As the United States marks 250 years since the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the country is celebrating the foundations of its democratic system while also confronting a difficult question: why are so many citizens becoming dissatisfied with democracy itself?
The question has become increasingly important as concerns about political corruption, government gridlock, polarization and declining civic participation continue to shape public debate. A recent analysis from the University of Notre Dame examines one possible response: better and more relevant civics education.
Notre Dame development economist Enrique Seira Bejarano argues that education could play an important role in strengthening democratic engagement, particularly among younger generations. His research explores the relationship between citizens’ satisfaction with democracy, their willingness to participate in democratic institutions and their reactions to political corruption.
The findings do not suggest that civics education alone can solve every problem facing modern democracies. Instead, they point toward a broader idea: citizens who understand how democratic institutions work may be better equipped to participate in them, evaluate political claims and respond constructively when governments fail.
Why Democracy Is Facing a Crisis of Confidence
Democracy depends on more than elections. It also depends on citizens believing that democratic institutions are worth participating in and protecting.
Over the past two decades, scholars have documented growing concerns about democratic backsliding around the world. Democratic backsliding occurs when institutions gradually weaken as political leaders, parties or citizens move away from democratic rules and norms.
One important measure of democratic health is how satisfied citizens are with the way their political system operates. When people believe their government is failing them, their willingness to participate can decline.
Notre Dame’s Enrique Seira Bejarano and his research collaborators studied this relationship using data from Mexico. Their research examined more than 50,000 citizens across approximately 6,300 electoral precincts during Mexico’s 2017 state elections. The researchers compared people’s reported satisfaction with democracy with actual measures of democratic participation.
The results were concerning. Citizens who expressed the lowest levels of satisfaction with democracy were less likely to participate in several democratic activities, including poll worker training, staffing polling stations and voting in later elections.
The findings suggest that dissatisfaction is not simply an opinion that remains separate from behavior. It can influence whether people decide to participate in the democratic process at all.
When Political Frustration Becomes Civic Disengagement
It is natural for voters to become frustrated with politicians. Citizens may disagree with government policies, dislike particular political parties or believe elected officials are not delivering on their promises.
Democracy is designed to accommodate that disagreement.
The problem emerges when dissatisfaction with individual politicians becomes dissatisfaction with democracy as a system.
If voters conclude that elections do not matter, institutions cannot be trusted or political participation cannot produce meaningful change, they may stop engaging altogether.
That disengagement can take many forms. A person may stop voting, avoid political discussions, decline to volunteer in elections or become less interested in understanding public policy.
Over time, widespread disengagement can create a cycle in which fewer citizens participate while a smaller group of highly motivated political actors gains greater influence.
This is why the relationship between democratic satisfaction and civic participation matters. A healthy democracy requires citizens who are willing to remain involved even when they are disappointed by political outcomes.
Political Corruption Can Make the Problem Worse
One of the most damaging sources of political dissatisfaction is corruption.
Corruption occurs when public office is used for private gain. When citizens believe politicians are enriching themselves, accepting bribes or abusing their positions, they may begin to question whether democratic institutions actually serve the public.
Seira’s research suggests that the consequences can go beyond anger toward individual politicians.
In a separate study involving 17 Latin American countries, researchers examined how exposure to political corruption affected democratic behavior. According to the Notre Dame analysis, exposure to scandals involving high-level politicians was associated with significant reductions in voter turnout and other forms of civic participation.
The research reported that exposure to corruption scandals could reduce individual voter turnout by 10 to 20 percentage points. In experimental settings, exposure to footage showing politicians accepting cash was associated with voter turnout reductions of as much as 27 percent and lower support for democracy.
These findings highlight an important psychological effect of corruption.
Citizens may not simply conclude that a particular politician is dishonest. They may begin to believe that the entire political system is fundamentally dishonest.
Why Corruption Damages More Than Political Trust
The effects of corruption may extend beyond people’s relationship with government.
The Notre Dame analysis notes that researchers found exposure to political corruption could also reduce interpersonal trust. Citizens became less willing to trust other people with money and demonstrated greater acceptance of dishonest behavior in experimental settings.
That finding is particularly important because democracy depends heavily on social trust.
People must be willing to accept that political opponents can participate in the system without being treated as enemies. Citizens must also believe that institutions will enforce rules fairly, even when their preferred candidate loses.
When corruption makes dishonesty appear normal, those assumptions can weaken.
In that sense, political corruption is not merely a government problem. It can influence broader social attitudes about fairness, honesty and cooperation.
The Complicated Role of Political News
Modern citizens are exposed to more political information than previous generations could have imagined.
News websites, television, podcasts, social media platforms and online video can bring political scandals to millions of people within minutes.
This increased visibility has both positive and negative consequences.
Publicizing corruption is essential to accountability. Journalists, investigators and citizens need to be able to expose misconduct. A democracy cannot effectively address corruption if corrupt behavior remains hidden.
But constant exposure to political scandals can also contribute to cynicism if citizens repeatedly see evidence of wrongdoing without seeing meaningful consequences.
Seira’s analysis highlights this tension. The problem may not necessarily be that corruption is being exposed. The deeper issue may be that citizens see corruption being exposed but believe that those responsible rarely face meaningful punishment.
When accountability appears absent, transparency can unintentionally reinforce the belief that corruption is simply part of how politics works.
Could Civics Education Help?
This brings the discussion to civics education.
Civics education teaches citizens how government works, how institutions interact and how individuals can participate in democratic processes. At its best, it does more than teach students the names of government branches or historical dates.
Effective civic education can help people understand their rights, responsibilities and opportunities for participation.
It can also teach citizens how to evaluate political information, distinguish between evidence and misinformation, understand the role of elections and recognize the importance of institutional checks and balances.
Seira believes that providing stronger and more relevant civics education could be one way to strengthen democracy and combat dissatisfaction. Notre Dame researchers are currently conducting a multi-country study examining whether civics education can influence democratic behavior.
The researchers want to understand whether civic courses can produce more informed citizens, improve people’s ability to critically assess alternatives to democracy and increase willingness to devote time and resources to democratic activities.
Those questions are particularly relevant at a time when younger generations are developing their political identities in an environment dominated by social media and rapidly changing information.
Civics Education Is More Than Memorizing Government Facts
Traditional civics education can sometimes focus heavily on memorizing facts.
Students may learn the names of government institutions, how bills become laws or when important historical events occurred. While that knowledge has value, modern civic education may need to go further.
Young people also need opportunities to understand how democratic institutions operate in real life.
They can learn how to evaluate competing political arguments, identify misleading claims, understand the responsibilities of elected officials and recognize why independent institutions matter.
They can also learn that democracy does not guarantee that every political decision will produce an outcome they personally support.
Instead, democracy provides mechanisms for disagreement, accountability, peaceful transitions of power and citizen participation.
That distinction could become increasingly important as political polarization makes disagreement feel more personal.
Teaching Citizens How to Respond to Disappointment
One of the most valuable lessons civics education could provide is that disappointment is not necessarily evidence that democracy has failed.
Every democratic system produces outcomes that some citizens dislike.
Candidates lose elections. Laws pass that some voters oppose. Governments make mistakes. Political institutions can move slowly. Legislatures can become gridlocked.
These frustrations are part of democratic life.
The danger arises when people interpret every political failure as proof that democratic institutions themselves are worthless.
Civics education can help citizens understand the difference between criticizing government performance and rejecting democratic principles.
A knowledgeable voter can say, “This government is failing,” while still believing that elections, constitutional rules, independent institutions and peaceful political competition are worth protecting.
That distinction could be crucial to maintaining democratic stability.
Why Young Voters Matter
The issue becomes especially significant among younger generations.
Notre Dame’s analysis points to a substantial generational difference in the share of Americans who consider living in a democracy essential. According to Seira and his co-authors, the figure is substantially higher among Americans born in the 1930s than among those born in the 1980s.
Generational differences do not necessarily mean that young people reject democracy. They can reflect different experiences with government, economic conditions, institutions and political events.
However, declining attachment to democratic principles deserves attention.
Young citizens will eventually become voters, community leaders, public servants, business owners, educators and policymakers. Their attitudes toward democratic institutions will influence the political culture of the coming decades.
That makes civic education an investment not simply in students but in the future health of democratic society.
Education Cannot Replace Accountability
While better civics education may help, it cannot solve the problem of political corruption by itself.
Citizens can understand democracy perfectly well and still become frustrated when politicians abuse public office.
If corruption is widespread and institutions fail to punish misconduct, telling citizens to become better informed does not address the underlying problem.
Democratic institutions must also provide mechanisms for accountability.
Independent investigations, transparent government, ethical standards, functioning courts, responsible journalism and meaningful enforcement can all contribute to public trust.
Civic education should therefore be viewed as one part of a larger democratic strategy rather than a substitute for institutional reform.
Citizens need knowledge, but they also need functioning institutions that give them reasons to trust the political system.
The Importance of Civic Participation
Democracy is ultimately sustained through participation.
Voting is the most visible form of participation, but it is not the only one.
Citizens can attend local government meetings, volunteer during elections, participate in community organizations, communicate with elected officials, engage in public debates and help others understand political issues.
These activities create connections between citizens and institutions.
When people participate, they are more likely to understand how government works and where they can influence decisions.
When participation declines, the distance between citizens and institutions can grow.
That is why the research linking dissatisfaction to lower participation is so important. It suggests that democratic confidence and democratic behavior are closely connected.
A Different Way to Think About Democracy
The broader lesson from the Notre Dame research is that democracy should not be viewed only as a system for choosing political leaders.
It is also a civic culture.
That culture depends on citizens understanding democratic principles, accepting legitimate disagreement, recognizing corruption as harmful and remaining willing to participate even when political outcomes are disappointing.
Civics education can help build that culture by giving people the knowledge and skills needed to engage with political institutions.
But education works best when citizens can see that their participation matters.
If people vote, volunteer, speak out and hold officials accountable, but never see institutions respond, their confidence may continue to decline.
Democracy therefore requires both informed citizens and institutions capable of earning their trust.
What the Future of Civics Education Could Look Like
The future of civic education may need to be more practical and connected to everyday political life.
Instead of teaching only how government is structured, schools could give students opportunities to analyze real policy debates, evaluate competing sources of information and understand how local and national decisions affect their communities.
Students could also learn how corruption affects public services, why transparency matters and how citizens can hold officials accountable.
The goal would not be to teach students which political positions to support.
Instead, the goal would be to give them the tools to make informed decisions for themselves.
That distinction is essential. Civic education should strengthen citizens’ ability to think critically rather than become another form of political persuasion.
Final Takeaway
The question of whether better civics education can restore confidence in democracy does not have a simple answer.
Research from University of Notre Dame economist Enrique Seira Bejarano suggests that dissatisfaction with democracy can translate into lower civic engagement, while exposure to political corruption can weaken voter participation, trust and support for democratic institutions.
Those findings point toward an important challenge for the United States and other democracies: citizens need more than the right to vote. They need reasons to believe that participation matters.
Civics education could be part of that solution by helping young people understand how democratic institutions work, how to evaluate political information and how citizens can participate beyond Election Day.
But education cannot replace accountability. If governments want citizens to trust democracy, institutions must also demonstrate that corruption can be exposed, investigated and punished.
As America reflects on 250 years of democratic history, the challenge is not simply preserving the institutions inherited from the past. It is ensuring that future generations understand why those institutions matter and feel empowered to participate in them.
A healthy democracy ultimately depends on both sides of the equation: citizens who understand their responsibilities and institutions that deserve their trust.
Citation Section
University of Notre Dame — ND Expert on Democracy: Can Better Civics Education Restore Voter Dissatisfaction Over Political Corruption?
Read the original Notre Dame article
University of Notre Dame — Democracy Initiative
Learn more about Notre Dame’s Democracy Initiative
University of Notre Dame — Enrique Seira Bejarano
Explore Notre Dame’s coverage of Enrique Seira Bejarano’s research
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
The Notre Dame article discusses research published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences examining the relationship between dissatisfaction with democracy and democratic participation in Mexico.