2020 New Hampshire Civic Health Index

It is clear that the demographic characteristics of our residents have a relationship to civic health, a finding consistent with the 2012 New Hampshire Civic Health Index. In particular, education levels and age appear to have a large impact on Granite Staters’ civic health. Income affects civic health in different ways—although higher income individuals tend to vote more often, give financially, or volunteer more, lower income individuals tend to help out their neighbors more. Other variables, like where people live, their political identity, and if they had experienced civics education in school also seemed to impact civic health in varying ways. What this suggests is that not everyone has access to civic health in the same ways—for instance, the personal circumstances for people (such as disposable income or time they have to spend on non-work or family responsibilities) and the way systems are constructed (such as how voting opportunities may conflict with work schedules or access to transportation) have a bearing on both how motivated and able people are to contribute to the civic health of their communities.

The 2020 New Hampshire Civic Health Index presents three interesting voting trends to consider:

• First, although our voting rates in all types of elections are stronger than national averages, from 2004 to 2016 we saw a steady decline in presidential election voter turnout.
• Second, despite a decline in presidential election voter turnout, in the last midterm elections in 2018 we saw the highest level of turnout since 1978.¹⁶
• Third, in the most recent presidential election of 2020, 73 percent of New Hampshire’s voting age population turned out—the highest turnout since 1964.¹⁷

These declines and increases in voting have mirrored national trends, although the spike in midterm election voting was more pronounced in New Hampshire than were national averages. It is important to note that this report was completed in December of 2020, we were not able to mine the 2020 voter turnout data for demographic distinctions, so as future researchers examine who in New Hampshire voted in the 2020 presidential election, we may have more insight into presidential election voter trends in both New Hampshire and the nation.

Even with our overall strong voter turnout, based on voter data from the past decade, we have reasons to be concerned about voting in New Hampshire. Those with a college degree are much more likely to vote than are those with only a high school degree, and the more education one has, the more likely one is to vote. People with a high income—who make $75,000 or more—were much more likely than people with a very low income—$35,000 or less—to vote. But what is interesting is that although lower income and lower educated groups often get stereotyped as being unable or unmotivated to participate in civic life, our data suggest this is not the case—for instance, when it comes to doing favors for neighbors and helping out friends or extended family, low-income people do this more than any other income group.

Our data indicate that less educated and lower income people are less likely to vote or engage in other ways due to specific obstacles that make them less able to participate in civic life. A striking ninety-seven percent (97%) of New Hampshire residents who did not vote in 2016 also reported that work schedules or inadequate childcare created obstacles or barriers to their community engagement. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of New Hampshire residents who did not vote in 2016 reported that a lack of transportation was a barrier to their community engagement. The majority of people who did not vote in 2016 also reported they experienced barriers to participating in civic life such as feeling unwelcome, lacking the needed information, or feeling they could not make a difference. People who did not vote in 2016 were less likely to feel they mattered to their community or that people like themselves could make an impact on making their community better.

Note: The data below were collected in the fall of 2019, prior to the pandemic as well as protests directed at law enforcement, so it may be helpful for the reader to consider that trust in institutions and neighbors may have been further eroded by events in 2020.

New Hampshire residents’ trust in public institutions is declining. Since 2001, trust in the national government has fallen by half. Trust is also declining in local government and local media outlets, though not as rapidly as the decline in trust of the national government. This declining trust signals a period of insecurity in New Hampshire—where public institutions may need to work to demonstrate they are reliable and effective entities that Granite Staters can count on.

Further, New Hampshire residents’ trust in their neighbors has declined. There are many factors that may be at play to explain this decline in trust, including our national and local political polarization and volatility, stresses about finances and the economy, and an influx of newcomers to the state. New Hampshire is becoming more racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse than ever before. However, we rank in the bottom five states when it comes to how frequently we interact with people of a different racial, ethnic, or cultural background than ourselves—which may speak both to opportunities to interact with others as well as our willingness to do so. Within some demographic groups, these trends are magnified further. New Hampshire residents 18-34 years old trust their neighbors much less than other age groups. Older generations are less likely to interact with people from different racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds than their own. However, New Hampshire has the second oldest population in the nation—so many of our residents fall within this “older” demographic.

In other words, the above dynamics point to civic health risk factors. If younger people are not trusting their neighbors, and older people are not frequently interacting with people from different racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds at the same time that our major populations centers are becoming more racially and ethnically diverse, this could lay the ground for discrimination, misunderstanding, and potential conflict among people different from each other in New Hampshire communities. The reflections section at the end of this report will speak to this dynamic.

Education overwhelmingly makes a difference in the way Granite Staters participate and take action in political and civic life in their communities, as well as how they connect with others. This finding is consistent both with New Hampshire’s history—we came to similar conclusions in the 2012 New Hampshire Civic Health Index—and with national trends related to civic health.¹⁸ On virtually all of the civic health indicators, Granite Staters who had a college education tended to demonstrate stronger levels of civic health than did those with a high school degree. There were only two indicators where this was not true—people with a high school degree tended to do more when it came to doing favors for neighbors, and they also do more when it comes to helping out friends and extended family.

New Hampshire residents who hold a college degree are much more likely to vote and attend public meetings. They are also much more likely to feel they can make a positive impact and that they matter to their community.

Further, our data suggest that civics education also makes a significant difference in the ability to navigate and participate effectively in civic life. For instance, New Hampshire residents who received civics education in school are much more likely to:

• Trust the local media and local government
• Know how to get involved and participate in problem solving in their community
• Feel they matter to people in their community
• Feel that people like themselves can make an impact in their community

It also appears that civics education is associated in several ways with more effective participation in civic life. A significant 80% of Granite Staters who identified “a lack of information or not knowing where to start” as a barrier to their community engagement also reported that they had not received civics education in school.

Since education levels can be a proxy for social class and income, it might lead one to jump to the conclusion that civic health is related to social class—and those with more wealth and higher incomes and more education might also be those who exhibit higher levels of civic participation. However, this may not be the case. Although for some civic health indicators, income appears to be associated with stronger civic health, there is considerable variability in how income relates to New Hampshire’s civic life, and in fact lower income people demonstrated strengths on several civic indicators. But without a doubt, education (both achievement and access to civics education) influences Granite Staters’ civic habits, attitudes, and subsequent participation in their communities.

One’s income is highly related to whether and how one participates in civic life. Higher income people tended to vote more, connect more with family and friends, and connect more with people of a different racial or ethnic group. Higher income Granite Staters, those who make $75,000 or more, showed the highest levels of civic health overall.¹⁹ Those in the lowest income group were the most likely to do a favor for a neighbor or help others out.

But lower middle-income people in New Hampshire, presumably lots of individuals in “working class” occupations, demonstrate some intriguing civic trends. Although this population is highly engaged politically, they participate at lower levels in other civic behaviors such as voting in national elections, volunteering, and financial giving. These individuals, who earn between $35,000 to $49,999, led all income groups in five categories including:

• Engaging with news by reading, watching, or listening to news or information about political, societal, or local issues
• Posting views online about political, societal, or local issues
• Talking with friends and family about political, societal or local issues
• Talking with neighbors about political, societal or local issues
• Interacting with public officials to express their opinion

In other words, lower middle-income Granite Staters are paying attention to the news, talking about it with others, sharing their views with public leaders and with their broader networks online. Lower middle-income New Hampshire residents also demonstrated strengths in attending public meetings and connecting with people of different racial, ethnic, or cultural groups.

However, although lower middle-income people in New Hampshire show up for local elections, when it comes to midterm or presidential voting, they participate less often than other income groups. Further, lower middle-income Granite Staters demonstrate a mixed bag of results when connecting in community and volunteering. Lower middle-income Granite Staters are also less likely to participate in groups or volunteer on a regular basis or engage in political or charitable giving.

This gap in participation raises important questions—why are lower middle-income New Hampshire residents more likely to think and talk about politics but less likely to vote in national elections? We did not have access to sufficient longitudinal data to determine if lower middle-income Granite Staters’ behavior has changed in recent years, or if their behavior is indicative of longer-term trends. But what we can determine from this data is that lower middle-income people in New Hampshire are interested in contemporary issues. Lower levels of activity in areas such as charitable giving and voting may be related to having less discretionary income and working in occupations that do not allow the flexibility or access needed to vote during weekday polling hours, not because of disinterest or lack of will. However, lower middle income individuals do vote locally, which suggests there may be other explanations for this disparity between engagement and voting in national elections.

People of different ages participate in public life to different degrees and in different ways. Although Millennials demonstrate strengths in a few civic health indicators, overall Millennials rank below other generations in their civic awareness and engagement, connections in community, and volunteering and giving. Millennials participate in public life through posting online and volunteering. However, Millennials demonstrate lower rates than other generations in:

• Voting in all types of elections
• Paying attention to news
• Trusting, helping, and connecting with neighbors
• Going to public meetings
• Engaging with public officials
• Trusting local media
• Belonging to groups, such as recreational groups, civic or service organizations, spiritual communities, and political groups
• Giving to charitable or political causes
• Knowing how to get involved and participate in local problem solving
• Feeling they matter to their community

Younger people in New Hampshire also report higher rates of experiencing barriers or obstacles to civic engagement compared to other generations.

However, one should not conclude from this data that Millennials do not want to be connected with others—in fact Millennials connect more with friends and family than any other generation. And second only to Generation X, New Hampshire Millennials are interacting more with people from a different racial, ethnic, or cultural background than are Boomers or the Silent and Long Generation—a trend that may be connected to the demographic shifts occurring in the state.

But these results are concerning. If Millennials are not expressing their views to public officials, either by attending meetings or voting, and if they aren’t paying attention to news, this suggests that the priorities and needs of Millennials are also likely not being heard by elected decision-makers. Although it is possible that certain dispositions or attitudes of the Millennial generation affect their participation, we should exercise caution before jumping to this conclusion. For instance, our data suggest that younger generations in New Hampshire are less likely to know how to get involved, more likely to experience barriers to participating, and—perhaps most importantly—more likely to feel they do not matter to their community.

It is difficult to know exactly why Millennials are experiencing disparities in civic health, and our recommendations suggest paths to address this trend. It may be that the way civic health measures are structured to not correspond to how Millennials are engaging. It is possible that what we are seeing in New Hampshire corresponds to national studies that suggest American youth are increasingly isolated and report feelings of loneliness more than other generations.²⁰ The Granite State Poll indicates that New Hampshire youth are also more worried than other generations about drug use in the state.²¹ All of this begs the question of the relationship between civic health with mental and physical health. Further, in a culture of unprecedented social isolation due to COVID-19, it is important to consider how fear and a lack of trust in others might continue to erode civic health in the long term.