growing wealth and professionalization of the major politica
parties. Where once the parties relied on grassroots volunteers and face-to-face persuasion to
recruit locals to the party cause, the Democrats and Republicans now rely primarily on “air war”
strategies  – television advertisements, public opinion polling, mass mailings to people whose
names and addresses are purchased from “list brokers,” and phone banks staffed by professiona
solicitors. The political scientist John Aldrich aptly describes today’s parties as service bureaus
for free-lancing candidates, rather than as voluntary associations of like-minded individuals
working to advance their policy interests.
8
The decline in campaign involvement has been fueled at least in part by changes in the ways
parties attempt to communicate with would-be supporters.
9
 The decline is significant across
generational cohorts, suggesting that the explanation lies at least in part with the political system.
But it is also true that the decline in party involvement has been far more pronounced among
younger than older age groups. For example, seniors aged 60 and above were 36% less likely to
participate in the late 1990s relative to the early 1970s, but the comparable figure for people 18-
29 was fully 64%.
10
 The difference in drop-off rates suggests that a generational factor may be at
work. The story is familiar: The long civic generation that came of age during the Depression and
second World War is far more inclined to participate in politics than are the generations that
followed. If the younger generations are less inclined to take the initiative to get involved, this
makes it all the more imperative that political institutions find ways to reach and persuade them.
Attendance at Political Events. Americans have become less likely to express their collective will
or to deliberate about civic affairs. The fraction of people who attended a political rally or speech
has fallen by more than a third, as has the fraction of citizens who attended a public meeting at
which town or school affairs were discussed. Likewise, membership in good-government groups
and service on local committees has dropped significantly since the early 1970s. Again, these
trends are most pronounced among younger generations.
To summarize: American politics has become shriller, more craven, and more elite-oriented.
Millions of middle Americans, understandably, have tuned out. The decline in participation is
troublesome for the simple reason that civic engagement is a necessary condition for wise,
responsible, and effective government. Social capital makes democracy work. Not surprisingly,
then,.