CIRCLE

When we cover the progressive youth movement here at Future Majority, we often report, summarize, and analyze current events, whether those occur in all levels of government, within political parties, at colleges or universities, or elsewhere. What we sometimes neglect is the history and context informing much of the terrain we do cover. I wanted to take a break today, at least for this post, from our contemporary political scene and look back 40 years to a critical moment in the youth movement: the passage of the 26th Amendment that lowered the minimum voting age from 21 to 18. While we often take this amendment for granted, re-visiting the story behind it reminds us of the importance of the youth vote and bolsters our efforts as we prepare to defend our rights against those who wish to disenfranchise us.

History:

I had assumed that the story of the 26th Amendment commenced during the Vietnam War, however I was surprised to find that President Dwight Eisenhower was the first president to argue in favor of lowering the voting age. In his 1954 State of the Union address, Eisenhower made his case by citing the discrepancy in being old enough to be drafted and deployed to a war zone but not old enough to vote for people making these policy decisions.

For years our citizens between the ages of 18 and 21 have, in time of peril, been summoned to fight for America. They should participate in the political process that produces this fateful summons. I urge Congress to propose to the States a constitutional amendment permitting citizens to vote when they reach the age of 18.

Unfortunately, no amendment passed. As the 1950s came to a close, and the country elected a new president - John F. Kennedy - America was in the middle of the Cold War, pursuing a strategy of containment in an effort to stifle communism around the world. Intent on protecting South Vietnam from communism, the U.S. committed an increasing amount of resources to fighting the North Vietnamese, deploying the first combat troops in 1965. In 1968, North Vietnam launched the Tet Offensive against the U.S. and South Vietnamese forces; the unforeseen attack didn't jibe with statements from American leaders claiming that the end was near. The anti-war movement strengthened.

In 1970, at the height of student activism, President Nixon re-visited extending voting rights to those Americans between the ages of 18 and 21. With increasing numbers of Americans opposing military action in Vietnam and the death toll mounting every day, the discrepancy between soldiers being conscripted for military service while being unable to influence the political process through voting became more apparent. Nixon felt the pressure. On June 22 of that year, Nixon signed an extension of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, lowering the minimum voting age to 18. He did so, though, noting that the courts might deem some of the provisions unconstitutional. After Oregon and Texas challenged the new law all the way to the Supreme Court, the Court ruled that while Congress had the power to lower the voting age in federal elections, the provisions in the law regulating state and local elections were unconstitutional (Oregon v. Mitchell, 400 U.S. 112 [1970]). Faced with the possibility of having two separate voting rolls in some states, one on the federal level that allowed 18-21 year olds to vote and one on state and local levels barring them from voting, Congress and state legislatures moved to pass the 26th Amendment to the Constitution.

On March 10, 1971, the Senate voted to propose an amendment guaranteeing that the standard minimum voting age would be 18 (94-0). Then, on March 23, 1971, the House of Representatives voted 401–19 to pass the amendment. After only four months from the time Congress submitted it to the states, the amendment had been ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures. This was the fastest any amendment had been adopted by the states. The Amendment reads:

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Following the passage of the amendment, President Nixon issued the following statement:

As I meet with this group today, I sense that we can have confidence that America’s new voters, America’s young generation, will provide what America needs as we approach our 200th birthday, not just strength and not just wealth but the “Spirit of ‘76’ a spirit of moral courage, a spirit of high idealism in which we believe in the American dream, but in which we realize that the American dream can never be fulfilled until every American has an equal chance to fulfill it in his own life.

I can't tell what strikes me more about this - his hypocrisy or the significant difference in rhetoric and ideology between this Republican president and today's GOP.

Tracing Youth Voting Rates Since 1971:

In 1972, for the first time in the nation's history, 18 year olds were able to vote in a presidential election. 55.4% of the 18-29 age group voted that year, which continues to be the highest turnout on record. Both the 1992 election (52%) and the 2008 (51.1%) came close to matching this rate. (See CIRCLE PDF here.)

After 1972, the youth vote was consistently attacked as being unreliable. This attitude led to a cycle in which candidates refused to pay young adults attention on the campaign trail, and young adults, feeling ignored, disengaged from the political process by not voting. We also know that generational dynamics also came into play. Generation X, coming of age in the 1980s and 1990s, was deemed cynical, individualistic, and alienated; this further led to a downward trend in the youth vote.

However, the Millennials followed Generation X and differed in their attitudes toward voting significantly. While Generation X disengaged from the process altogether, Millennials - known as a civic generation according to generational theorists Howe and Strauss - welcomed community engagement. While discouraged by the complex and hostile nature of politics, they repeatedly expressed that being involved in their respective communities was important to them. As they came of age, the youth voting rate began to rise. This graphic, depicting both college and non-college voting rates, illustrates the upward trajectory of the youth vote in the last several presidential elections after its plummet in the mid-1990s.

What's at Stake:

Though Millennials are generally more engaged than the generational cohort behind them, we still have work to do. We can always do a better job of recruiting more young people to run for office and increasing voting rates in off-year elections. We saw the importance of this just last year, in 2010, when a whiter, older, wealthier, and more conservative electorate voted, sweeping Republicans to a House majority and into control of many statehouses.

Unfortunately, the consequences are also directly impacting the youth vote. Many states, at the behest of new Republican governors (like Scott Walker of Wisconsin, pictured) and Republican legislatures are constructing barriers to keep youth from voting, effectively deconstructing the 26th Amendment we're celebrating today. States are either establishing or preparing to establish poll tax fees to support a voter ID system, or enacting strict photo ID standards that would restrict students and members of the military from voting (or both!). Rescinding same-day registration and motor voter laws in order to curb "voter fraud" (the idea of which has proved to be a fraud itself) is underway in several states, specifically impacting students, the poor, and many working people. As if this wasn't enough, new Republican majorities, preoccupied with the debt instead of investing in its people, are cutting billions of dollars from the education of our young people (especially civic education).

So, as we take time today to remember how the youth vote was expanded with the passage of the 26th Amendment 40 years ago, we would also do well to acknowledge that youth voting rights aren't safe and are, in fact, under attack.

Celebrating the 26th Amendment:

In closing, I wanted to highlight a few statements and an effort in support of the 26th Amendment's 40th anniversary. We thank everyone involved for commemorating this important day, but also urge all Americans to understand the importance of safeguarding and expanding youth participation in our democracy.

• The Overseas Vote Foundation is organizing a Twitter event in support of this historical milestone, saluting America's young people by engaging U.S. voters around the world in a dialogue about "why you vote" - in 140 characters or less. The organization is holding a daylong conversation on the Twitter channel #WhyUVote beginning at 9:00 am Eastern Standard Time on Friday, July 1, 2011. They're hoping you tweet your TOP 10 REASONS TO VOTE and and include #WhyUVote. Join in and follow the worldwide Twitter conversation moderated by Youth Vote Overseas Program Coordinator Michael Casey Bonfield here
• Debbie Wasserman Schultz issued a statement of support for the 26th Amendment:
  

  Since 1971, young voters have played an indispensable role in the electoral process. Their spirit and activism help guide the country and their belief in the power and promise of America continually inspires us. Young voters are a reminder that America’s greatest resource will always be the ability of generations to rise up to the challenges of their time. That is why the Democratic Party and President Obama have actively sought to include young voters in the electoral process and make sure their voice is heard at the voting booth. Youth activism has been particularly important to me--having gotten my start in politics in college and having run for office for the first time at the age of 25, I know first hand how important it is to foster enthusiasm and commitment to public service in young people.

  Unfortunately, recent legislative actions by Republicans are threatening to limit young people's ability to participate in the electoral process. While Republican governors and legislatures across the country attempt to hinder young people from voting, the Democratic Party will continue fighting to expand the electorate and make sure young voters are able to exercise their Constitutional right to vote.

• House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi also issued a statement:
  

  “Forty years ago, our nation opened the doors of democracy to millions of Americans. By extending the right to vote – the most fundamental right of a citizen in a democratic society – to Americans age 18 and older, we offered our youth the responsibility and opportunity to participate; we placed the power of the ballot in their hands, empowering generations of students and young people to determine their own destiny.

  “The 26th amendment ensured that the leaders of tomorrow – our future workers and business owners, entrepreneurs and public servants – recognize that elections are as much about them as their parents and grandparents. Whether it’s making health care more affordable; investing in schools and student aid; creating jobs or balancing the budget – Americans of all ages have a stake in the decisions of their elected representatives.

  “Four decades after the ratification of the 26th amendment, the fight for voting rights goes on. Today, state legislatures across the country are pushing new legislation that threatens to disenfranchise millions of voters, especially students and minority communities. These actions contradict our core democratic principles and betray our values as a people.

  “Democrats will stand firm for the basic right of every American to vote and choose their own leaders. We will uphold the central promise of the 26th amendment: that ‘the right of citizens of the United States…to vote shall not be denied or abridged.’”

Update: Other statements have come in, so I am posting those, as well as links to two pieces that connect the anniversary with Republican-led efforts to disenfranchise young voters today.

• A proclamation from President Barack Obama:
  

  Forty years ago, the 26th Amendment to the United States Constitution took effect, lowering the universal voting age in America from 21 years to 18 years. Millions of young Americans were extended the right to vote, empowering more young people than ever before to help shape our country. On this anniversary, we remember the commitment of all those who fought for the right to vote and celebrate the contributions of young adults to our Nation.

  The right to vote has been secured by generations of leaders over our history, from the women's groups of the early 20th century to the civil rights activists of the 1960s. For young people, the movement to lower America's voting age took years of hard work and tough advocacy to make the dream a reality. Yet, once proposed in Congress in 1971, the 26th Amendment was ratified in the shortest time span of any Constitutional Amendment in American history.

  In the midst of the Vietnam War, our Nation bestowed upon our young people the ability to change the status quo and entrusted them with a new voice in government. Today, young adults across America continue to exercise this enormous responsibility of citizenship. Countless young people are involved in the political process, dedicated to ensuring their voices are heard.

  Ideas from young Americans are important to my Administration, and they will help shape the future of our Nation. We are committed to supporting and developing young leaders from all beliefs and backgrounds, and from urban and rural communities alike. This year, I launched "100 Youth Roundtables," an initiative to facilitate substantive dialogue between my Administration and young Americans. We hosted a Young Entrepreneur Summit to listen to budding entrepreneurs and better assess their needs. And this summer, we are beginning a "How to Make Change" series for young Americans from all walks of life who are seeking change in their communities and our world.

  Young adults have been a driving force for change in the last century, bringing new ideas and high hopes to our national dialogue. Today, we remember the efforts of those who fought for their seat at the table, and we encourage coming generations to claim their place in our democracy.

  NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim July 1, 2011, as the 40th Anniversary of the 26th Amendment. I call upon all Americans to participate in ceremonies and activities that honor young Americans, and those who have fought for freedom and justice in our country.

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of July, in the year of our Lord two thousand eleven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.

  BARACK OBAMA

• From Rod Snyder, President of the Young Democrats of America:
  

  "Today the Young Democrats of America (YDA) joins all Americans in celebrating the 40th anniversary of the ratification of the 26th amendment to the Constitution, which extended the right to vote to citizens 18 years of age and older.

  "The ratification of the 26th amendment was an important moment in our nation’s history where we recognized the inconsistency of asking young Americans to fight in wars on foreign shores while not affording the basic right to participate in our democracy at home.

  "Over the past forty years, young people have helped shape the future of our nation, with youth participation notably on the rise during the past decade. YDA and other youth organizations have played an important role in ensuring that young Americans have the opportunity influence the political process.

  "Yet on the anniversary of this important step forward, voting rights are facing calculated attacks by Republican state lawmakers across the country. GOP-controlled legislatures are seeking to systematically erect barriers to the democratic process and deny millions of Americans the right to vote.

  "Make no mistake, Republicans are attempting to disenfranchise groups of voters that they have failed to win over in the ballot box, including students and minority communities. Our democracy cannot survive if politicians are permitted to select their voters rather than voters selecting their leaders. Our most fundamental constitutional rights should never be subject to partisan politics.

  "These recent Republican attacks are a reminder that we cannot take voting rights for granted. YDA applauds the group of U.S. Senators led by Michael Bennet (D-CO) who are urging the Department of Justice to review new restrictive voting laws at the state level."

• The League's Executive Director Biko Baker has a piece in The Hill - "The War on Voting Weakens Youth Power"
• Campus Progress is up with a piece warning us to enjoy the 26th Amendment while it lasts.

CIRCLE has a post today exploring the difference in reasons college youth and non-college youth give for not voting.

Peter Levine notes that data about voting is notoriously suspect given its ambiguity and the potential for people to withhold their actual behavior.

However, we do see that college-attending non-voters attribute their lack of participation to not being home on Election Day, while their non-college-attending, non-voting peers cite a distrust that their vote will carry any impact.

Of course, the question I am left with is how do we get students to believe in the power of their vote, to commit to voting somewhere whether that's at home or at college, and to actually do the deed. In a post on Monday articulating a ten point plan for renewal, Levine puts forth a vision for how we might start this work.

4. Prepare a new generation of active and responsible citizens. People form attitudes and habits related to civil society when they are young and keep them for the rest of their lives. But civic education has been cut in most school systems, and there are too few opportunities for young people to learn through service and extracurricular activities. Congress should revive the small Learn & Serve America program that provides competitive grants for service-learning, eliminated in 2011 after 21 years of work. Congress should also restore funding for civic education in schools (eliminated in 2011), but direct the funds to organizations that test or expand innovative educational methods and rigorously evaluate their impact. Meanwhile, the Office of Civic Education within the U.S. Department of Education should be elevated from its current low status (within the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools) and given a leadership role in coordinating the civic education functions of all federal agencies, including the National Parks Service, the national endowment for the humanities and the arts, the Defense Department, and Homeland Security.

Restoring Learn & Serve America moves us in the right direction, while increasing the power and visibility of the Office of Civic Education sends a message that civic education isn't a joke. We need these steps, combined with many others, to build a foundation for our education system that cultivates civic responsibility among students. The problems in our society are large enough that we need as many people as possible--especially young people-- to be on board and willing to make tough decisions and worthy contributions toward our future.

CIRCLE has recalculated its estimation of youth turnout following reweighted exit poll data from Edison Research.

The original post-election estimation of youth turnout was 20-21% of registered 18-29 voters for a vote share of 11% of the electorate. The new reweighted estimation is 22.8% of young voters with a 12% vote share. Youth turnout in 2010 is in the same range as turnout from the 2006 midterm elections.

Ben Goddard at The Hill comments on the current generation gap in politics. His discussion reminds us of the coalition-based, yet impatient methodology Millennials use to solve problems.

They have not generally gotten involved with candidates or issues because “Millennials perceive politics as a polarized debate with no options for compromise or nuance,” in the words of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. They don’t want to be limited by political party affiliation. They care about issues important to their “community” and will work with anyone who can get something done.

But [Millennials] are impatient. That is why so many seemed to drift away from President Barack Obama as the healthcare debate dragged on and partisanship in Washington got out of hand. For nearly a year and a half their parents’ and grandparents’ generations argued over what — to many — seemed like petty details. They tuned out not because they didn’t care but because they were bored.

Now that there actually is a healthcare bill, it will be fascinating to see if they are willing to re-engage. The Obama campaign showed how to communicate with and motivate this generation in 2008. Re-engaging them will be crucial to the president’s reelection and, arguably, to Democrats’ congressional future. There are 44 million Millennials eligible to vote, which is about 20 percent of the electorate. Most of them are independents — at least in their voting patterns. Recent polls show independents drifting away from the Republican Party as a result of the angry debate in Washington. The Millennials could lead that bloc of voters back into the Obama/Democrat fold if the president can show that together, they are making a difference. Millennials make up a big community confident in their ability to make change and willing to get involved if the president and congressional Democrats send them the right pithy message: Yes, we did.

Goddard's assessment is the first I have encountered that accurately captures the Millennials' move away from Democrats this year. It's not that they are becoming conservative. It's that they are looking at an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress -- a Congress they have more of a stake in than any other in recent history, given their turnout rate in 2006 and 2008 -- and seeing few issues of theirs discussed in a substantive manner. When the focus is on bitter, personal debates -- personality rather than the problem itself -- any notion that representatives and senators might be interested in problem-solving is out the door.

And now we get to why that impacts our country. The obvious answer is rooted in that generational pact seen in American society for centuries -- that each generation is responsible for ensuring that the torch it passes to a new generation burns brighter. We know that the life-long adoption of civic habits like voting are dependent on youth engagement. The more a young person votes when he or she is first eligible, the more he/she will continue to vote later in life. Furthermore, from a large-D Democratic perspective, given the obvious electoral benefits of adding a large, engaged, liberal generation to the voting rolls, the Democrats should be thinking of everything they can do to appeal to young people. In V.O. Key's terms, the PIG (Party-in-Government) must mind the PIE (Party-in-Electorate), designing ways to better communicate the process so that it doesn't interfere with young voters' appreciation of the policy output. Easier said than done, but it must be done.

Bottom line: if we fail to engage a group of young people who are interested in being engaged, we're not only letting them down, we're letting our nation down.

CIRCLE's new working paper, Spiral of Rebellion: Conflict Seeking of Democratic Adolescents in Republican Counties, "shows a
striking pattern of Democratic youth thriving in political expression and debate when exposed to Republican ideological climates."

The study compares Democratic adolescents to Republican adolescents, and further breaks down the comparison into those living in Democratic, balanced, and Red counties. They found that Democratic youth were more politically expressive than Republican youth, and that Democratic youth in Republican areas were more expressive than those living in blue or balanced areas.

A couple findings of note:

When asked what they perceived to be the greatest influence on their political beliefs, "the largest difference occurs with religion, particularly at post-election, when 24.8% of Republicans identified religion as the greatest influence compared with 1.5% for Democrats."

There are large differences between factors in partisan identity strength (PID) among Republican and Democratic youth:

At T2 (Post-Election), knowledge becomes the sole correlate of Republican ID strength. PID strength among Democrats correlates with more indicators of political involvement: talking with friends, initiating talk, and comprehension at T1 (Pre-Election), and testing out opinions, listening to opponents, classroom discussion, confronting parents, knowledge, and news attention at T2. Thus, we might say that a firm allegiance to the Republican Party is manifest in knowledge during adolescence, while Democratic ID is expressed more holistically, in political cognition but also interpersonal communication.

By knowledge, they are referring to perceived knowledge of the political parties.

An intriguing implication is that dynamics of formative partisan identity resonate with the philosophical tension between progressive and conservative visions of “the good citizen.” Progressive ideology celebrates the inter-subjectivity of civic and political engagement, in conceptions such as the public sphere, social capital, deliberative democracy, and communitarianism (Murphy, 2004). In conservative visions of the ideal citizen, civic virtue springs from the pursuit of self-interest and the guarding of individual autonomy (Murphy, 2003; Westheimer, 2004).

From the results of the study, the authors recommend the following:

In more pragmatic terms, results from this study suggest a need for peer-centered discussion about topical issues in U.S. social studies curricula. We have documented a significant gap in interpersonal political engagement between liberal and conservative youth. A strikingly consistent pattern of deliberative deficits appeared among Republican youth. However, recent research shows that schools can promote equality of civic and political development by allowing students to wrestle with contentious issues (Hess, 2004; Hess & Ganzler, 2007). Unfortunately, conflict-avoidant instincts of school boards, teachers, and parents preclude this kind of instruction in many communities (McDevitt & Caton-Rosser, 2009). Still, an argument put forth by Hibbing and Theiss-Morse in 1996 still resonates. Civics is not enough. If we can tolerate and even promote agonistic expression in classrooms, more youth would benefit from deliberative development.

The October 2009 CIRCLE report has been released about college students and voting. Here are some of the findings:

• Students can be diligent voters with high turnout, both by absentee ballot and in local voting.
• Students who can vote in their home state or their college state are strongly influenced in that choice by the closeness of the presidential election.
• Even in the internet era, in-person voter drives reach many students who would not otherwise vote.

The report was based on a peer-to-peer voter drive done at Northwestern University during the 2008 election. During this voting drive, campaigners encouraged students from Presidential swing states to register back home as opposed to in Illinois. Students contacted by the campaign chose to register back home and vote absentee instead of locally by an 8:1 ratio. Of the students that registered through the drive, 80% voted.

I have mixed feelings about encouraging students to vote absentee over locally. For most students, the political decisions that are going to have the greatest effect on their lives will be made at the state and local level in their college district. State legislatures decide university funding, and that in turn determines tuition increases. City ordinances can have a big effect on students. Back when I represented students at Arizona State a number of student-opposed measures were passed through the Tempe City Council.

Encouraging students to vote back home in a swing state makes sense to the Presidential campaign, but it has it's cost in other political areas. I'm also concerned that this sends a message that the only really important election is the Presidential one every four years and discourages students from building the habit of voting locally and being an active and engaged part of the civic community.

The drive at Northwestern University, analyzed here, offered each student a choice of registering for local voting in Illinois (the college state) or for absentee voting in their home state. Absentee voting was encouraged for students from swing states. Students from non-swing states were mildly encouraged to vote in Illinois. Students from swing states showed a dramatic preference for absentee voting in their home state, over local voting in Illinois, by an 8:1 ratio. Even students from other non-swing states preferred absentee voting in their home state over local voting in Illinois by a 2:1 ratio.

What is troubling is that the students that were contacted that were not from swing states were only mildly encouraged to register locally. Once again this appears to be a situation where the campaign only cares about the Presidential election and ignores the importance of local races. While at the Presidential level it makes sense for people to vote in swing states, it doesn't make sense to not strongly encourage students to register locally when neither state is highly contested.

On the bright side, the campaign showed that students are reliable voters when engaged by campaigns, most effectively through peer-to-peer contact. It also showed that absentee voting drives are possible and can be effective.

A troubling finding of the report is that absentee voting is error-prone:

16% of applicants for absentee voting were not enabled to vote. In 1/3 of these cases, an error was made by the applicant, and in 2/3 of the cases the error was made by county boards of elections. Most errors by applicants could be prevented by adding minor annotations to the application forms.

However, even with the errors the success rate of the campaign was extremely high.

There is a lot of good information in the report, as well as an evaluation of the methods used by the absentee voter drive campaign. It's definitely a must read for people involved in organizing college students.

I'll end with a question for the comments: what are your thoughts on where students should be encouraged to register and vote?

20-29 year olds with no college experience are half as likely to volunteer as those in the same age group who do attend college, according to a report by CIRCLE and jointly released with the National Conference on Citizenship.

Conducted by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) at Tufts University’s Tisch College and released jointly with the National Conference on Citizenship, the report found that 25 percent of young adults who have attended college volunteered in 2007 while only 11 percent of those with no college experience volunteered. This gap has remained constant since 2002.

Peter Levine, director of CIRCLE, said young people without college experience are underutilized and underestimated: “Studies show all young people want to get involved in their communities, and lack of college experience should not be the deciding factor,” Levine said. “Schools, communities and government need to create more opportunities for all young people, not just the ones with a college education. Volunteering and participation in civic life is an important part of society, and no one should be excluded from an opportunity to do so.”

This activism gap between those youth attending college and non-college youth is something we've written about before here, and as you can see, it continues to exist. While colleges should be doing all they can to develop civic skills in their students, there should also be more focus on those not in college.

Some more information:

Eight in 10 young volunteers became involved by approaching the organization or being asked to become involved. Youth with college experience were more likely to have started volunteering through a pre-existing connection with that organization (33 percent) compared with 21 percent of non-college youth. Of those who started volunteering in some other way, youth without college experience were more likely to have started volunteering through a relative than college youth.

When asked for which type of organization they volunteered, “religious” organizations were the top choice for young people regardless of college experience. Most spend their time mentoring youth and teaching/tutoring, although young people with college experience were slightly more likely to provide professional or management assistance including serving on a board or committee.

Check out CIRCLE's fact sheet from the release here.

This month CIRCLE released a report on the effects of state voter registration laws on young voter turnout.

The report shows that Election Day Registration (EDR) had the greatest effect in the November 2008 election in increasing youth turnout.

Election Day registration laws (EDR) allow voters to avoid the inconvenience and pressure of registration deadlines. As of 2008, nine states (Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Wyoming) allow voters to register at the polls on Election Day. In a 2003 study about the 2000 Presidential Election, it was found that turnout was, on average, 14 percentage points higher among 18- to 24-year-old youth in states that had EDR. EDR may also decrease the disparity between younger and older voters. Before implementing EDR, Idaho, New Hampshire, and Wyoming were among the worst states in terms of turnout inequality between younger and older Americans. After EDR laws took effect, all three states decreased this gap dramatically. Wyoming, for example, moved from 39th place to the 7th smallest turnout gap.

What is so impressive is how dramatic the effect of EDR was in increasing turnout (emphasis added):

After controlling for effects of educational attainment, gender, marital status, age, race, and ethnicity, young people whose home state implemented EDR were 41% more likely to vote in the November 2008 election than those who did not have residence in the EDR states.

The report also shows that no-excuse absentee voting/vote by mail most likely had a strong effect, 23% of young voters voted absentee, however CIRCLE was "not able to estimate how the use of this strategy impacts state-by-state turnout since many young people, such as college students, live outside of their home state." In-person absentee voting was appeared to be a convenience to young voters who were already planning to vote, but CIRCLE does not believe that its availability turned young voters out that were not already determined to vote.

Extended polling hours resulted in an increase in the turnout of young workers and part-time students, but did not seem to have much of an effect on full-time students.

The general theme of the report is one that we often discuss in the youth political community: that lowering the barriers to voting will increase turnout. Youth organizations should be working with state legislators to reform their elections processes and enact some or all of the policies mentioned in the report, as well as others, such as online registration and permanent vote-by-mail.

Yesterday CIRCLE released their analysis of the 2008 Census Data, and they have revised their estimates on youth vote turnout. Here's the toplines:

• Overall youth turnout (18 - 29) was revised from an estimated 52 - 53% (based on exit polling data) down to 51.1%. This is still the third highest youth turnout since 18 year-olds were granted the right to vote:

• 22.4 million young Americans voted in November, 2 million more than in 2004.
• Turnout increase 2 percentage points over the 2004 turnout (49%) and 11 points over 2000 turnout levels (40%). It's also worth noting that young voters were the only age demographic to increase their turnout over 2004 levels.
• Turnout among young African Americans was the highest since 1972. 58.2% of young African Americans voted - the highest turnout for any racial/ethnic demographic since 1972.

• Finally, unlike every other state, youth turnout was higher in DC than turnout among voters over 30.

That's the good news, but it wasn't all roses. While the overall youth vote is continuing to trend towards higher and higher rates of participation, that participation is not evenly distributed throughout the youth population. Huge disparities in turnout still exist - particularly when it comes to educational attainment.

• Voter turnout among young people without college experience was at only 36% compared to 62% for those with some college experience.
• The turnout gap between men and women continued to widen in 2008. 54.9% of young women voted in November, compared to just 47.2% of young men.

So good news overall, but still a ways to go in some areas. We need to work on closing the gender and educational gaps in voter turnout, as well as work on increasing down-ballot participation. Part of that is voter registration reform, and part of it needs to be a greater commitment of resources towards registering and GOTVing these demographics.

Youth voting was up in 2008, but volunteering was down in 2007 ('08 data will be available later this year). Yet, it's not all bad news, as Peter Levine notes, "They're still volunteering at higher rates than their parents did." Additionally, some of us - depending on when your parents were born - are voting at higher rates, too. (So, stop calling Millennials 'lazy'.)

This news of a drop in high school volunteering may come as a surprise, especially as other stories report increasing service in 2009, which is partly due to the flagging economy and the growing number of under- and unemployed young Americans. CIRCLE's research uses data from the Current Population Survey, the largest public data set gauging the country's volunteerism, which is fielded annually in September. So, 2009 volunteer data still has some time to be recorded, and it's likely (when the data is released in 2010) given recent anecdotal evidence, and the signing of the GIVE/Serve America Act last Tuesday, that data will confirm a rise in volunteering this year.

While the AP story focused on 16-18 year olds, the overall pictures of youth volunteering has changed somewhat, too.

The data for 2007 show some decline in volunteering among young people, particularly high school students and college freshmen. The rate of volunteering for 16-to-18 year-olds peaked in 2005, at 33%, but has since declined by six percentage points. Traditionally, the 16-to-18 year-old cluster volunteered at a slightly higher rate than other age groups, but in 2007, people 25 or older volunteered at a slightly higher rate than 16-to-18 year-olds. The volunteer rate for the population aged 25 years and older has changed very little (2% or less) since 2002, and was 28% in 2007. (PDF)

Some trends did not change. The plurality (21%) of young volunteers got involved through religious organizations, but that varies by location, naturally.

While many factors are related to volunteering rates, perhaps the most notable feature of Salt Lake City volunteers is their affiliation with religious organizations...about half of 19-to-24 year-old SLC volunteers did [sic] performed their services at or though religious organizations. This is especially notable in contrast to their peers in the Boston area, where only 21% of volunteers donated their time at religious organizations.