Connect with us

Government

Many don’t know key facts about US Constitution, Annenberg study finds

PHILADELPHIA – Many Americans do not know what rights are protected under the First Amendment and a substantial number cannot name all three branches…

Published

on

PHILADELPHIA – Many Americans do not know what rights are protected under the First Amendment and a substantial number cannot name all three branches of government, according to the 2023 Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey.

Credit: Annenberg Public Policy Center

PHILADELPHIA – Many Americans do not know what rights are protected under the First Amendment and a substantial number cannot name all three branches of government, according to the 2023 Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey.

The Annenberg Public Policy Center’s annual, nationally representative survey finds that when U.S. adults are asked to name the specific rights guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution, only one right is recalled by most of the respondents: Freedom of speech, which 77% named.

The civics knowledge survey, released annually to celebrate Constitution Day (Sept. 17), also finds that although two-thirds of Americans (66%) can name all three branches of government, 10% can name two, 7% can name only one, and 17% cannot name any. 

The Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey was fielded in a year of high-profile events that propelled the workings of government into the daily news cycle, which included four criminal indictments of former President Donald Trump; trials for those charged in the 2021 assault on the Capitol; Supreme Court rulings that sidelined race-conscious college admissions programs and a Biden Administration student-loan forgiveness plan; several justices being dogged by allegations of unethical conduct; the collapse of a plea deal to resolve a gun charge and tax offenses by President Joe Biden’s son Hunter; and discussions by House Republicans whether to open impeachment proceedings against Biden.

“It is worrisome that one in six U.S. adults cannot name any of the branches of government and that only 1 in 20 can name all five freedoms protected by the First Amendment,” said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and director of the survey. “One is unlikely to cherish or work to protect freedoms one does not know one has and will have trouble holding elected and unelected leaders accountable if one does not understand the nature and prerogatives of each branch and the ways in which the power of each is kept in check.”

How the survey is conducted – and what is different this year

The Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey is a nationally representative survey conducted annually in advance of Constitution Day by the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania. This year’s survey of 1,482 U.S. adults was conducted for APPC by independent research company SSRS from August 9-15, 2023. It has a margin of error of ± 3.5 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

For the first time, the annual civics survey presented this year was conducted online rather than by telephone. The online survey, conducted as part of a wave of our Annenberg Science and Public Health (ASAPH) knowledge study, was self-administered, meaning that respondents completed it without an interviewer’s assistance. In 2022, we conducted two versions of our survey: one over the phone and one online. There, we found – as have similar studies from the Pew Research Center – that there were differences in some responses between online and telephone respondents. In our survey, online respondents generally had higher knowledge levels than phone respondents. Beginning with this year’s survey, we will be conducting the Constitution Day survey online only, and therefore we cannot fairly compare knowledge levels from this year to those gathered by phone in prior years. Because of this change in methodology, this year’s knowledge findings will not be presented as part of a historical trend.

We shifted from telephone to online surveys because phone surveys have become increasingly difficult to conduct reliably, with very low response rates. Accordingly, APPC, like other public opinion researchers and news organizations such as Gallup, Pew, NORC, and CNN, has decided to add or transition to online panels of nationally representative individuals. In an accompanying white paper, written by APPC research analyst Shawn Patterson Jr. and edited by our survey research team, we explain the interventions that we have tested and implemented to maximize the likelihood that responses reflect what respondents actually know. These interventions aim to discourage those who might otherwise consider looking up answers to unfamiliar questions in the online survey, a move less likely when being asked knowledge questions by phone.

“Whether giving people a chance to reread a question and search their memory for an accurate response is a better way to assess civic knowledge than asking top-of-mind recall over the phone is an open question,” Jamieson observed. “But whether one prefers online to phone questions or not, the bottom line across our surveys remains the same – a concerning number cannot muster the knowledge needed to exercise their constitutional rights or make sense of the workings of our system of government.”

The survey was conducted under the supervision of Ken Winneg, Ph.D., APPC’s managing director of survey research, and the analysis and graphics were prepared by APPC research analyst Shawn Patterson Jr., Ph.D.

For the survey questions and data, read the topline. For more on the mode effects, see the white paper.

The three branches of government

The three branches: The 2023 survey found that 66% of U.S. adults could name all three branches of government – executive, legislative, and judicial – while 10% could name two of the branches and 7% could name only one. About 1 in 6 people (17%) could not name any branches.

Poor knowledge of First Amendment rights

The First Amendment: When respondents are asked to name the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, the only right with widespread recognition is freedom of speech:

  • Three-quarters (77%) name freedom of speech.
  • Less than half (40%) name freedom of religion.
  • A third (33%) name the right to assembly.
  • Just over a quarter (28%) name freedom of the press.
  • And less than 1 in 10 (9%) know the right to petition the government.

In all, only 5% of the U.S. adults surveyed correctly name all five First Amendment rights while 30% could name three or four of the rights. Nearly half of those surveyed (46%) could name one or two First Amendment rights, and 20% could not correctly name any.

A surprisingly large number of respondents, over 1 in 5 (22%), replied by listing the right to bear arms, which is a right under the Second Amendment, not the First. We hypothesize that, seeing five empty text boxes, web panelists may have called to mind any other right with which they are familiar.

Freedom of speech and Facebook: Over half (53%) think it is accurate to say that the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech means that Facebook must permit all Americans to freely express themselves on Facebook pages, while nearly half (47%) say that is not accurate.

While the First Amendment protects citizens from government action to limit speech, courts have ruled that social media companies such as Facebook are private companies are not covered by it.

The Supreme Court and other issues

The survey asked knowledge questions and an attitude question about the court.

The Court: Over half of those surveyed (51%) disapprove of the way the Supreme Court is handling its job, while 49% approve. This finding is more positive than past surveys by APPC and other organizations. In APPC’s 2022 online panel, 42% approved of the court and 58% disapproved. By comparison, in August 2023 Gallup found Supreme Court approval at 40%.

Voting coalitions on the Supreme Court: Survey respondents were asked what percentage of Supreme Court cases in the past year they thought were decided by a 9-0 or 8-1 vote – a unanimous or near-unanimous vote. Respondents were invited to fill in a number between 0 and 100. A fifth (22%) offered answers that fell correctly in the 41%-60% range. Other responses were widely distributed – and on average, respondents thought 35% of the rulings were 9-0 or 8-1.

Though attention has been paid to the divisions on the court, with its 6-3 conservative-liberal split among the justices, over half the decisions in the 2022-23 term were decided by a 9-0 or 8-1 consensus.

The fact that so many decisions are effectively unanimous is surprising to many Americans, but it reflects something deeper about the court, says Matt Levendusky, a Penn political science professor and Stephen and Mary Baran Chair in the Institutions of Democracy at APPC. “While some high-profile issues are divisive, much of what comes before the court is not. On many issues, justices of all ideological stripes agree on what should be done. This is important to remember when assessing the court’s function as well,” Levendusky noted.

The meaning of a 5-4 ruling: Over 7 in 10 respondents (71%) accurately say that when the Supreme Court rules 5-4 on a case, the decision needs to be followed. In the survey, 16% say a 5-4 ruling means that a decision would be sent back to Congress for reconsideration, while 12% indicate that the decision is sent back to the federal court of appeals to be decided.

The constitutionality of an act by the president: If the president and Supreme Court differ on whether an action by the president is constitutional, who has the final responsibility for determining whether it is constitutional – the president, Congress, or the Supreme Court? Just over half of the survey respondents (54%) correctly say the Supreme Court, while 21% say Congress and 4% say the president. Another 21% say they are not sure or don’t know.

Civics education associated with knowledge

An APPC analysis found that reporting having taken a high school civics class continues to be associated with correct answers to civics knowledge questions, including knowledge of the three branches; knowledge of First Amendment rights; the meaning of a 5-4 Supreme Court decision; the Supreme Court having the final say on the constitutionality of a president’s actions; and knowing that Facebook is not covered by the First Amendment. 

In 2023, nearly 6 in 10 (59%) of respondents with at least some high school education said they had taken a civics course in high school that focused on the Constitution or judicial system, about the same as in previous years we have asked this question. A third of those with at least some college education (33%) said they had taken a college course that focused on the U.S. system of government and the Constitution.

Constitution Day

The Annenberg Civics Knowledge Survey is released by APPC for Constitution Day, which celebrates the signing of the Constitution on Sept. 17, 1787. APPC’s initiatives to enhance civics education include Annenberg Classroom, which offers free resources for teaching the Constitution, and the Civics Renewal Network, a coalition of 43 nonpartisan, nonprofit organizations dedicated to improving civics education by providing free, high-quality resources for teachers. Among those resources: CRN’s Constitution Day Toolkit for teachers and Annenberg Classroom short films released this year on our nation’s newest holiday, Juneteenth, and on the landmark Supreme Court First Amendment case New York Times v. Sullivan, one in a series of award-winning videos.

The Annenberg Public Policy Center was established in 1993 to educate the public and policy makers about communication’s role in advancing public understanding of political, science, and health issues at the local, state, and federal levels.

 

 

 

 

 

  


Read More

Continue Reading

International

Beloved mall retailer files Chapter 7 bankruptcy, will liquidate

The struggling chain has given up the fight and will close hundreds of stores around the world.

Published

on

It has been a brutal period for several popular retailers. The fallout from the covid pandemic and a challenging economic environment have pushed numerous chains into bankruptcy with Tuesday Morning, Christmas Tree Shops, and Bed Bath & Beyond all moving from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7 bankruptcy liquidation.

In all three of those cases, the companies faced clear financial pressures that led to inventory problems and vendors demanding faster, or even upfront payment. That creates a sort of inevitability.

Related: Beloved retailer finds life after bankruptcy, new famous owner

When a retailer faces financial pressure it sets off a cycle where vendors become wary of selling them items. That leads to barren shelves and no ability for the chain to sell its way out of its financial problems. 

Once that happens bankruptcy generally becomes the only option. Sometimes that means a Chapter 11 filing which gives the company a chance to negotiate with its creditors. In some cases, deals can be worked out where vendors extend longer terms or even forgive some debts, and banks offer an extension of loan terms.

In other cases, new funding can be secured which assuages vendor concerns or the company might be taken over by its vendors. Sometimes, as was the case with David's Bridal, a new owner steps in, adds new money, and makes deals with creditors in order to give the company a new lease on life.

It's rare that a retailer moves directly into Chapter 7 bankruptcy and decides to liquidate without trying to find a new source of funding.

Mall traffic has varied depending upon the type of mall.

Image source: Getty Images

The Body Shop has bad news for customers  

The Body Shop has been in a very public fight for survival. Fears began when the company closed half of its locations in the United Kingdom. That was followed by a bankruptcy-style filing in Canada and an abrupt closure of its U.S. stores on March 4.

"The Canadian subsidiary of the global beauty and cosmetics brand announced it has started restructuring proceedings by filing a Notice of Intention (NOI) to Make a Proposal pursuant to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). In the same release, the company said that, as of March 1, 2024, The Body Shop US Limited has ceased operations," Chain Store Age reported.

A message on the company's U.S. website shared a simple message that does not appear to be the entire story.

"We're currently undergoing planned maintenance, but don't worry we're due to be back online soon."

That same message is still on the company's website, but a new filing makes it clear that the site is not down for maintenance, it's down for good.

The Body Shop files for Chapter 7 bankruptcy

While the future appeared bleak for The Body Shop, fans of the brand held out hope that a savior would step in. That's not going to be the case. 

The Body Shop filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States.

"The US arm of the ethical cosmetics group has ceased trading at its 50 outlets. On Saturday (March 9), it filed for Chapter 7 insolvency, under which assets are sold off to clear debts, putting about 400 jobs at risk including those in a distribution center that still holds millions of dollars worth of stock," The Guardian reported.

After its closure in the United States, the survival of the brand remains very much in doubt. About half of the chain's stores in the United Kingdom remain open along with its Australian stores. 

The future of those stores remains very much in doubt and the chain has shared that it needs new funding in order for them to continue operating.

The Body Shop did not respond to a request for comment from TheStreet.   

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Authored by Michael Barone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The headlines coming out of the Super…

Published

on

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Authored by Michael Barone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The headlines coming out of the Super Tuesday primaries have got it right. Barring cataclysmic changes, Donald Trump and Joe Biden will be the Republican and Democratic nominees for president in 2024.

(Left) President Joe Biden delivers remarks on canceling student debt at Culver City Julian Dixon Library in Culver City, Calif., on Feb. 21, 2024. (Right) Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. President Donald Trump stands on stage during a campaign event at Big League Dreams Las Vegas in Las Vegas, Nev., on Jan. 27, 2024. (Mario Tama/Getty Images; David Becker/Getty Images)

With Nikki Haley’s withdrawal, there will be no more significantly contested primaries or caucuses—the earliest both parties’ races have been over since something like the current primary-dominated system was put in place in 1972.

The primary results have spotlighted some of both nominees’ weaknesses.

Donald Trump lost high-income, high-educated constituencies, including the entire metro area—aka the Swamp. Many but by no means all Haley votes there were cast by Biden Democrats. Mr. Trump can’t afford to lose too many of the others in target states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Majorities and large minorities of voters in overwhelmingly Latino counties in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley and some in Houston voted against Joe Biden, and even more against Senate nominee Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas).

Returns from Hispanic precincts in New Hampshire and Massachusetts show the same thing. Mr. Biden can’t afford to lose too many Latino votes in target states like Arizona and Georgia.

When Mr. Trump rode down that escalator in 2015, commentators assumed he’d repel Latinos. Instead, Latino voters nationally, and especially the closest eyewitnesses of Biden’s open-border policy, have been trending heavily Republican.

High-income liberal Democrats may sport lawn signs proclaiming, “In this house, we believe ... no human is illegal.” The logical consequence of that belief is an open border. But modest-income folks in border counties know that flows of illegal immigrants result in disorder, disease, and crime.

There is plenty of impatience with increased disorder in election returns below the presidential level. Consider Los Angeles County, America’s largest county, with nearly 10 million people, more people than 40 of the 50 states. It voted 71 percent for Mr. Biden in 2020.

Current returns show county District Attorney George Gascon winning only 21 percent of the vote in the nonpartisan primary. He’ll apparently face Republican Nathan Hochman, a critic of his liberal policies, in November.

Gascon, elected after the May 2020 death of counterfeit-passing suspect George Floyd in Minneapolis, is one of many county prosecutors supported by billionaire George Soros. His policies include not charging juveniles as adults, not seeking higher penalties for gang membership or use of firearms, and bringing fewer misdemeanor cases.

The predictable result has been increased car thefts, burglaries, and personal robberies. Some 120 assistant district attorneys have left the office, and there’s a backlog of 10,000 unprosecuted cases.

More than a dozen other Soros-backed and similarly liberal prosecutors have faced strong opposition or have left office.

St. Louis prosecutor Kim Gardner resigned last May amid lawsuits seeking her removal, Milwaukee’s John Chisholm retired in January, and Baltimore’s Marilyn Mosby was defeated in July 2022 and convicted of perjury in September 2023. Last November, Loudoun County, Virginia, voters (62 percent Biden) ousted liberal Buta Biberaj, who declined to prosecute a transgender student for assault, and in June 2022 voters in San Francisco (85 percent Biden) recalled famed radical Chesa Boudin.

Similarly, this Tuesday, voters in San Francisco passed ballot measures strengthening police powers and requiring treatment of drug-addicted welfare recipients.

In retrospect, it appears the Floyd video, appearing after three months of COVID-19 confinement, sparked a frenzied, even crazed reaction, especially among the highly educated and articulate. One fatal incident was seen as proof that America’s “systemic racism” was worse than ever and that police forces should be defunded and perhaps abolished.

2020 was “the year America went crazy,” I wrote in January 2021, a year in which police funding was actually cut by Democrats in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and Denver. A year in which young New York Times (NYT) staffers claimed they were endangered by the publication of Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-Ark.) opinion article advocating calling in military forces if necessary to stop rioting, as had been done in Detroit in 1967 and Los Angeles in 1992. A craven NYT publisher even fired the editorial page editor for running the article.

Evidence of visible and tangible discontent with increasing violence and its consequences—barren and locked shelves in Manhattan chain drugstores, skyrocketing carjackings in Washington, D.C.—is as unmistakable in polls and election results as it is in daily life in large metropolitan areas. Maybe 2024 will turn out to be the year even liberal America stopped acting crazy.

Chaos and disorder work against incumbents, as they did in 1968 when Democrats saw their party’s popular vote fall from 61 percent to 43 percent.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 23:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The…

Published

on

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) reviewed no data when deciding in 2023 to keep its COVID-19 vaccine mandate in place.

Doses of a COVID-19 vaccine in Washington in a file image. (Jacquelyn Martin/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

VA Secretary Denis McDonough said on May 1, 2023, that the end of many other federal mandates “will not impact current policies at the Department of Veterans Affairs.”

He said the mandate was remaining for VA health care personnel “to ensure the safety of veterans and our colleagues.”

Mr. McDonough did not cite any studies or other data. A VA spokesperson declined to provide any data that was reviewed when deciding not to rescind the mandate. The Epoch Times submitted a Freedom of Information Act for “all documents outlining which data was relied upon when establishing the mandate when deciding to keep the mandate in place.”

The agency searched for such data and did not find any.

The VA does not even attempt to justify its policies with science, because it can’t,” Leslie Manookian, president and founder of the Health Freedom Defense Fund, told The Epoch Times.

“The VA just trusts that the process and cost of challenging its unfounded policies is so onerous, most people are dissuaded from even trying,” she added.

The VA’s mandate remains in place to this day.

The VA’s website claims that vaccines “help protect you from getting severe illness” and “offer good protection against most COVID-19 variants,” pointing in part to observational data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that estimate the vaccines provide poor protection against symptomatic infection and transient shielding against hospitalization.

There have also been increasing concerns among outside scientists about confirmed side effects like heart inflammation—the VA hid a safety signal it detected for the inflammation—and possible side effects such as tinnitus, which shift the benefit-risk calculus.

President Joe Biden imposed a slate of COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021. The VA was the first federal agency to implement a mandate.

President Biden rescinded the mandates in May 2023, citing a drop in COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations. His administration maintains the choice to require vaccines was the right one and saved lives.

“Our administration’s vaccination requirements helped ensure the safety of workers in critical workforces including those in the healthcare and education sectors, protecting themselves and the populations they serve, and strengthening their ability to provide services without disruptions to operations,” the White House said.

Some experts said requiring vaccination meant many younger people were forced to get a vaccine despite the risks potentially outweighing the benefits, leaving fewer doses for older adults.

By mandating the vaccines to younger people and those with natural immunity from having had COVID, older people in the U.S. and other countries did not have access to them, and many people might have died because of that,” Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine on leave from Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times previously.

The VA was one of just a handful of agencies to keep its mandate in place following the removal of many federal mandates.

“At this time, the vaccine requirement will remain in effect for VA health care personnel, including VA psychologists, pharmacists, social workers, nursing assistants, physical therapists, respiratory therapists, peer specialists, medical support assistants, engineers, housekeepers, and other clinical, administrative, and infrastructure support employees,” Mr. McDonough wrote to VA employees at the time.

This also includes VA volunteers and contractors. Effectively, this means that any Veterans Health Administration (VHA) employee, volunteer, or contractor who works in VHA facilities, visits VHA facilities, or provides direct care to those we serve will still be subject to the vaccine requirement at this time,” he said. “We continue to monitor and discuss this requirement, and we will provide more information about the vaccination requirements for VA health care employees soon. As always, we will process requests for vaccination exceptions in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies.”

The version of the shots cleared in the fall of 2022, and available through the fall of 2023, did not have any clinical trial data supporting them.

A new version was approved in the fall of 2023 because there were indications that the shots not only offered temporary protection but also that the level of protection was lower than what was observed during earlier stages of the pandemic.

Ms. Manookian, whose group has challenged several of the federal mandates, said that the mandate “illustrates the dangers of the administrative state and how these federal agencies have become a law unto themselves.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 22:10

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending