Low Trust in Government Obama's Fault? Not so Fast

Charle's M. Blow's op-ed in Friday's New York Times, Imbalance of Trust, suggests that voters trust government less under Democrats than under Republicans.   You may feel there's a whiff of truth in that analysis.  Let me suggest the opposite may equally be true.

Says Mr. Blow:

…Americans seem to trust the government substantially more after a Republican president is elected than they do after a Democratic one is elected — at least at the outset.

Since 1976, the polls have occasionally included the following question: “How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington to do what is right — just about always, most of the time, or only some of the time?”

The first poll taken in which this question was asked after Ronald Reagan assumed office found that 51 percent trusted the government in Washington to do the right thing just about always or most of the time. For George H.W. Bush, it was 44 percent, and for George W. Bush it was 55 percent.

Now compare that with the Democrats. In Jimmy Carter’s first poll, it was 35 percent. In Bill Clinton’s, it was 24 percent, and for Barack Obama’s, it was only 20 percent. (It should be noted that the first poll conducted during George W. Bush’s presidency came on the heels of 9/11).

The implicit assumption Mr. Blow makes is that trust changes quickly, and that polls reflect it; that the selection of a Democrat quickly results in low trust scores, while the selection of a Republican quickly results in high trust. The casual reader might infer that Blow is suggesting voters trust Republicans more.

Not so fast.

Let’s challenge Blow's assumption.  Let’s assume that social trust--as many academics suggest--changes much more slowly than Mr. Blow assumes.  That in fact, questions like “do you trust the government” shift over a matter of many years--not a few months.  (See, for example, Professor Eric Uslaner, whose studies suggest that many forms of social trust evolve not only over years, but over generations).

Now let’s rewrite Blow’s paragraph—same facts, different implicit assumption:

…Americans seem to trust the government substantially more after a prolonged period of Democratic leadership than they do after Republicans have held the office—and the effect even carries over into the next administration for a few months.

Since 1976, the polls have occasionally included the following question: “How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington to do what is right — just about always, most of the time, or only some of the time?”

The first poll taken in which this question was asked was when Carter had taken office, after eight years of Nixon and Ford.  In that poll, only 35 percent trusted the government in Washington to do the right thing just about always or most of the time.  Carter restored trust in government; when Reagan took over, that number tested at 51%.

However, after 12 years of Reagan/Bush, when Clinton had moved into the White House, it had been driven down all the way to 24% (Reagan did, after all, preach that government itself was the problem, not the solution).  By the end of Clinton’s two terms, that number had gone back up to 44%, of which George W. Bush was the beneficiary 8 months into his first term.

But with Republican Dubya at the helm for 8 years, trust in government dropped precipitously (Iraq, Katrina, et al); so precipitously, in fact, that the trust-in-government score early in Obama’s term was only 20%. 

Same facts: different assumptions. Who’s right? It depends. It depends partly on how people interpreted the question, and even moreso on how long it takes people to shift their viewpoint on that particular question.

Trust is tricky. It’s not like measuring the temperature, or even political polls. The interpretation contains a lot more art and a lot less science than most simple surveys would suggest.

Interpreter beware.

Follow Charles H. Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/charleshgreen

Comments

[Chris McKenna]

Well the truth is anyone can spin numbers. In fact this is something both Repulicans and Democrats do equally well. If as the writer says, people trust goverment more when a Republican is elected after a Democrat has served why then did the democrats lose the office? Don't people elect their leaders in part based on how much they trust them? why would trust quickly change to elect the other side? In fact isn't that the basis for this artical, that trust doesn't change quickly? I believe if you measure trust in the goverment today it is clear that people trust the goverment less now than they did 1-year ago. The obvious answer is Obama has not kept the truely important promises that put him in office. He has accelerated the beltway machine by allowing increased earmarks, increased lobbying, circumventing the vetting process with czars, and appointing special interest to goverment positons. Is it no wonder people don't trust someone who lies to them about what yhey think is really important?

[gmcc]

you lost me at "Carter restored trust in government"