Bankrupt Rhetoric: How Misleading Information Affects Knowledge about Social Security

Most citizens know little about politics. Scholars often attributepolitical ignorance to individual-level factors, but we concentrateon the quality of the information environment. Employing a combinationof experimental methods and content analysis, we code statementsfrom the 1998–99 debate over Social Security reform aseither misleading or not misleading. Then, using surveys conductedduring the debate, we examine the impact of individual- andenvironmental-level variables on political knowledge about theprogram’s future. We show that misleading statements aboutSocial Security’s future cause some citizens to get animportant fact about the program wrong. More precisely, manycitizens mistakenly believe that Social Security will run outof money because political elites occasionally use words thatlead to overly pessimistic assessments of the program’sfinancial future. Our findings have important implications forpolicymakers who are attempting to remake America’s largestfederal program, scholars who study citizen competence, andcitizens in a representative democracy.