An August poll conducted by Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates found that, when presented with three choices, only 37 percent of respondents were able to correctly choose what the public option is. That's not much better than 1 in 3: the amount one would expect to get the question right were everyone guessing at random.
In an NBC poll released on Aug. 18, 45 percent of respondents expressed belief in the overwhelmingly debunked death panel myth, fueled most famously by 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.
The same poll found that 50 percent of Americans believe the House's health care bill would constitute a complete government takeover of the health care system, and 55 percent believe it would extend coverage to illegal immigrants. Neither is true.
Should Polls Affect Policy?
If one were to consider what the implications of such findings should be for policy, it seems a no-brainer that the advice of the ignorant would be — if not ignored entirely — at least appropriately devalued.
This, after all, is one of the driving forces behind the idea of representative democracy. By electing a few to represent the many, Joe the Plumber and Jane the Firefighter are no longer looked upon to make decisions about complex issues they know little about.
Were one creating a Platonic Republic, one might even divvy up legislative responsibility according to expertise: for instance, assigning the teacher-turned-representative from Utah to deal with education and education alone.
The realities of this republic, however, afford neither the luxury of specialization nor, even, representation in the sense of a senator making his or her own decisions with the constituency's blessing. The United States doesn't work that way: a vote in November isn't understood to be a blank check for the person elected. Electoral pressures make representation less a mandate to vote on the electorate's behalf than an appointment to vote as the public demands, lest they be replaced in the future.
The Media's Role
Right or wrong, much of this is enabled by the media. While most critics will point to horse-race coverage as the true crime of excessive polling, there is some question as to the extent to which in-term opinion polling is constructive for the goal of good governance.
On the one hand, media reports on public opinion provide a legitimate service; polls represent an easy way of telling elected officials what their constituents think about the issues. After all, who doesn't want their Congressional representatives working with their best interest in mind?
The cynic will point to such polls as a product of the 24-hour news cycle, representing little more than an inexpensive opportunity for instant analysis.
The truth behind their prevalence is likely a combination of the two. But the implications thereof have received little discussion.
Regardless of how Americans want their government to behave — whether it should aspire more to the ideal of a republic or a direct democracy — the prevalence of opinion polls puts elected officials in a difficult spot.
The great temptation for a legislator is to place too much stock in polls that, at their most volatile, may reflect the mood of the ill-informed rather than the will of voters who genuinely understand the issues at hand. In complex situations, Americans might prefer that their representative use his or her best judgment. At the same time, voting for a deservedly unpopular measure could be a boon to challengers, and rightfully so.
 |
