Americans' Confidence in Institutions Stays Low

http://www.gallup.com/poll/192581/americans-confidence-institutions-stays-low.aspx

by randomname2 • 10 years ago

70 53 10 years ago

pigpaws3• 10 years ago

confidence in congress only went down 10%? they must be polling the lobbyists or something...

jostmey2• 10 years ago

It's sad because congress is where our individual vote carries the most weight. It's a crucial institution for our country, without which we'd be nothing more than an empire (in my opinion). Now more than ever it is important to root out the cronyism, nepotism, and big-money that has corrupted this important branch of our government.

honkhonkpants• 10 years ago

You can't clean up Congress because you only get to vote for one of 438 members. In general the problem with members of Congress is that their constituents actually like them and frequently re-elect them.

zappo2938• 10 years ago

Maybe people have higher confidence in their own Congresspersons. Perhaps, they disagree strongly with their counterpart voting constituents on the Coasts. If this is the case, democracy is working as expected.

sehugg• 10 years ago

Extreme polarization is keeping Congress from functioning properly: http://www.pressherald.com/2012/03/04/analysis-shows-congres...

ccallebs• 10 years ago

It went from 19% to 9%. Meaning a relative reduction of > 50%. When you're already at the bottom there's not much room to fall :)

hackuser3• 10 years ago

Speaking generally, people seem to have unrealistic expectations about human institutions. Name a large one that isn't bureaucratic, that doesn't have inefficiencies of large organizations, and where its priority isn't loyalty to the institution itself (though Congress, consisting of elected people nationwide, might be an exception to that).

Not all institutions are the same; some are better than others and we shouldn't just accept problems and corruption. But why do people keep believing big talkers who say they're going to magically eliminate all those things and make it run like a hyper-efficient 5-person business?

IMHO, much of it is people looking to get elected by looking for problems and things to complain about, rather than looking how to get things done.

Without time to examine it in detail (I've got to run), I'd hypothesize that most of what's important in the world is accomplished and has been accomplished by large institutions.

alanwatts• 10 years ago

I'd hypothesize that most of what's important in the world is accomplished and has been accomplished by large institutions.

Teams of people are good at solving problems that individuals could not do by themselves, nothing new there. On the flip side of this hypothesis, the most grievous acts have also been committed by teams of people.

Accountability and transparency are the important factors here.

clumsysmurf• 10 years ago

In "American Amnesia" (1) Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson argue that post WWII, the mixed economy of private business / free markets doing what it does best, in conjunction with the government investing in education, science, technology, and infrastructure (which all benefit private sector), while providing a safety net, resulted in prosperity.

The trend since Reagan / Thatcher years (neoliberalism) and anti-government free market fundamentalism threatens this constructive partnership where private sector and government were both rivals and partners.

On the one side you have "starving the beast" (think Grover Norquist, Tax Pledge), defunding critical programs to the point of dysfunction. Does it surprise anyone that the IRS is underfunded by Congress to pursue tax evaders, as Congressman are lobbied to keep loopholes open?

Another calamity is NASA's Earth Sciences, the part that studies Earth itself (climate change, etc).

On the other side of the isle, the dems have failed to make government /efficient/ and a visible positive force in the daily lives of average people.

(1) https://www.amazon.com/American-Amnesia-Government-America-P...

dv_dt• 10 years ago

The Dems have failed because they've largely signed onto the 'neoliberalism' philosophy too.

LionessLover• 10 years ago

In this context, a great lecture about ancient Silicon Valley history: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTC_RxWN_xo

Lecture brought to you by The Computer History Museum in Mountain View, CA (http://www.computerhistory.org/)

TL;DR: The foundation for the SV was laid by the US government in WWII. Only on that basis did private enterprise build the industry.

From today's point of view, WWII saw today unimaginable spending - huge waste! - by the government. On research, research, more research and infrastructure, and more infrastructure, and even more research. Imagine even half the amount they spent back then announced today (in today's dollars). The cries about government overreach and waste and "oh my god the debt!" would shake the North American continent down to 5 km below the surface.

opo• 10 years ago

I have heard variations of this argument many times, but it isn't clear how this represents US history since WW II. By any measure (% of GDP, etc). government spending is much larger than it was in the post WWII era. By any measure, government regulations and control over the economy is much larger than it ever was in the post WW II era.

...On the one side you have "starving the beast" (think Grover Norquist, Tax Pledge), defunding critical programs to the point of dysfunction.

With overall taxes paid as a percentage of GDP about the same as they were in the post WW II era it isn't clear how there has been much "starving the beast" https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FYFRGDA188S

What has changed since after the WW II era, is that the spending on the safety net is many times larger than it was earlier. Even with overall spending going up, this has resulted in less spending on federal R&D, infrastructure, NASA, etc.

...anti-government free market fundamentalism ...

Offhand, I don't know of any economist or politician who has said they believe in "free market fundamentalism" - as such I don't think the term is useful as it just becomes a label used to poison the well and prevent meaningful discussion.

vaadu• 10 years ago

The problem is multilayered:

- Corruption. money gets access

- Elected government folks over promise and under deliver.

- Elected government folks' priority is getting reelected.

- Unelected government folks have far too much power

- Lack of accountability for wrongdoing and incompetence

- Waste of taxpayer money

- Good people don't want to run for office because the scrutiny is too high

AnimalMuppet2• 10 years ago

In other words, Americans are correctly assessing their institutions, which is why confidence in them is low...

theseatoms2• 10 years ago

Exactly. I don't see why this is a "problem."

rayiner• 10 years ago

Are Americans' perceptions more or less accurate than they were 50 years ago, when confidence in public institutions was a lot higher? Look at the factors 'vaadu listed:

Corruption. money gets access

Back in the day, money used to buy votes and offices outright.

Elected government folks' priority is getting reelected.

That's always been the case.

Unelected government folks have far too much power

The power of the administrative state contracted dramatically during the Reagan/Clinton era. Measures like price controls are taboo today, but were seen as a standard tool of governance in the 1950's and 1960's.

Lack of accountability for wrongdoing and incompetence

Government is way more transparent today than it used to be, both voluntarily and involuntarily. The FBI's investigations into MLK took about a decade to come to light. The NSA's activities are being leaked almost in real time. U.S. covert missions in other countries used to take decades to come to light. These days, we all but have a play-by-play of every drone strike.

Another example is that the morals of our leadership are subject to more scrutiny than ever. JFK was literally raping young women in office. George H.W. Bush had a mistress that everyone in knew about. But the media never talked about any of that--there was a code of silence about that. But that code of silence is dead today. Obama is probably one of the most morally virtuous men to hold the office--if he wasn't his failings would've been plastered 24/7 across the Internet.

I'd argue that peoples' increased cynicism is not a response to government getting worse, but peoples' expectations getting higher because they have more information about everything.

titanoceanus• 10 years ago

Spot on.

harveywi• 10 years ago

To add to the list of the multilayered problem:

- Sabotage and subversion. (It is easy to forget to add this one to the list...but there is probably quite a bit of this going on at various levels).

- Lack of "Jokers" or lack of the right kinds of them...? [1] [2].

The Jokers bit is interesting. To quote [2], "Jokers are crazy, sadistic bastards who care nothing about the group benefit (so they don't consume it), but they do care about destroying things. They usually do so while cackling and making bad puns. They closely resemble Cesar Romero, Jack Nicholson, or Heath Ledger (depending on the decade), or sound like post-Star Wars Mark Hamill (the best Joker of all time)."

Interestingly, in a public goods game involving Cooperators (your good institutional contributors), Defectors (your bad actors), and Jokers, there are three possible outcomes:

1. Without Jokers in the game, Defectors do better than Cooperators.

2. With semi-effective Jokers in the game, an indefinite cycle of (a) Cooperators doing well, then (b) Defectors taking over, then (c) Jokers beating out Defectors happens.

3. With super-effective Jokers in the game, they take over and beat out both Cooperators and Defectors.

[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.3257

[2] https://thegoodreads.quora.com/Why-The-Joker-and-Not-Batman-...

jostmey2• 10 years ago

I think it has more to do with institutions that lack ladders for people to climb. Who can dream of becoming a politician or a banker? Such realities are closed to most people.

Retra2• 10 years ago

- Elected government folks' priority is getting reelected. - Unelected government folks have far too much power

I'm sure there's any way to have both of these be managed. If you give more power to elected officials, they have even more incentive to get reelected. If you take power away from them, the elections just matter less.

pasbesoin• 10 years ago

You have to enable people to do the right thing. Sufficient stability and resources, combined with active and effective accountability.

No project, much less institution, is "set and forget". Nor can any individual continually nor consistently "do the right thing" in the face of ongoing personal threat and insecurity.

Not every aspect of life benefits from loose, disposable relationships.

Professional, nor personal.

NTDF9• 10 years ago

Life in America is simple, "To each his own". You are on your own if you fuck up and no, you can't rely on institutions to save your ass. Institutions are just looking for their own good.

yompers888• 10 years ago

Your path leads to lots of problems. Humans are social; our entire adaptability revolves around being able, in times of discomfort or disaster, to use the tools others have spent their time and resources creating. Someone thinking it's possible to make it on his/her own just shows that cooperation is so ubiquitous that we don't even notice it.

The development patterns of the last 75 years, with their spreading out of people, have caused huge problems here, causing people to be physically distant from one another, eroding a very natural support network.

Additionally, we've lost powerful charitable forces over the recent decades: religion and unpaid women. Wealthy wives, being expected to stay home with the kids, were hugely important in social work. Now that church influence is in decline and women are paid for their work, we have to pivot to other institutions for support structures. In the US, we've not quite gotten that next generation of support figured out.

virmundi• 10 years ago

I wonder if the reason we distrust our institutions is because we almost worship them. As I've watched the society become more atheistic, I've watched it look more and more to the human institutions to replace what it lost. All the grandeur and power we expected of a god is missing. Instead we see corrupt humans just like us doing corrupt things. Every time something bad happens, we scream for the government to do something. We don't hold the person accountable; we hold the tool. When the government does something and it has unintended consequences, we get mad that they didn't forsee it coming or we get mad that they knew what would happen and just wanted steal even more power. The same is true for financial institutions. We expect them to magically make money and prosperity for our stocks. We give them grand titles and powers. Then they fail. We gnash our teeth and curse these Titans of industry.

jdavis703• 10 years ago

This is one of the main points of "Sapiens." That Capitalism, Communism, Nations-States, et al are manifestations of a new wave of religions that followed the first wave (polytheism, tree worship, animism, etc), and the second wave of monotheistic religions like Islam, Christianity etc.

vermontdevil• 10 years ago

Most Americans' common encounter with the "institutions" would be the following:

DMV (motor vehicle bureau/department) Post Office Police/Courts Local schools Social Security

Our government is not monolithic. It's vast (ranging from SS, military, FAA, FDA, NASA, etc etc) and on the state level as well.

But seems many Americans' experience are mostly with these front line departments and quite often it is not quite positive.

But many of us do not see beyond this and want to tear down everything regardless of how essential many of these agencies/services are.

CaptSpify• 10 years ago

You don't notice when things go well. If you have a good experience with the Fire Department, you aren't going to say "wow, I wish we could take down that institution". It just disappears from your mind.

I'm sure there's a term for this, but I don't know what it is.

Americans' Confidence in Institutions Stays Low

Related Stories