ILNews

Index shows poor voter engagement

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Rehearing

On Sept. 14, results of the inaugural Civic Health Index were released to the public. The data shows that while Indiana is on-par with national standards in volunteerism, the state’s voter turnout and registration are among the lowest in the country.

The report measures family interaction, voting habits, involvement with social groups, and other areas to determine citizens’ level of engagement in their communities and with each other. Results are measured in relation to other states and the District of Columbia.

Indiana earned above-average marks for involvement in religious, school, sports, and other groups, with 36.2 percent of residents reporting involvement in such groups. Indiana ranked 21st in group associations. In 2010, 26.1 percent of Indiana citizens volunteered their time to help others; the national volunteerism rate is 26.3 percent.

Voter turnout in Indiana ranked 48th in the nation in 2010, with a rate of 39.4 percent. Only 61.2 percent of eligible Indiana citizens were registered to vote in 2010, putting the state in 43rd place for voter registration. The report also shows that Indiana ranks 48th in its analysis of citizens who discuss politics with each other.

U.S. Census Data – which provide the foundation for the report – show a connection between Indiana citizens who access news regularly and their level of community involvement. About 7-in-10 Indiana residents who access news on a daily basis via the newspaper, radio, television, or Internet sources reported doing a favor for a neighbor at least once per month. Of people who do not read a newspaper or listen to radio news daily, 5-in-10 reported doing a favor for a neighbor at least once a month.

Several organizations lent their support to the Indiana Civic Health Index, including the Indiana Bar Foundation, the Center on Congress at Indiana University, the Hoosier State Press Association, Indiana University Northwest, and the Indiana Supreme Court. The National Conference on Citizenship enlists researchers at the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, who analyze the Census Current Population Survey data to create the final report.

On April 19, former U.S. Rep. Lee Hamilton announced the Civic Health Index project, just days after Congress passed a budget that cut $35 million for civic education. In April, Hamilton said: “Those of us interested in this project are concerned … because there is an awful lot of evidence that suggests an awful lot of Americans are less and less interested in civics, and if that’s the case, the entire democracy is in jeopardy.”

Since 2006, the NCoC has conducted a yearly national Civic Health Index. Comparing results of the indexes with research studies conducted in the 1970s and thereafter, the NCoC reports that most forms of civic engagement measured in the index – like voter turnout and volunteerism – have fallen over the past three decades. In 2008, the NCoC began offering state-level indexes. Ohio, California, and Florida were the first states to receive such a report, as they have every year since.

Rehearing "Effort seeks to revive citizens' civic interest" IL April 27-May 10, 2011
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  2. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  3. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  4. I totally agree with John Smith.

  5. An idea that would harm the public good which is protected by licensing. Might as well abolish doctor and health care professions licensing too. Ridiculous. Unrealistic. Would open the floodgates of mischief and abuse. Even veteranarians are licensed. How has deregulation served the public good in banking, for example? Enough ideology already!

ADVERTISEMENT