In an Information Age during which decentralized news and information have contributed to a greater lack of trust in government and traditional media outlets, is it possible to restore confidence in both institutions? Nick Mastronardi, a Hoover Institution veteran fellow and software innovator in the field of public-sector communications, discusses advances in data collection and artificial intelligence and a positive impact on government behavior with Hoover Volker Senior Fellow (adjunct) “Checker” Finn, one of the nation’s preeminent authorities on education policy and innovation.
Recorded on January 14, 2025.
ABOUT THE SERIES
Educators across the land are preparing for Civic Learning Week in mid-March—with the capstone National Forum at the Hoover Institution on March 13—as the nation also gets ready for next year’s 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. In anticipation of both—and recognizing the urgent need to rekindle civic literacy via our schools and colleges—Renewing Civics Education – Preparing for American Citizenship, a five-part podcast series, takes on the challenges of citizenship education: why it matters, what it needs to do differently, what shortcomings it must overcome. The series features distinguished members of Hoover’s Working Group on Good American Citizenship, led by Volker Senior Fellow Chester Finn.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
[MUSIC]
>> Chester Finn (00:09):
How on earth can you say, as you have done once or twice,
that American citizenship has gottenworse because of technological progress?
I don't even see the connectionbetween the two.
>> Nick Mastronardi (00:20):
Well, Chuck, great to see you today,
excited to be here with you.
And I think technological progressbrings a lot of great things with it.
I think until it is adapted to fit a lotof our, the roles of citizenship and
some of our public sector,it may be exacerbating or
just exposing some negative trends thatpreviously existed and scaling those.
(00:45):
So I don't know if technology necessarilyis making our institutions worse,
but it might be accelerating trends and
fault lines that were residing out there,anyway, is my life.
>> Chester Finn (00:56):
Yikes,
that is not encouraging butwe'll come right back to it.
I'm Chester Finn,known as Checker, on behalf of
the Huber Institutions Working Groupon Good American Citizenship and
its center onRevitalizing American Institutions.
And I have a great treat at the momentto be talking with Nick Masternardi,
a Hoover Institution veteran,fellow, the head of polco.
(01:19):
And also a veteran of the,the Air Force Academy, the Air Force,
the White House,the Council of Economic Advisors, and
any number of other distinguishedactivities in his checkered past.
Delighted to be with you today, Nick, andthank you, but I wanna stick with this.
An example you've given me in the past oftechnological issues that may be a threat
(01:44):
or problem for civics and citizenshipis that the fragmentation of media.
How people are getting their information,their news these days from so
many different sources?
It seems to me there's someadvantages to that, but
you're also seeing some disadvantages.
Can you enlighten us?
There's apparently some pros andsome cons on this.
>> Nick Mastronardi (02:06):
Yeah, it's an interesting space.
There certainly has beena lot of decentralization in
our news media consumption,
a lot of variation in the sources wherepeople are getting their news from.
And like you suggested,I think there's some real pros and cons.
I think some of the pros are obvious, thatmore people are starting to go out there,
investigate and report and informothers and get varied news sources and
(02:29):
that's pretty cool,there's some good benefits.
One of the downsides, though,is we end up finding ourselves not
always on the same page orthe same shared experiences,
debating from the same facts and figuresthat we see in our interpretations.
Our analysis muscle almostgets weak even though we have
(02:52):
a better data sources coming in.
And so I think at the end of the day,some of those shared
experiences really kind of harm usas a society and our citizenship.
But on the other hand,I do agree it's pretty neat to see so
many different people finding data andreporting on it in our society today.
>> Chester Finn (03:13):
I used to just believe Walter Cronkite when he told me that that
was the news of the day.
Now we get it from so many differentsources, but do we learn more that way or
do we just get more suspiciousof what other people are saying?
>> Nick Mastronardi (03:28):
Yeah, I mean, there's so many people, Reddit and Instagram,
even TikTok today, and forms andformats of the information.
And that's great.
I think what will be reallyimportant is I think the thing that
really drives difficulty inbeing a good citizen is you,
(03:51):
regardless of where youget this information.
And there's so much out of it out therein different formats that might be really
good and digestible to youis what do you do with it?
And as that gets built up and
you don't really have an outlet of placesto provide input, that has impact men,
I think that really builds up someresentment and some negative impacts.
(04:15):
And as that decentralizationhas accelerated,
that built up resentment has also,I think, been something that's
damaging the sense andactions of citizenship out there today.
>> Chester Finn (04:29):
Is that what's also contributing to the widely documented
decline in trust in government,confidence in government?
Because we're learning more about it or
we're getting more sourcestelling us about it?
>> Nick Mastronardi (04:43):
I'll bounce it, but I'd love to get your take,
but I really think so, Checker.
At the firm that I run on my day to day,we do a lot of polling and
surveying of local governmentsof the satisfaction of their
citizens with their public services andtheir trust in government.
We do mostly state, but even mostlystate and local, and even out of that,
(05:06):
mostly local.
And while state and local andespecially local have persisted
with trust in governmentabove the federal rates.
They also have been declining andshowing, and
even increases in disparity too, by ageand gender and wealth and ethnicity.
(05:27):
But among all these groups,there has been continued decline.
And I no longer think we canjust get away with saying for
these different pockets andfor these different groups.
Their trust and satisfaction withgovernment is higher than federal because
it's no longer that you're justhealthier than a sick organization,
(05:48):
you may also be sick.
And I think there reallyare some root causes that we.
And as you are with the center forRevitalizing American Institutions and
the working group teamsthat you're leading.
It's time we come back to it andreally assess it and think about things
that we can do to restore andreinvigorate citizenship and public trust.
>> Chester Finn (06:10):
Let's talk for a second about why local is better,
even if it's not very good,better than the national.
I mean, I spend most of my own life inthe education field where it's taken for
granted that people have a higheropinion of their own child's school than
they do of American education in general.
They'll give an A to theirown child's school and
(06:33):
a C minus to American education.
Help me understand why youthink people have a stronger,
more positive view oflocal than of national.
>> Nick Mastronardi (06:44):
I mean, you can directly see it, you can feel it if your
sewer is working, if your streetsare drivable, or maybe if they're not.
But you see the impacts more directly,even as a veteran myself,
than you may see or feel from defenseexpenditures and other federal so
you're more in touch with the benefits.
(07:07):
I would say one of the other,alluding to a previous comment of mine,
something to increase trust and
your sense of citizenship is your agencyand your impact on what you have.
And it's a lot easier to be a influentialmedian voter in your local area,
in your school district, city, county,than it is at the federal level.
(07:29):
And I mean, you could say the chances ofyou being the median voter are near zero
in any of those circumstances.
But really, I think in today's connectedenvironment, from you to your family and
your friend's family, and if you'resomebody your friends and family trust.
Say there's just 10 people who theywould trust your input on a referendum,
whether it should pass orschool levy or whatever it may be, and
(07:53):
they impact 10, 20 people themselves.
You're talking about impact into thehundreds, into maybe what's a small town.
And so I think yeah, you see and
feel the benefits of yourlocal government around you.
But also if you're smart, trusted,respected, you're doing your research and
you're connected through these differentsocial media and technologies that exist,
(08:15):
you can have agency andimpact on good citizenship there.
And I think that's a, that's a positiveand I think that's what's kept it above.
But even with those positive impacts,
we are still seeing declines interestsout there we should tend to.
>> Chester Finn (08:27):
And as I understand it,
you spend most of your day giving localgovernments feedback on what citizens
think about the services they'regetting from their local government.
Do local governments want to know this?
Why do they want to know this?
And we give them this information.
Do they do anything with it?
>> Nick Mastronardi (08:46):
Yeah, it's a great question.
We hope more do I think and a lot are.
I think there really are two benefitsif local governments invite input and
participation and stoke the positiveflame of citizenship among the residents.
One is you just build trust by asking and
(09:06):
having that dialogueeven in the short run.
But if you don't do it well,sometimes that can flame out.
I'll just give an example.
Like in the early days governmentsattempted to shoehorn some tools in that
were not necessarily designed forthe public sector.
They wouldn't just field a surveymonkey and people would say, okay,
they're asking my input,I'll participate again.
(09:27):
But those results of the survey monkeysweren't always trusted because you didn't
know if somebody voted ten times orthey were being sock puppeted.
Was it somebody in anothercountry who was providing input?
And so, in the immediate term maybe, itfelt like they were seeking their input,
but then it wasn't being trusted, andso that's a little bit deflating.
But if you do it in the right venue andyou're using results you can trust and
(09:50):
you're showing how people's input impacts.
Now I think you're doing in a sustainableway that is re engendering great
citizenship.
And I think the second benefit ifa local government is kind of teetering
on this concept of should I invitethis is residents satisfaction
with public services.
Even if it's a perception, but
(10:10):
there's a reality to that isa really important data point.
And I think that our government's local,state,
federal really need to be embracea culture of data driven governance.
If we're not for an accountability but
just to build trust by showing that youdid what you said you were going to do or
even Taking ownership if you didn't dowhat you said you were going to do.
(10:32):
So I think there's two things.
It's really just building trust by havingthe dialogue that didn't exist before, but
also embracing data to show the progressor lack thereof, but take ownership of it.
And I think if we do those things well,I think we're rebuilding the relationship
that had been distancing itselfbetween citizens and their government.
(10:56):
It's almost like a middle school dancebetween the citizens and their government.
They're on their separate sides ofthe room, but let's bring them together.
We can all have fun likethe old days if we do it,
if we reopen that dialogue in a classy.
>> Chester Finn (11:09):
Way so it's not just the boys on one side of the room and
the girls on the otherstaring at each other.
>> Nick Mastronardi (11:13):
That's right, yeah.
>> Chester Finn (11:15):
The.
I understand why giving peoplea sense that their local
government is interested intheir feedback is valuable for
people to feel associated and engaged.
But do the local governments,once they get this information,
do anything with it ordo they just let people report it?
>> Nick Mastronardi (11:38):
Some do.
You'd be surprised.
Just for a sense of scale for everybody,there's about 90,000 units of
local government acrossthe country in the United States.
So about half of those are very small orspecial districts.
But even so, that's in the 40 to50,000 good sized communities.
I mean maybe a few thousand people,up to 10,000 people and up from that.
(12:04):
And I would say today isprobably in the low thousands who
are fully embracing a datadriven governance culture,
both data andutilizing communication technology.
We wish that would go up.
We think it will go up.
I think residents will begin to demand fortheir tax dollars some accountability.
(12:29):
I think also a lot ofthere's a shift occurring
with how these local governmentsget a lot of their revenue.
It used to be,especially over the last few years for
from federal grants throughstate governments and down.
And those didn't always haveto be really data driven.
But I think we're starting to see withthe new administration a desire that,
(12:51):
you know, that it be really data drivengrant requests either for the federal
state grants or for philanthropiccommunity foundational grants.
Your application, if it's data driven,
is going to be the best chance ofgetting your government more revenue.
And so are they.
No, there are a few who'vewon the Baldrige Award.
(13:14):
Again, the Baldrige Award is an awardthat goes to the best data driven
organizations.
And there have been Fort Collins Colorado,I think Coral Gables, Florida.
It's always great to see publicsector institutions in there and
I hope we get more, but I think not a ton.
But the trend's going inthe right direction, I hope.
>> Chester Finn (13:31):
In education, when we give a school or a school district data on
how its students are doing andwhether it's getting better or worse,
we hope they're going to changetheir ways in response to this data.
You're seeing some local governmentsactually changing what they do when
they get this customer feedback.
>> Nick Mastronardi (13:53):
We do.
And in fact we try to be really carefulwith it because sometimes communities
ratings just go up if they attractwealthier residents who are usually more
satisfied with public services, especiallylaw enforcement services and so forth.
So we've begun to play around withnew ratings to identify who is
(14:13):
doing the best conditionedon their budget and
change in demographics in their community,either preserving or growing.
And we do our best to celebrate those.
I'll just give a shout out to Avondale,Arizona.
But yeah,I mean there's a lot out there and
we see them directly using theirresults to change their behavior.
(14:36):
Countless examples.
But I think that act itself is whatbegins to make the relationship
between the resident andthe government sustainable is not.
Step one is ask.
Yeah, just talk, start,initiate the dialogue, but then listen and
continue the dialogue.
And then use the data thatyou gathered to set goals and
(14:58):
have a conversation around the progress.
And we are then dancingin the dance together.
>> Chester Finn (15:05):
That's really interesting.
I can't think of any examples of a stategovernment, much less the federal
government, asking for customer feedbackfor consumer satisfaction information.
Am I missing something ordo they just not bother?
And if they don't bother, why don'tthey bother when local governments,
(15:27):
apparently many of them do bother?
>> Nick Mastronardi (15:31):
You know, from my experience, and this is not exhaustive
Checker, as you mentioned at the opening,I've worked a little while
at the federal level in the Department ofDefense and the Council Economic Advisors.
We really didn't have a great mechanism or
means to gather a lot ofdata in a trusted way.
Nevermind historical trends and benchmarkswith other federal governments like ours.
(15:54):
I think at the local level,
this is our laboratory fordemocracy as it's been stated.
And there's more variation andcities like Palo Alto,
literally been in Scottsdale, Arizonaliterally been doing this for decades.
A lot of communities in Minnesota,
I think there was a state subsidy tolocal governments if they use data and
(16:15):
in good engagement practices andthat's kind of built a hotbed.
Colorado, Florida, there's a lotof places where, where it's good.
We're starting to see progressunlock right now at the state level.
And I think that really as kind of thismiddleman between the local government and
the federal is a great place tokind of share best practices.
(16:38):
And I think, I think the progress willreally accelerate as it begins to be in,
as it begins to get adoptedat the state level.
That just might be me being optimistic,but that's my hope.
>> Chester Finn (16:48):
I mean I live in the state of Maryland which never asks my
opinion about anything and and whereasI do get a weekly email from the county
executive reporting on what heregards as progress in his county,
I never hear from the governor andmuch less get asked what do I think of
the state police or something inthe state, the federal government.
(17:13):
I worry that we may besubstituting people's tweets and
responses to them foractual public opinion data.
Just sort of what's the reaction tosomething provocative rather than anything
systematic by way of how do you feelabout the services you're getting?
>> Nick Mastronardi (17:34):
I 100% agree checker.
Maryland actually ismaking some great strides.
So my hope is Maryland will begin toask you how you feel on your input.
And I think they'regoing to be knowing you,
I think they're going to beamazed with what they get.
>> Chester Finn (17:48):
They might not like what they get, but go ahead.
>> Nick Mastronardi (17:51):
I think they will.
I think a way to characterize your secondpoint there is when we leave public
sentiment to the the Twitter's exes,social medias of the world, a lot of time
what the governments then end up gettingand reacting to is just reactive itself.
And I think there's an opportunity insteadfor our governments to be proactive and
(18:14):
frame the dialogue and say let's start,let's build a baseline.
What are our goals thatwe wanna shoot for.
So instead of people just reactive orcomplaining to where we are today,
I think a healthier dialogue I wouldlove to see us embrace is together
painting a shared vision of the future andmaking sure that the decisions
(18:36):
that we then make together are inpursuit of that citizen formed desire.
Vision of the future.
>> Chester Finn (18:43):
Really interesting.
Back to my education comparison.
In in education we havetwo Sort of mechanisms for
trying to make better results.
One is a kind of accountability viadata for the schools and the districts.
The other is the marketplace.
People just school choice is is the simplephrase for it, people voting with their
(19:04):
feet, leaving a school or a schooldistrict if they're not satisfied.
Is this also happening with respectto local government generally?
Are people changing communitiesbecause they're not happy with the.
I mean, at the moment that we are talking,
I would leave Los Angeles because I'mnot happy with the fire department.
(19:24):
But in broader examples than that,
are people relocating because ofsatisfaction or dissatisfaction?
>> Nick Mastronardi (19:33):
I think that's going to be a trend that was led by the school
districts because it's.
You have more options justchanging your schools.
A lot of times with charter schools andprivate schools in your area that
you don't physically needto relocate from or move.
But I think now post pandemic withmore people working from home.
And I know that's de emphasizinghere now slightly, but
(19:56):
that did make it possible for peopleto move with their feet to governments
that they felt were incorporating theirvoice and making better decisions and
returns with their tax dollars.
So I think so.
Although with more people going backto the office, that's less sticky.
But your labor markets are more fluid now.
It'll be something,I think you bring up a great point.
(20:16):
We should keep our eye on it andit would be a effectively competitive
forcing function driving someinnovation in the governance process.
>> Chester Finn (20:27):
That's also really interesting.
As you know, we're getting ready forCivic Learning Week in March,
middle of March, as well asthe Hoover Institution hosted Civic Summit
on March 13 that I think a lot of peopleare going to come to and tune into.
So as we think about, andit's very substantially for
(20:51):
civics educators at the K12 andhigher education levels,
when I think of civics coursesas they are taught these days,
they don't say much usuallyabout local government.
They say a lot about how Congress works,how a bill becomes a law,
how your state has two senators,things like that.
(21:11):
But I don't see a lot being taughtabout your, your town and how it works.
Should it,should civics courses take this seriously?
And if so, what should they teach?
>> Nick Mastronardi (21:24):
Man, absolutely, 100%.
These are good questions, Chucker.
This one's almost a littlebit of a softball but.
But I'll take it.
I do think, yeah,I think they really should.
Our conversation today focused a loton what the governments can and
should do to engender this greatrelationship between the governments and
(21:45):
the citizens and consequently Citizenship.
And there's obviously a lot of progressleft to be done by the governments, but
at the same time,there is responsibility for,
for us as citizens to bethe best citizen that we can be.
And that doesn't mean justvoting in your federal election.
It doesn't mean just voting inyour state and local elections,
(22:07):
although you should do those as well.
We should all strive, I think,especially if we are going to demand or
request the best from our governmentsthat we give our best as citizens.
And that's being aware of what's going on.
I don't think it's annoyingif there's a referendum or
a bill or agenda item in your localgovernment that's going on and
(22:29):
you research it and maybe you go talk atcouncil on a Tuesday night and wait for
a couple hours or a chance oreven leverage social media or
a different platform to let your friendsand family know about what's going on.
If they don't want it, you can take themoff the distro, but otherwise it's just
good citizenship because you are sharingyour research on what you think would
(22:53):
be best for your community and havinga voice and kind of adding to the pot or
to the stew that ultimately, I think,you know, it's incumbent we have data and
technology tools now to bring lots ofvoices together and, and help them.
But coming back to Citizenship Week,I think that, yes,
all the things that we talked about,
(23:14):
let's demand those from our government,like the data and the tools and
the communication technologies exist forthem to continue to improve.
And I don't wanna take it away fromthe many local governments who've done
amazing things.
But let's also focus onthe other half of the equation,
on ourselves as citizenship, ourselvesas citizens, doing the best that we can.
(23:38):
And it's just even with your family andit's with your neighbors and
it's smiling at people asyou walk down the street.
Everybody that you got shared socialcapital within your community,
do the best that you canrecognize that they're a teammate.
>> Chester Finn (23:53):
Well, I can't certainly disagree with that, but
I'm also still here sitting, feelinglike a civics teacher, wondering if.
My students even know what a referendumis if it's not in the curriculum.
If the curriculum sticksto the national stuff,
we might need to revise it so thatpeople know that there's a town council,
(24:15):
there's a city manager,there's a water department.
I don't know, we aren't teaching.
As far as I know, not many placesare teaching this stuff in school or
in college.
I mean the universities, a number ofthem are getting serious about civics
education for college students,which would be a great thing.
(24:36):
Is a great thing.
Going to be talkingabout that incidentally,
during the civic learningweek that's coming up.
But if it's not part of the curriculum,how are people going to find out about it?
>> Nick Mastronardi (24:47):
You're right.
I mean your education background,and you know the best I do.
I agree with your sentiment thatthe curriculum should be updated
because you know, I don't think I ever.
I'm tryna think of my own personal journeyinto learning about the volume of,
(25:08):
basically there's about between $3 and
$4 trillion a year spent between state andlocal in the United States.
It's a significant amountof our overall economy.
And I think a lot of them, when we thinkabout government, just like you said,
we think about federal.
But you live in a school district,you live in a city, you live in a county.
Each of them have multiple departments,
(25:30):
are running many programs thatdirectly impact your quality of life.
And you can influence those programs ifyou just knew a little bit about what was
going on, and we leverage technologyto better connect you with them.
I agree, education would benefitall of us in this equation.
>> Chester Finn (25:48):
As we get close to finishing up,
let's stick with technology forjust a second because we started there.
You've mentioned that you seean opportunity for digital venues for
working on citizenship and civicparticipation, not just physical venues.
We all tend to think that civicparticipation means coming to a meeting,
(26:10):
getting in your car and
driving to an auditorium wherethere's a meeting going on.
Is there in fact a technologicaldigital alternative to
that that we should be tryingto develop and make use of?
>> Nick Mastronardi (26:26):
I'll try to answer this question about being too self
serving, but I do want to highlightjust because I think it's relevant.
We have continued withmy company with Polka,
we've continued to build public sectorengagement tools that enrich and
capture the real trade offs andthe intricacies of what's going on.
And yeah, in order foryou to get the real feel and
(26:47):
to hear the emotion of what's beingShared at a city council meeting.
And by the way, it's good entertainmentif you haven't been before.
Go.It's just like you really can see the,
the color and the fabric of your,
your local community,things that people care about and why.
But we also understand there'sa lot of busy families and
not everybody can make itout on a Tuesday night.
And so some of our new engagementtechnologies are helping cities
(27:10):
meet residents where theyare to get their input in a way
that understands the context andthe trade offs.
Hey, we have only so much fungible budgetand there's real trade offs behind this.
Where the money comes from isn't magic.
Are we gonna make trade offson the community pool versus
the fire preparedness just to beprone to what's going on today?
(27:34):
And so we're doing that,not only with budget simulations so
residents can grapple with, understand,and ultimately hopefully appreciate, and
better participate in these things, buteven in California, there's housing plans
to make sure zoning policies going forwardare preparing for demographic shifts.
(27:55):
There's climate plans.
If we want to make sure thatwe're doing things in a certain
way to achieve climate outcomes,there's costliness.
And so we want to make sure,like I think your old fashioned poll,
while easy and nice,misses some of the trade offs.
And so I think as technology has expanded,and especially now with AI,
we're going to have richer digitalvenues that people can really begin
(28:18):
to understand, appreciate,and have better input and
thereby impact these importantthings going on all around us.
So hopefully that wasn't too long ofa answer on it, but that's my sense.
>> Chester Finn (28:30):
Now your mention of AI, of course,
makes me wish I had a virtualalternative to my county executive.
I would far rather deal witha virtual one than the real guy.
But anyway, that reflects mysatisfaction with my local government.
This has been fantastic,Nick, and I appreciate it.
I'm looking forward to seeing youat Civic Learning Week in March at
(28:53):
the Hoover Institution.
And on behalf of Hoover andthe working group on good
American Citizenship,let me thank you and say adios.
All the best.
>> Nick Mastronardi (29:07):
Tucker was a blast, my pleasure.
Hope you have a great day.
>> Chester Finn (29:09):
Thanks so much.
Bye.
[MUSIC]
>> Chester Finn (00:09):
How on earth can you say, as you have done once or twice,
that American citizenship has gottenworse because of technological progress?
I don't even see the connectionbetween the two.
>> Nick Mastronardi (00:20):
Well, Chuck, great to see you today,
excited to be here with you.
And I think technological progressbrings a lot of great things with it.
I think until it is adapted to fit a lotof our, the roles of citizenship and
some of our public sector,it may be exacerbating or
just exposing some negative trends thatpreviously existed and scaling those.
(00:45):
So I don't know if technology necessarilyis making our institutions worse,
but it might be accelerating trends and
fault lines that were residing out there,anyway, is my life.
>> Chester Finn (00:56):
Yikes,
that is not encouraging butwe'll come right back to it.
I'm Chester Finn,known as Checker, on behalf of
the Huber Institutions Working Groupon Good American Citizenship and
its center onRevitalizing American Institutions.
And I have a great treat at the momentto be talking with Nick Masternardi,
a Hoover Institution veteran,fellow, the head of polco.
(01:19):
And also a veteran of the,the Air Force Academy, the Air Force,
the White House,the Council of Economic Advisors, and
any number of other distinguishedactivities in his checkered past.
Delighted to be with you today, Nick, andthank you, but I wanna stick with this.
An example you've given me in the past oftechnological issues that may be a threat
(01:44):
or problem for civics and citizenshipis that the fragmentation of media.
How people are getting their information,their news these days from so
many different sources?
It seems to me there's someadvantages to that, but
you're also seeing some disadvantages.
Can you enlighten us?
There's apparently some pros andsome cons on this.
>> Nick Mastronardi (02:06):
Yeah, it's an interesting space.
There certainly has beena lot of decentralization in
our news media consumption,
a lot of variation in the sources wherepeople are getting their news from.
And like you suggested,I think there's some real pros and cons.
I think some of the pros are obvious, thatmore people are starting to go out there,
investigate and report and informothers and get varied news sources and
(02:29):
that's pretty cool,there's some good benefits.
One of the downsides, though,is we end up finding ourselves not
always on the same page orthe same shared experiences,
debating from the same facts and figuresthat we see in our interpretations.
Our analysis muscle almostgets weak even though we have
(02:52):
a better data sources coming in.
And so I think at the end of the day,some of those shared
experiences really kind of harm usas a society and our citizenship.
But on the other hand,I do agree it's pretty neat to see so
many different people finding data andreporting on it in our society today.
>> Chester Finn (03:13):
I used to just believe Walter Cronkite when he told me that that
was the news of the day.
Now we get it from so many differentsources, but do we learn more that way or
do we just get more suspiciousof what other people are saying?
>> Nick Mastronardi (03:28):
Yeah, I mean, there's so many people, Reddit and Instagram,
even TikTok today, and forms andformats of the information.
And that's great.
I think what will be reallyimportant is I think the thing that
really drives difficulty inbeing a good citizen is you,
(03:51):
regardless of where youget this information.
And there's so much out of it out therein different formats that might be really
good and digestible to youis what do you do with it?
And as that gets built up and
you don't really have an outlet of placesto provide input, that has impact men,
I think that really builds up someresentment and some negative impacts.
(04:15):
And as that decentralizationhas accelerated,
that built up resentment has also,I think, been something that's
damaging the sense andactions of citizenship out there today.
>> Chester Finn (04:29):
Is that what's also contributing to the widely documented
decline in trust in government,confidence in government?
Because we're learning more about it or
we're getting more sourcestelling us about it?
>> Nick Mastronardi (04:43):
I'll bounce it, but I'd love to get your take,
but I really think so, Checker.
At the firm that I run on my day to day,we do a lot of polling and
surveying of local governmentsof the satisfaction of their
citizens with their public services andtheir trust in government.
We do mostly state, but even mostlystate and local, and even out of that,
(05:06):
mostly local.
And while state and local andespecially local have persisted
with trust in governmentabove the federal rates.
They also have been declining andshowing, and
even increases in disparity too, by ageand gender and wealth and ethnicity.
(05:27):
But among all these groups,there has been continued decline.
And I no longer think we canjust get away with saying for
these different pockets andfor these different groups.
Their trust and satisfaction withgovernment is higher than federal because
it's no longer that you're justhealthier than a sick organization,
(05:48):
you may also be sick.
And I think there reallyare some root causes that we.
And as you are with the center forRevitalizing American Institutions and
the working group teamsthat you're leading.
It's time we come back to it andreally assess it and think about things
that we can do to restore andreinvigorate citizenship and public trust.
>> Chester Finn (06:10):
Let's talk for a second about why local is better,
even if it's not very good,better than the national.
I mean, I spend most of my own life inthe education field where it's taken for
granted that people have a higheropinion of their own child's school than
they do of American education in general.
They'll give an A to theirown child's school and
(06:33):
a C minus to American education.
Help me understand why youthink people have a stronger,
more positive view oflocal than of national.
>> Nick Mastronardi (06:44):
I mean, you can directly see it, you can feel it if your
sewer is working, if your streetsare drivable, or maybe if they're not.
But you see the impacts more directly,even as a veteran myself,
than you may see or feel from defenseexpenditures and other federal so
you're more in touch with the benefits.
(07:07):
I would say one of the other,alluding to a previous comment of mine,
something to increase trust and
your sense of citizenship is your agencyand your impact on what you have.
And it's a lot easier to be a influentialmedian voter in your local area,
in your school district, city, county,than it is at the federal level.
(07:29):
And I mean, you could say the chances ofyou being the median voter are near zero
in any of those circumstances.
But really, I think in today's connectedenvironment, from you to your family and
your friend's family, and if you'resomebody your friends and family trust.
Say there's just 10 people who theywould trust your input on a referendum,
whether it should pass orschool levy or whatever it may be, and
(07:53):
they impact 10, 20 people themselves.
You're talking about impact into thehundreds, into maybe what's a small town.
And so I think yeah, you see and
feel the benefits of yourlocal government around you.
But also if you're smart, trusted,respected, you're doing your research and
you're connected through these differentsocial media and technologies that exist,
(08:15):
you can have agency andimpact on good citizenship there.
And I think that's a, that's a positiveand I think that's what's kept it above.
But even with those positive impacts,
we are still seeing declines interestsout there we should tend to.
>> Chester Finn (08:27):
And as I understand it,
you spend most of your day giving localgovernments feedback on what citizens
think about the services they'regetting from their local government.
Do local governments want to know this?
Why do they want to know this?
And we give them this information.
Do they do anything with it?
>> Nick Mastronardi (08:46):
Yeah, it's a great question.
We hope more do I think and a lot are.
I think there really are two benefitsif local governments invite input and
participation and stoke the positiveflame of citizenship among the residents.
One is you just build trust by asking and
(09:06):
having that dialogueeven in the short run.
But if you don't do it well,sometimes that can flame out.
I'll just give an example.
Like in the early days governmentsattempted to shoehorn some tools in that
were not necessarily designed forthe public sector.
They wouldn't just field a surveymonkey and people would say, okay,
they're asking my input,I'll participate again.
(09:27):
But those results of the survey monkeysweren't always trusted because you didn't
know if somebody voted ten times orthey were being sock puppeted.
Was it somebody in anothercountry who was providing input?
And so, in the immediate term maybe, itfelt like they were seeking their input,
but then it wasn't being trusted, andso that's a little bit deflating.
But if you do it in the right venue andyou're using results you can trust and
(09:50):
you're showing how people's input impacts.
Now I think you're doing in a sustainableway that is re engendering great
citizenship.
And I think the second benefit ifa local government is kind of teetering
on this concept of should I invitethis is residents satisfaction
with public services.
Even if it's a perception, but
(10:10):
there's a reality to that isa really important data point.
And I think that our government's local,state,
federal really need to be embracea culture of data driven governance.
If we're not for an accountability but
just to build trust by showing that youdid what you said you were going to do or
even Taking ownership if you didn't dowhat you said you were going to do.
(10:32):
So I think there's two things.
It's really just building trust by havingthe dialogue that didn't exist before, but
also embracing data to show the progressor lack thereof, but take ownership of it.
And I think if we do those things well,I think we're rebuilding the relationship
that had been distancing itselfbetween citizens and their government.
(10:56):
It's almost like a middle school dancebetween the citizens and their government.
They're on their separate sides ofthe room, but let's bring them together.
We can all have fun likethe old days if we do it,
if we reopen that dialogue in a classy.
>> Chester Finn (11:09):
Way so it's not just the boys on one side of the room and
the girls on the otherstaring at each other.
>> Nick Mastronardi (11:13):
That's right, yeah.
>> Chester Finn (11:15):
The.
I understand why giving peoplea sense that their local
government is interested intheir feedback is valuable for
people to feel associated and engaged.
But do the local governments,once they get this information,
do anything with it ordo they just let people report it?
>> Nick Mastronardi (11:38):
Some do.
You'd be surprised.
Just for a sense of scale for everybody,there's about 90,000 units of
local government acrossthe country in the United States.
So about half of those are very small orspecial districts.
But even so, that's in the 40 to50,000 good sized communities.
I mean maybe a few thousand people,up to 10,000 people and up from that.
(12:04):
And I would say today isprobably in the low thousands who
are fully embracing a datadriven governance culture,
both data andutilizing communication technology.
We wish that would go up.
We think it will go up.
I think residents will begin to demand fortheir tax dollars some accountability.
(12:29):
I think also a lot ofthere's a shift occurring
with how these local governmentsget a lot of their revenue.
It used to be,especially over the last few years for
from federal grants throughstate governments and down.
And those didn't always haveto be really data driven.
But I think we're starting to see withthe new administration a desire that,
(12:51):
you know, that it be really data drivengrant requests either for the federal
state grants or for philanthropiccommunity foundational grants.
Your application, if it's data driven,
is going to be the best chance ofgetting your government more revenue.
And so are they.
No, there are a few who'vewon the Baldrige Award.
(13:14):
Again, the Baldrige Award is an awardthat goes to the best data driven
organizations.
And there have been Fort Collins Colorado,I think Coral Gables, Florida.
It's always great to see publicsector institutions in there and
I hope we get more, but I think not a ton.
But the trend's going inthe right direction, I hope.
>> Chester Finn (13:31):
In education, when we give a school or a school district data on
how its students are doing andwhether it's getting better or worse,
we hope they're going to changetheir ways in response to this data.
You're seeing some local governmentsactually changing what they do when
they get this customer feedback.
>> Nick Mastronardi (13:53):
We do.
And in fact we try to be really carefulwith it because sometimes communities
ratings just go up if they attractwealthier residents who are usually more
satisfied with public services, especiallylaw enforcement services and so forth.
So we've begun to play around withnew ratings to identify who is
(14:13):
doing the best conditionedon their budget and
change in demographics in their community,either preserving or growing.
And we do our best to celebrate those.
I'll just give a shout out to Avondale,Arizona.
But yeah,I mean there's a lot out there and
we see them directly using theirresults to change their behavior.
(14:36):
Countless examples.
But I think that act itself is whatbegins to make the relationship
between the resident andthe government sustainable is not.
Step one is ask.
Yeah, just talk, start,initiate the dialogue, but then listen and
continue the dialogue.
And then use the data thatyou gathered to set goals and
(14:58):
have a conversation around the progress.
And we are then dancingin the dance together.
>> Chester Finn (15:05):
That's really interesting.
I can't think of any examples of a stategovernment, much less the federal
government, asking for customer feedbackfor consumer satisfaction information.
Am I missing something ordo they just not bother?
And if they don't bother, why don'tthey bother when local governments,
(15:27):
apparently many of them do bother?
>> Nick Mastronardi (15:31):
You know, from my experience, and this is not exhaustive
Checker, as you mentioned at the opening,I've worked a little while
at the federal level in the Department ofDefense and the Council Economic Advisors.
We really didn't have a great mechanism or
means to gather a lot ofdata in a trusted way.
Nevermind historical trends and benchmarkswith other federal governments like ours.
(15:54):
I think at the local level,
this is our laboratory fordemocracy as it's been stated.
And there's more variation andcities like Palo Alto,
literally been in Scottsdale, Arizonaliterally been doing this for decades.
A lot of communities in Minnesota,
I think there was a state subsidy tolocal governments if they use data and
(16:15):
in good engagement practices andthat's kind of built a hotbed.
Colorado, Florida, there's a lotof places where, where it's good.
We're starting to see progressunlock right now at the state level.
And I think that really as kind of thismiddleman between the local government and
the federal is a great place tokind of share best practices.
(16:38):
And I think, I think the progress willreally accelerate as it begins to be in,
as it begins to get adoptedat the state level.
That just might be me being optimistic,but that's my hope.
>> Chester Finn (16:48):
I mean I live in the state of Maryland which never asks my
opinion about anything and and whereasI do get a weekly email from the county
executive reporting on what heregards as progress in his county,
I never hear from the governor andmuch less get asked what do I think of
the state police or something inthe state, the federal government.
(17:13):
I worry that we may besubstituting people's tweets and
responses to them foractual public opinion data.
Just sort of what's the reaction tosomething provocative rather than anything
systematic by way of how do you feelabout the services you're getting?
>> Nick Mastronardi (17:34):
I 100% agree checker.
Maryland actually ismaking some great strides.
So my hope is Maryland will begin toask you how you feel on your input.
And I think they'regoing to be knowing you,
I think they're going to beamazed with what they get.
>> Chester Finn (17:48):
They might not like what they get, but go ahead.
>> Nick Mastronardi (17:51):
I think they will.
I think a way to characterize your secondpoint there is when we leave public
sentiment to the the Twitter's exes,social medias of the world, a lot of time
what the governments then end up gettingand reacting to is just reactive itself.
And I think there's an opportunity insteadfor our governments to be proactive and
(18:14):
frame the dialogue and say let's start,let's build a baseline.
What are our goals thatwe wanna shoot for.
So instead of people just reactive orcomplaining to where we are today,
I think a healthier dialogue I wouldlove to see us embrace is together
painting a shared vision of the future andmaking sure that the decisions
(18:36):
that we then make together are inpursuit of that citizen formed desire.
Vision of the future.
>> Chester Finn (18:43):
Really interesting.
Back to my education comparison.
In in education we havetwo Sort of mechanisms for
trying to make better results.
One is a kind of accountability viadata for the schools and the districts.
The other is the marketplace.
People just school choice is is the simplephrase for it, people voting with their
(19:04):
feet, leaving a school or a schooldistrict if they're not satisfied.
Is this also happening with respectto local government generally?
Are people changing communitiesbecause they're not happy with the.
I mean, at the moment that we are talking,
I would leave Los Angeles because I'mnot happy with the fire department.
(19:24):
But in broader examples than that,
are people relocating because ofsatisfaction or dissatisfaction?
>> Nick Mastronardi (19:33):
I think that's going to be a trend that was led by the school
districts because it's.
You have more options justchanging your schools.
A lot of times with charter schools andprivate schools in your area that
you don't physically needto relocate from or move.
But I think now post pandemic withmore people working from home.
And I know that's de emphasizinghere now slightly, but
(19:56):
that did make it possible for peopleto move with their feet to governments
that they felt were incorporating theirvoice and making better decisions and
returns with their tax dollars.
So I think so.
Although with more people going backto the office, that's less sticky.
But your labor markets are more fluid now.
It'll be something,I think you bring up a great point.
(20:16):
We should keep our eye on it andit would be a effectively competitive
forcing function driving someinnovation in the governance process.
>> Chester Finn (20:27):
That's also really interesting.
As you know, we're getting ready forCivic Learning Week in March,
middle of March, as well asthe Hoover Institution hosted Civic Summit
on March 13 that I think a lot of peopleare going to come to and tune into.
So as we think about, andit's very substantially for
(20:51):
civics educators at the K12 andhigher education levels,
when I think of civics coursesas they are taught these days,
they don't say much usuallyabout local government.
They say a lot about how Congress works,how a bill becomes a law,
how your state has two senators,things like that.
(21:11):
But I don't see a lot being taughtabout your, your town and how it works.
Should it,should civics courses take this seriously?
And if so, what should they teach?
>> Nick Mastronardi (21:24):
Man, absolutely, 100%.
These are good questions, Chucker.
This one's almost a littlebit of a softball but.
But I'll take it.
I do think, yeah,I think they really should.
Our conversation today focused a loton what the governments can and
should do to engender this greatrelationship between the governments and
(21:45):
the citizens and consequently Citizenship.
And there's obviously a lot of progressleft to be done by the governments, but
at the same time,there is responsibility for,
for us as citizens to bethe best citizen that we can be.
And that doesn't mean justvoting in your federal election.
It doesn't mean just voting inyour state and local elections,
(22:07):
although you should do those as well.
We should all strive, I think,especially if we are going to demand or
request the best from our governmentsthat we give our best as citizens.
And that's being aware of what's going on.
I don't think it's annoyingif there's a referendum or
a bill or agenda item in your localgovernment that's going on and
(22:29):
you research it and maybe you go talk atcouncil on a Tuesday night and wait for
a couple hours or a chance oreven leverage social media or
a different platform to let your friendsand family know about what's going on.
If they don't want it, you can take themoff the distro, but otherwise it's just
good citizenship because you are sharingyour research on what you think would
(22:53):
be best for your community and havinga voice and kind of adding to the pot or
to the stew that ultimately, I think,you know, it's incumbent we have data and
technology tools now to bring lots ofvoices together and, and help them.
But coming back to Citizenship Week,I think that, yes,
all the things that we talked about,
(23:14):
let's demand those from our government,like the data and the tools and
the communication technologies exist forthem to continue to improve.
And I don't wanna take it away fromthe many local governments who've done
amazing things.
But let's also focus onthe other half of the equation,
on ourselves as citizenship, ourselvesas citizens, doing the best that we can.
(23:38):
And it's just even with your family andit's with your neighbors and
it's smiling at people asyou walk down the street.
Everybody that you got shared socialcapital within your community,
do the best that you canrecognize that they're a teammate.
>> Chester Finn (23:53):
Well, I can't certainly disagree with that, but
I'm also still here sitting, feelinglike a civics teacher, wondering if.
My students even know what a referendumis if it's not in the curriculum.
If the curriculum sticksto the national stuff,
we might need to revise it so thatpeople know that there's a town council,
(24:15):
there's a city manager,there's a water department.
I don't know, we aren't teaching.
As far as I know, not many placesare teaching this stuff in school or
in college.
I mean the universities, a number ofthem are getting serious about civics
education for college students,which would be a great thing.
(24:36):
Is a great thing.
Going to be talkingabout that incidentally,
during the civic learningweek that's coming up.
But if it's not part of the curriculum,how are people going to find out about it?
>> Nick Mastronardi (24:47):
You're right.
I mean your education background,and you know the best I do.
I agree with your sentiment thatthe curriculum should be updated
because you know, I don't think I ever.
I'm tryna think of my own personal journeyinto learning about the volume of,
(25:08):
basically there's about between $3 and
$4 trillion a year spent between state andlocal in the United States.
It's a significant amountof our overall economy.
And I think a lot of them, when we thinkabout government, just like you said,
we think about federal.
But you live in a school district,you live in a city, you live in a county.
Each of them have multiple departments,
(25:30):
are running many programs thatdirectly impact your quality of life.
And you can influence those programs ifyou just knew a little bit about what was
going on, and we leverage technologyto better connect you with them.
I agree, education would benefitall of us in this equation.
>> Chester Finn (25:48):
As we get close to finishing up,
let's stick with technology forjust a second because we started there.
You've mentioned that you seean opportunity for digital venues for
working on citizenship and civicparticipation, not just physical venues.
We all tend to think that civicparticipation means coming to a meeting,
(26:10):
getting in your car and
driving to an auditorium wherethere's a meeting going on.
Is there in fact a technologicaldigital alternative to
that that we should be tryingto develop and make use of?
>> Nick Mastronardi (26:26):
I'll try to answer this question about being too self
serving, but I do want to highlightjust because I think it's relevant.
We have continued withmy company with Polka,
we've continued to build public sectorengagement tools that enrich and
capture the real trade offs andthe intricacies of what's going on.
And yeah, in order foryou to get the real feel and
(26:47):
to hear the emotion of what's beingShared at a city council meeting.
And by the way, it's good entertainmentif you haven't been before.
Go.It's just like you really can see the,
the color and the fabric of your,
your local community,things that people care about and why.
But we also understand there'sa lot of busy families and
not everybody can make itout on a Tuesday night.
And so some of our new engagementtechnologies are helping cities
(27:10):
meet residents where theyare to get their input in a way
that understands the context andthe trade offs.
Hey, we have only so much fungible budgetand there's real trade offs behind this.
Where the money comes from isn't magic.
Are we gonna make trade offson the community pool versus
the fire preparedness just to beprone to what's going on today?
(27:34):
And so we're doing that,not only with budget simulations so
residents can grapple with, understand,and ultimately hopefully appreciate, and
better participate in these things, buteven in California, there's housing plans
to make sure zoning policies going forwardare preparing for demographic shifts.
(27:55):
There's climate plans.
If we want to make sure thatwe're doing things in a certain
way to achieve climate outcomes,there's costliness.
And so we want to make sure,like I think your old fashioned poll,
while easy and nice,misses some of the trade offs.
And so I think as technology has expanded,and especially now with AI,
we're going to have richer digitalvenues that people can really begin
(28:18):
to understand, appreciate,and have better input and
thereby impact these importantthings going on all around us.
So hopefully that wasn't too long ofa answer on it, but that's my sense.
>> Chester Finn (28:30):
Now your mention of AI, of course,
makes me wish I had a virtualalternative to my county executive.
I would far rather deal witha virtual one than the real guy.
But anyway, that reflects mysatisfaction with my local government.
This has been fantastic,Nick, and I appreciate it.
I'm looking forward to seeing youat Civic Learning Week in March at
(28:53):
the Hoover Institution.
And on behalf of Hoover andthe working group on good
American Citizenship,let me thank you and say adios.
All the best.
>> Nick Mastronardi (29:07):
Tucker was a blast, my pleasure.
Hope you have a great day.
>> Chester Finn (29:09):
Thanks so much.
Bye.
Popular Podcasts
True Crime Tonight
If you eat, sleep, and breathe true crime, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT is serving up your nightly fix. Five nights a week, KT STUDIOS & iHEART RADIO invite listeners to pull up a seat for an unfiltered look at the biggest cases making headlines, celebrity scandals, and the trials everyone is watching. With a mix of expert analysis, hot takes, and listener call-ins, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT goes beyond the headlines to uncover the twists, turns, and unanswered questions that keep us all obsessed—because, at TRUE CRIME TONIGHT, there’s a seat for everyone. Whether breaking down crime scene forensics, scrutinizing serial killers, or debating the most binge-worthy true crime docs, True Crime Tonight is the fresh, fast-paced, and slightly addictive home for true crime lovers.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.