Ohio’s Civic Health IndexOhio Civic Health Index Report 2009November 10, 2009
Downloads We begin with the simple act of voting. Voting, a low-cost civic responsibility in democratic systems, allows citizens the opportunity to exercise choice in the selection of those who would govern. Without widespread participation in free elections, a critical link in the chain of representation and accountability is broken and citizens yield control over the choices made by their leaders. Figure 1 shows the average turnout of voters (civilian population over the age of 18) for the past two elections (2006 and 2008, a midterm election and a presidential election) by state. Minnesota leads the nation in voter turnout: 70 percent of Minnesotans showed up to vote. In another 15 states, an average of more than 60 per cent of citizens exercised their right to choose. At the other end of the spectrum, there were 5 states – anchored by Utah – in which on average, less than half of the voters went to the polls. Ohio ranked twentieth on the list of fifty states and the District of Columbia. According to the CPS, about 70 percent of Ohioans over 18 years of age register to vote. Across the two elections, almost sixty percent (59.3%) of Ohioans voted. A quick word can be said about how Ohio compares to the nation and its neighboring states of Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. The average national voter turnout for the two elections was 56 percent. Compared to the other five states, Ohio ranks second on the list, behind Michigan (62%), but ahead of the others, including West Virginia which had the next to the lowest voter turnout rate (45%) in the nation. Alexis de Tocqueville observed of America in 1835 that “in no country of the world has the principle of association been more successfully used or applied to a greater multitude of objectives than in America.”22 Indeed, voluntary associations are at the heart of citizen engagement and America’s claim to be a pluralist democracy. It is in associations and nonprofit organizations that we promote culture, engage in nonpartisan and partisan politics, practice religion, perform charitable acts, solve community problems, and address hundreds of other purposes. By aggregating citizens with common interests and incorporating them in the decision-making process, associations give voice and power to ordinary citizens. The viability of voluntary associations depends, however, on the willingness of citizens to contribute their time and other resources to these activities. Figure 2 shows, by state, the average percentage — for 2006, 2007, and 2008 — of citizens age sixteen and greater who reported that they had undertaken volunteer activities in the past year. Utah tops the list with more than 40 percent of its citizens reporting that they had volunteered during the past year. The next highest states are Nebraska, Minnesota, Arkansas and Iowa with volunteer rates above 37 percent. At the bottom of the list are three states with volunteering rates of less than 20 percent. Ohio’s volunteering rate of 30% ranks 22nd. Ohio pulls up the national average of 26%; Ohio lags just behind Indiana (30%) and Michigan (30.0%), and ahead of Pennsylvania (28%), Kentucky (27%) and West Virginia (26%) in this regard. The third indicator considers the extent to which citizens age sixteen and older involve themselves directly in the process of governing. Figure 3 shows the average percent of citizens – for 2006-2008 – who reported that they had attended a public meeting during the past year. With strong traditions of participatory local governance, Vermont tops the list with more than 20 percent of its citizens reporting that they attended a public meeting. Alaska falls only slightly behind with over 19.7 percent of its citizens attending public meetings. Ohio is below the national median, ranking 27th, at 9.2%, but slightly above the national average of 8.9%. Among its regional neighbors, Ohio lags Michigan, but is more engaged than Pennsylvania (8.7%), Kentucky (8.5%), Indiana (7.5%), and West Virginia (6.4%). At the bottom of the list, two states have less than 6 percent of citizens reporting participation in public meetings. Our final civic health indicator focuses on collaborative problem solving. Communities with strong civic cultures are those in which citizens have the skills and the inclination to join together to address issues of common concern. Figure 4 shows the average percentage of citizens older than sixteen – for 2006-2008 –who report that they have worked with other people in their neighborhood to fix a problem or improve a condition in their community. Once again, Utah stands out at the top of the list with almost 18 percent of its citizens reporting that they have worked with others to address community issues. Ohio, again, falls in the middle compared to other states but with an engagement rate less than one-half that of Utah. Ranked 24th, Ohioans are slightly more involved in neighborhood and community improvement projects than are the citizens of the surrounding states. At the bottom of the list, collaborative community problem solving appears to be almost non-existent. Slightly more than 4 percent of New Jersey’s citizens reported that they have worked with others in their neighborhood. Combining these four measures, Figure 5 shows Ohio’s Civic Health Index based on the data from the Current Population Survey. Ranked 24th among states in the nation, Ohio earns a civic engagement score of 26.6. For purposes of comparison, Ohio ranks slightly lower on the Index than Michigan (21st), and higher than Kentucky (30th), Pennsylvania (31st), Indiana (32nd) and West Virginia (48th). We regard this Index as an approximate measure of Ohio’s civic health at the moment. Additional measures will be available through the CPS in the future and they can be incorporated into subsequent Ohio Civic Health Indexes. That said, the indicators contained in our 2009 Ohio Civic Health Index are consistent with our 2008 findings and point again to the conclusion that Ohio’s civic health is in the middle of the pack when compared to other states in the nation.23 But that fact should not provide comfort, as rates of national civic engagement show signs of distress,especially during current difficult economic times. It is hard not to conclude that there is much that could and should be done to improve the civic health of the Buckeye state. If you like this kind of content, sign up for an NCoC.net account and we'll customize your homepage recommendations based on your interests..
|
Recently Popular Tags
Baby Boomers
Business
Charitable Donations
Citizenship
Civic Engagement
Civic Health
Civic Learning
Deliberative Democracy
eCitizenship
Economy
Education
Elections
Expressing Political Views
Family & Friends
Gender
Generations
GenX
Government
Military
Millennials
Participating in Politics
Philanthropy
Policy
Political Involvement
Politics
Public Policy
Race
Religion
Service
Service-Learning
Social Entrepreneurship
Staying Informed
Trust
Understanding Politics & Government
Volunteering
Voting
|
||
| 202.955.6183 | conference@ncoc.net 1201 15th Street NW • Suite 420 • Washington, DC 20005 Copyright © 2000-2013 The National Conference on Citizenship. All Rights Reserved Privacy Policy | Glossary of Terms |
Follow Us on:    |
||
