Demos and Informed Decisions
The United States was founded on the basis of democracy, where the people have the
power to make necessary changes by holding their elected official accountable for legal
policies. The privilege and power given to citizens have raised the question of whether or
not the people are capable of making informed decisions about complex policies and politics.
As voters whose choices contribute to the creation of laws, citizens ultimately shape the
government. Consequently, determining the ability of the public to make informed decisions
is crucial for strengthening the American democracy. The public elects representatives –
based on their knowledge and preferences – who in turn make laws and determine the policy
of the country. Citizens do not have sufficient knowledge and information to cast votes that
correctly represent their unbiased beliefs, due to the way human behavior dictates
unconscious mental shortcuts, their unwillingness to change their opinions, and
susceptibility to rhetorical strategies that prevents them from making rational decisions that
accurately correlate with their unfiltered beliefs. As a result of these flawed behavioral
tendencies, the government structure should be reformed to facilitate the decision-making
process of the citizens through the promotion of referendums and minimal use of technical
jargons in policies.
The strength of the United States government lies in the hands of the citizens, as the
nation’s democracy allows the decisions of the people to shape its laws and regulations.
Consequently, it is crucial for voters to cast accurate votes, which are defined as votes that
are minimally influenced by outside factors. Scholars and pundits debate whether or not
average citizens are capable of making informed decisions in response to complex issues, as
some are skeptical about the abilities of the people with their frequently irrational mentality.
Regardless of intelligence or enthusiasm, the majority of voters are unable to cast
accurate votes as their unconscious usage of heuristics often errs during the process of
making complex decisions (Kuklinski and Quirk 167). Heuristics, or mental shortcuts used
by people on a daily basis, are utilized to extrapolate “cues” from surroundings and draw
conclusions. Although heuristics are instrumental in executing simple tasks, they are not
designed for use in making complex decisions. In addition, if people are exposed to
inaccurate context or cues, their decisions will fail to reflect their actual beliefs as the
effectiveness of mental shortcuts depend on the environment. If an average citizen casts a
vote that does not accurately correlate with his beliefs due to the misuse of heuristics, “no
one tells him his choice was wrong... Even in the unlikely event that he is interested in
improving his political heuristics, therefore, he’ll have a hard time doing so” (Kuklinski and
Quirk 169). Because he will not be able to recognize his previous mistakes, it is impossible
for a voter to adapt his mental shortcuts to adjust to complicated political matter.
Similar to the misuse of heuristics, irrational human behavior prevents average
citizens from making informed decisions as they are unwilling to change their opinions and
exercise selective perception. People do not respond quickly to the rapidly changing status
quo, as the voters often “reflect past political battles that have shaped the ways in which
voters thought about politics and government” (Popkin 23). The demos does not make
decisions in response to the current proposals of the government; rather, they recall previous
events to select their current preference. Consequently, the demos is incapable of making
decisions as it is unable to adapt to the evolving systems and policies of the government,
and, therefore, inaccurately refer back to the past to select the best resolution for the status
quo. Ultimately, the public bases its ideologies on previous governmental actions and
emotions, which are frequently irrational. Once the citizens adopt opinions, the perceived
thoughts are permanent, as humans are unwilling to change their beliefs, and “...cognitive
processes generate systematically false beliefs to promote certain kinds of behavior”
(Kulinski and Quirk 164). Rather than attempting to understand different aspects of an issue,
citizens unconsciously promote the ideas that they already have developed. Consequently, it
is almost impossible to change biases because it is less likely that the people will absorb
information that is contrary to their beliefs. Regardless of the exposure that certain
information receives, the demos absorbs only the facts that it wants to recognize due to this
behavioral tendency. Humans’ uncompromising opinions also lead to the tyranny of the
majority in controversial issues. Because it is incapable of understanding and broadening
their scope of understanding, the demos is unable to adopt the minority’s ideas. People lack
sufficient skills to make informed choices in complicated issues as their behavioral and
mental inclinations prevent them from quickly assimilating new ideas.
Although their opinions are often irrationally uncompromising, the demos is easily
swayed by rhetorical strategies of the media and other outside influences until opinions are
formed. This tendency is problematic as public opinion does not necessarily correspond with
the facts of the issue. In addition, the citizens are vulnerable to persuasion through political
communication as “politicians are not in the business of educating the public. Instead, they
use rhetoric to trigger the psychological mechanisms that distort judgment” (Kuklinski and
Quirk 168). Citizens cannot assume that politicians provide information that is free from
bias, but the public often relies on others to fact check. In addition, the way that information
is presented influences citizens more than the content itself during the decision-making
process as they “use a source’s attractiveness to judge her credibility” (Kulinski and Quirk
166). Citizens are susceptible to the rhetorical strategies frequently incorporated by actors of
politics, and thus unreliable in expressing their individual beliefs when making decisions.
Because the people are not informed enough to cast accurate votes, the government
should adopt reforms to the current system to minimize the impact of the citizens’ mistakes
by promoting referendums and avoiding incomprehensible jargon. Referendums are defined
as laws that are already passed by the legislature that are placed on the ballot to be voted on
by the people to determine whether or not they should remain effective. As a response to the
flaws in human behavioral and mental trends, the government should encourage
referendums by loosening their regulations. According to the National Conference of State
Legislatures, only 24 states currently allow referendums, and petitioning to place the law on
the ballot must take place 90 days after its passing (NCSL). The government should promote
this method of direct democracy by extending the days that the petitioning can take place to
allow citizens to recognize the full effect of the passed law and reflect upon their decisions.
In addition, because the current laws are too complex for the readers to comprehend,
technical jargon should be avoided in laws to allow readers to digest the information more
easily. Complex language familiar only to experts creates a sense of detachment that
prevents voters from maintaining their interest in politics. Through these reforms, the
government will be able to allow the citizens to access the laws more easily, and, therefore,
lessen the probability of making mistakes.
It is impossible to assume that average citizens are capable of casting informed votes on
complex issues due to people’s behavioral inclinations. The people need assistance in making
decisions as they have no conscious control over possibly flawed heuristics, are dogmatic in their
beliefs, and are vulnerable to strategic persuasion. The government should adopt reforms that
curtail or prevent the potential rashness of citizens’ wills – loosening certain restrictions to
encourage the use of referendums, incorporating simplified languages, and adopting stricter
regulations to minimize loopholes that may not be apparent to voters. According to Michael X.
Delli Carpini, a renowned communications and political science professor, “informed citizenry is
the sine qua non of democracy.” The practical assessment of how capable the demos is in
making political decisions that represent their moral values is of crucial importance, as
democracy holds every member of the population accountable for the ramifications of choices
made by the majority. Furthermore, with adoptions of reforms to improve the status quo, the
process of citizen participation in politics will be made easier, allowing logic to dominate human
tendencies in decision-making. This in turn will decrease the apathetic attitudes of the people, as
they have bigger voices in shaping their country. Ultimately, it is the government’s role as the
executor of democracy to make critical judgments as to the abilities of the demos, as such
assessments will allow the political institution to grasp the right starting point for reform in
bringing its systems closer to the people. With the current system, citizens are losing interest in
politics as complicated jargon in proposals forces them to invest additional time or look to other
shortcuts or stop trying. Rather than to maintain the status quo, where the knowledge and skills
of the citizens are overestimated, reforms restricting the effects of voters’ mistakes and flaws
should be adopted to strengthen the democracy of the United States. To ensure that American
democracy grows more powerful, it is of crucial importance to determine how capable the
average citizens are in making informed decisions through accurate votes and adjustments in the
government.
Works Cited
Delli Carpini, M. X. (1999). In Search of the Information Citizen: What Americans Know About
Politics and Why It Matters. The
Communication Review, 4 129-164. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10714420009359466>
"Initiative, Referendum and Recall." Processes and Definitions. National Conference of State
Legislatures, n.d. Web. 15 Dec. 2014. <http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-andcampaigns/initiative-referendum-and-recall-overview.aspx>.
Kuklinski, James H., Paul J. Quirk, Jennifer Jerit, David Schwieder, and Robert F. Rich.
"Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship." The Journal of Politics
62.03 (2000): n. pag. Web.
Popkin, Samuel L. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential
Campaigns. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1991. Print.