How much do American citizens know or care about citizenship, politics, and civil government in America? Despite the heightened interest in all things patriotic since Sept. 11, there is little evidence that Americans across a broad range of age groups know more, care more, or participate more in civic activities or politics. Two new surveys document a lack of basic knowledge, along with widespread complacency — if not disinterest — in community and political affairs.

The survey by the National Conference of State Legislators, “Citizenship: A Challenge For All Generations,” takes a look at the 15- to 26-year-old “Dot Net” generation in comparison to Americans over 26. The participants were drawn from across the United States. A second survey focuses exclusively on measures of civic knowledge and participation in North Carolina. The participants were 13- to 17-year-old students in North Carolina.

According to the North Carolina Civic Education Consortium’s “Civic Index 2003,” a survey of 13- to 17-year olds revealed that 47 percent could not name either of North Carolina’s U.S. senators. Only 19 percent could name even one, and less than 9 percent could identify both correctly.

Students don’t know, or aren’t sure, who makes the laws in North Carolina, either. More than 69 percent identified a government body other than the General Assembly, or could not provide any answer to the question.

Although 56 percent of students surveyed knew that the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution are called the Bill of Rights, the remaining 44 percent guessed something else, or said they didn’t know.

Students were not completely uninformed, however. Of the 771 students who completed the “Civic Index 2003” interview, most could identify which level of government is responsible for operating a jail, setting a school bus schedule, administering drivers license tests, putting out fires, and issuing passports.

One of the marks of an involved citizenry is its willingness and ability to participate in civic debate. Divergent interests require communities to discuss, weigh, and resolve issues with reason, and often with compromise. Students were asked to assess their abilities in these areas.

Most students gave themselves an excellent or superlative rating for their ability to interact with others. As many as 80 percent thought that they were “very effective” or “extremely effective” in communicating their ideas, weighing issues, and listening to and persuading others.

More than 60 percent of the students awarded themselves a four or five, on a scale of five, for their ability to reach a compromise with others. They were equally confident that they knew whom to contact “to get things done.” On community-related issues, 80 percent to 90 percent said they could compose a clearly stated letter or comment to present in a public forum.

Some of the survey questions asked students whether they had taken specific actions. Had they contacted a public official to air their views, or written to a newspaper or called a talk show about an issue important to them within the past 12 months? Fewer than 20 percent of students said that they had acted on any of these options in the last 12 months.

The survey response revealed that 13- to 17 year-olds overwhelmingly do not read to gain information about events. Newspapers and news magazines are largely ignored by this demographic group. A few listen to radio news. North Carolina’s youths get most of their information about government from two sources identified in the “Civic Index 2003”: the school/workplace, and TV news. More than 42 percent said they watch TV news seven days a week, the same number that report that politics is discussed at least sometimes around their house.

Very few students missed the survey question on the legal voting age in North Carolina. They know that they can’t cast a ballot before age 18. Even if that fact dampens their interest in civic issues, most schools offer an opportunity for activism within student government. In student government, young adults have a chance for their voice and view to “count,” but few avail themselves of the opportunity. Students chose parents as their most influential models of good citizens, but said that schools taught them “a lot” or a ”fairly large amount” of what they know about government and community issues.

“Citizenship: A Challenge For All Generations,” shows that attitudes and participation in civic affairs differ from one generation to the next. ‘”DotNet” participants, 15 to 26 years old, attach less importance to keeping up with politics than do Americans over 26.

Fewer than half of DotNets said that communicating with elected officials is part of good citizenship. Two-thirds equate voting with good citizenship. About 50 percent of DotNets say they vote regularly.

Civics classes may have a positive effect on civic participation, according to the Challenge report. Claims about voter participation were 24 percent higher among the DotNets who said they had taken a civics class, than among those who had not. For Americans over 26, 83 percent believe that voting is required of a good citizen, and three-fourths claim to vote regularly.

Both generations were short on facts. Three-fourths of the older group knew the political party of their state’s governor, and most over 26 knew which party controls Congress. Only one-third knew which party controlled their state legislature.

Among the DotNets, less than 50 percent knew who controlled their state legislature. However, 80 percent of this group could supply the name of the town that the TV Simpsons live in, and the name of the latest “American Idol” winner on TV.

The “Challenge” study and the “Civic Index” results dovetail in many respects. Large percentages of citizens know little about their government representatives or the government process. They are disinclined to participate in civic issues. Few of the younger citizens even participate in student government.

Clearly, there is a gulf between the traditional view of citizenship and the one currently held by young adults. Martin Rochester, writing for the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation in “The Training of Idiots,” said, “If one takes the view that ill-informed political participation is as bad as no participation, then perhaps it is just as well that participation levels are low.”

Dr. Karen Palasek is assistant editor of Carolina Journal.