A Better Civic Education — Do We Really Need One?
A few months ago I was listening to a podcast produced by the Bible Project. While listening I had this great thought — someone should do a Civic Education Project. Use the same model of videos, blogs, podcasts, classes — to teach people about civics and government. And maybe I could be that guy! But then my wife Andrea said, OK great. But what’s the problem you’re trying to solve? Why do people need to have better civic education? And, truthfully, I still don’t have good answers to those questions.
One of the biggest deficits in civic knowledge for Americans is the Supreme Court. Most media outlets are notoriously bad at covering it. They don’t have time, interest, or expertise, and when they do decide to cover a couple of the blockbuster cases, it tends to be pretty superficial. And it’s understandable! Have you ever tried to read a Supreme Court opinion, start to finish? Even one of the more famous ones. Go back and read Obergefell v. Hodges, the famous marriage case from 2015. It’s tough sledding! (I mean, it doesn’t help that Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, but I digress).
Or take the question of how to interpret the Constitution. Just take originalism. It’s quite difficult to get people to understand how an originalist wants to argue that indeed their mode of interpreting “commerce” actually DOES allow for changes in technology, so that Congress is not limited to just regulating commerce of boats.
And yet, maybe it doesn’t really matter. When American citizens think about judges and courts, they tend to think about a few hot-button issues. And when it comes time to vote for President, they depend on their choice to select judges that will get them more (or fewer) abortion rights, less corporate influence in elections, more religious liberty, more gay rights, and so on. But can you, dear American citizen, tell me how exactly those abortion rights should be diminished? How will Roe be overruled or Casey modified? What would be the legal arguments to do such a thing? What legal standard will replace it? How, dear American citizen, would you argue for Citizens United to be overruled? Can you tell me why corporate entities should not have the right to speak, and if they do, how and under what circumstances they should be limited in that speech?
To expect good answers to these questions is certainly too great an expectation. Civic education should amount to helping people get a basic sense of where the parties stand, throw in a side of separation of powers and federalism, maybe a dessert of tax policy and trade, and call it a day. Right?
Maybe it’s like this. You go to the doctor and say, “What’s up doc? I’ve got this broken bone and would like it fixed. I don’t care about all the science that goes into it. You’re the one who went to school for 100 years. Just fix my bone. Please and thank you.” Or you go to church and the pastor is really bringing it with the gospel of Jesus Christ. You’re moved, you’re convinced. And yet you have no idea what exegetical strategy they used, what commentaries consulted, how the Greek and Hebrew were parsed. Of course you don’t! You didn’t go to seminary!
Maybe that’s where we’re at, and maybe that’s all we need. It’s up to us have a very basic understanding of government and select the right people to represent us.
I find it hard to believe, though, since the clamoring on about crisis of democracy would suggest we need MORE civic education, not LESS.
So I go back to the Bible Project. They’re obviously doing something right. Maybe you give people different entry points — videos for the basics, podcasts and blogs for those who want to go a bit further, and classes for the deep divers. Maybe that would work.
Thoughts?
