We have a national civics deficit. It’s a problem that’s getting worse.
Students are woefully ignorant about American history and government, and they lack strong civic skills such as media literacy and the ability to distinguish facts from opinion. Too many undergraduates do not support free speech and open exchange: About a third favor speech codes, a quarter favor disinviting speakers, and a fifth favor limits on expressing political views.
This deficit limits our nation’s prospects. In a recent survey, nearly 2 in 5 said that were the nation invaded, they would flee rather than fight. This number included most younger adults.
Unlike past generations, we may lack the civic disposition to sustain America’s successes, correct its shortcomings, and lead the free world. Can we expect to rebuild patriotism if young people are misled about our past, unaware of our civic resources, and unschooled in the ideas that undergird our freedoms?
To address the problem, policymakers should begin by enacting the bipartisan Civics Secures Democracy Act, which was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE) and John Cornyn (R-TX). Wisely, it would invest substantially in educating young people about our history, governing institutions, and values such as free speech, tolerance, and civil discourse. Specifically, the act would boost federal spending on American history and civics from just $5.3 million in 2021, a paltry sum compared to what Washington invests in STEM education, to $1 billion a year over five years. That would finance civics programs in higher education institutions, school systems, and nonprofit organizations.
As for fears of a federalized civics education and curriculum, the bill explicitly states that the secretary of education cannot prescribe curricula in history, civics, or political thought. About 60% of the funding would go to states and local education authorities, who would retain the authority to set curricula.
Conservatives, rightly worried about the left-leaning tilt of our nation’s universities, should cheer the act. The program would offer support to faculty-led academic centers and institutes that faculty and donors, many of them conservative, have established at scores of universities over the last two decades. For the campus communities they serve, these centers are forums for genuinely diverse political viewpoints and education about our nation’s constitutional traditions, the free market, and American political thought. The act would also invest in civics instruction for K-12 teachers. Today, only 1 in 5 social studies teachers report feeling prepared to teach civics. Conservative higher education policy experts and teachers have been eager to see this program reauthorized and funded.
Conservatives also should be encouraged by bipartisan civics legislation in the states. Tennessee, for example, just enacted a bill with strong bipartisan support to establish a new civics institute at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville, the state’s largest public university. Previously, Arizona lawmakers provided the funds to establish the School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership at Arizona State University, now a national model for government investment in civics education. The school fosters viewpoint diversity and robust education in our intellectual tradition, history, and governing institutions.
The top line: We cannot move beyond our crippling polarization if we do not address our civics deficit. The good news is that there is widespread agreement on the need to do so. Let’s recommit to preparing young people with the knowledge, skills, and civic dispositions to lead us in the years ahead.
Jacqueline Pfeffer Merrill is director of the Campus Free Expression Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center.
James R. Stoner, Jr., is the Hermann Moyse, Jr., professor and director of the Eric Voegelin Institute at Louisiana State University.
