Elections

Like a lot of people who work somewhere in the general orbit of politics, I often find myself playing the role of low-budget pundit with friends and acquaintances.

"How's the election looking?" they ask. "Who's going to be the running mate?" "What big October surprises do we have in store?"

Honestly I kind of suck at punditry. Answering damn near every question with "who the hell knows" probably won't get you invited back as a talking head on CNN, and a careful analysis of the possibilities doesn't really seem to thrill a party crowd gathered around the punch bowl.

I'm ok with that. Anyone who claims to have all the answers is probably as full of it as the TV pundits anyway.

But there is one question that I get asked that really ticks me off -- not because it's a bad question, but because I don't have a good answer.

That question: "What else can I do?"

I know tons of people, of all ages, who really care about the outcome of this election, and who want to "help." But they don't really know how.

For young people who can afford to do it, there are definitely some jump-in-with-both-feet options, like volunteering or working full time for a campaign, or hooking up with the League of Young Voters (where I work), or taking a trip with Swing Semester, or getting involved with one of the great "young progressive" organizations on the right column of this website.

But when it comes to young people who need to work full time, or people in my parents and grandparents generation, or even my peers in their 30's or 40's, the options thin out a little bit.

Everyone knows they can donate money. That's a good thing to do, and it's important. But it's only sorta satisfying, and reduces a person's potential talent and energy to all the creativity and skill of having a credit card.

Sure, I could tell people to volunteer at a local campaign office. That's definitely important. Sometimes that can even be fun or satisfying. And sometimes it stinks.

I could tell them to get out there and make phone calls or knock on doors. That can be enjoyable sometimes, when you're not feeling apologetic being the guy on the other end of those phone calls and front porch visits we all "love" so much. After trying it once, plenty of people have no interest in a return engagement.

Donating, stuffing envelopes, phone banking, or knocking doors. Are those really the best ways we can offer people to engage?

The truth is, the way most election work is done these days is shockingly inefficient. The amount of time and money that campaigns end up spending in ineffective ways is staggering. We have to play the game because it's the best option we've got right now. But if you step back and summon a little perspective about the way voters are identified and turned out, you quickly figure out that we're still just emerging from the prehistoric age here.

There has to be a better way. I've been thinking about it and I've got some ideas about how we might be able to step back a bit, think outside the box, and figure out how to use the massive well of talent and energy that's out there from people of all ages.

I hope other people are hard at work at the same task. There's a lot of powerful passion, energy, and skill out there to be tapped, and we're only just at the beginning of learning how to do it. Holler if you're down to help, and let's get to it.

--------------------
Sam Dorman is the Managing Director of the League of Young Voters

UPDATE: Also... a quick fact from our friend Kat: 18-20 year olds didn't have the right to vote until 1972. So the excerpt ""The Census Bureau’s historical time series shows that the 18-to-24 vote peaked at 50.9 percent in 1964, 50.4 percent in 1968, and 49.6 percent in 1972" is especially funny.

David Hill, a reporter for The Hill and republican pollster, attacked young voters and their enthusiasm today by directly targeting Heather Smith, executive Director of Rock the Vote. His argument is illogical, insubstantial, poorly researched, and dishonest.

Lets begin:

"Campaigners must set aside normative wishes about kids voting and be realistic about the likelihood of that happening. Regrettably, youth vote boosters like Heather induce too many candidates and campaigns to place too much emphasis and hope on that unreliable slice of the electorate. If Barack Obama wants to build his entire campaign on exciting the youth vote, then as a Republican I hope he does exactly that, because it will lead to his defeat. The hard numbers don’t lie."

Heather Smith advocates getting out the vote for young people and encourages candidates to talk to young voters. She does not say that young voters will win a candidate an election or that they should only talk to young voters.

But rather, in a political world where candidates and campaigns do absolutely no communication with young voters, making that contact and building those relationships CAN make or break a campaign.

Hill is right about one thing. Numbers don't lie. Youth outreach in conjunction with other efforts can and has made a difference. See some REAL numbers here, here, here, here, here, and here's a nice fact sheet with date for even more info.

No one in the youth movement is saying or would say that only targeting young people is the way to win an election. In fact I think Jane Flemming has articulated on here before a clarification about that misnomer.

Next:

"but the more compelling number may be that 58.1 percent of the entire 18- to 24-year-old cohort didn’t vote. That doubles non-voting among 65- to 74-year-olds, only 29.2 percent of whom didn’t vote."

Its true. And if you'd expand the numbers to reflect the two voting blocks in a more even way say compare 18-29 year olds vs. 65-77 year olds then you'd be looking at ten years in each voting block. To take folks 18-24 (7 years) and compare it to 65-74 (10 years) disproportionately skews the data to fit his thesis.

What is more substantial is this table here:

Hill can talk about seniors all he wants. Its great that seniors turn out to the polls and work hard to vote. It is, however, significantly easier for them to vote then it is for younger people as today's Dallas Morning News reports:

"Despite the high voter interest, many students also were turned away – for showing up at the wrong precinct, forgetting identification cards and failing to register in time."

First, young people are not as settled as seniors (who often live in the same house they die in). Young people are just starting out, they move around from college, to internships, to new homes, new apartments, school, and other places. With Election Day Registration we can level the playing field and make it easier for young people who are too often disenfranchised.

Secondly, there is an obscene amount of outreach to seniors. In fact, seniors have their own nationally recognized subsidized organization that spends millions on lobbying each year for their specific age block. Young people don't have that. They have Heather Smith and the hundreds of young people working tirelessly for little money all to combat negative articles like David Hill's.

If we passed Election Day Registration in each state and we had even half of the outreach that seniors have 18-29 year olds would run this country. Instead we have little outreach and only 7 states offer EDR. Even with that, we have an overwhelming number of people voting this year with the potential for more.

The rest of the article throws more stats at you that don't make sense because they only look at 18-24 year olds. He finally claims that even at its height

"The Census Bureau’s historical time series shows that the 18-to-24 vote peaked at 50.9 percent in 1964, 50.4 percent in 1968, and 49.6 percent in 1972

By that same token, since in 2004 American turnout peaked at 60% a record turnout for the entire country, that we just shouldn't connect with any of those other voters that are registered because.... they don't matter. Right.... that makes SO much sense.

Amber Goodwin who serves on the DNC Youth Advisory Council, the NAACP Youth and College Branch, the YDA Minority Caucus, and tons of others wrote a letter to the editor that we hope they have the guts to publish in response to Hill's piece. Among the facts and figures, from the the recent primary states, Amber says this:

"Maybe Mr. Hill slept through the results of the caucuses from last night, or somehow misplaced his newspaper that showed the historic youth turnout in out state of Texas. Yes, I get it; the "Obama Factor" is huge. I am now an Obama delegate to the Senate Convention and am proud to support his campaign. One of the reasons that his campaign has been very successful is what youth advocates have been saying for years: campaigns must target young people.

Obama's campaign started from the beginning by actually talking to young people, targeting young people and having conversations with us about our issues, many of which resonate across race, gender, age and even party lines. The 2008 presidential cycle is the first time that we have seen skilled National Youth Directors as integral staff for all of the major Democratic candidates."

We think that perhaps Mr. Hill is just a little Republican pollster that is seeing the numbers and is worried. The fact is that we are making huge waves and both parties are scrambling to understand what is going on and how to capture us. As a result we are in large enough numbers that we impact policies and campaigns by serving as a compliment to existing outreach.

For Hill, supposedly a respected numbers guy, to try and come up with his own numbers and only quote data that doesn't match up is simply bad journalism. I think people are smarter than that.

While I was in hibernation, we had an election. Who knew.

We've talked in the past about the Long March, the rate at which Millennials are expected to assume leadership roles at the municipal, state, and federal level. Last Tuesday saw some solid steps forward on that front, and I wanted to give a shout-out to what I'm sure are just a few noteworthy victories by young people (defined here as 35 and under, though I note ages when I can) in local, state, and federal elections.

From Martina Hone, who won a school board position in Falls Church Virginia, to Lisa Wong, the 28 year old (and first minority) mayor of Fitchburg, MA, and Luke Ravenstahl, the 27 year old Mayor of Pittsburgh, PA (that's right - mayor of one of the countirey's largest urban centers), young people had a successful year on the campaign trail. I've got reports about almost 30 victories by young people (all listed below), and I'm sure these are just a drop in the bucket. These victories are to say nothing of the many close races that young progressives lost, like Dayne Walling, who lost the mayoral race in Flint, Michigan to incumbent Don Williamson by just 581 votes. It was the closest race in 30 years, based in large part to Dayne's courting of young voters in Flint.

There's no national information available yet on young voter turnout, (though I'm sure that's coming), but from what I hear so far, it was a good off-year for young voters at the ballot box as well. In Missoula, Forward Montana helped swing the city council to progressives for the first time in years with its Candidates Gone Wild and Pink Bunnies campaigns, and The League is reporting that in Portland, Maine, all three of its endorsed candidates were elected, giving them their second major victory in 2007.

Before I get to the full list of winners, I want to say that even though running for office is intimidating, it's doable, even for someone in their early 20's. All of these victories prove it. Anyone looking to run (or even those winners who now need to think about how they will govern and, unfortunately, get reelected in just a few short years), there are many resources available to you. The Young Elected Officials Network will help anyone under 35 attain, hold and competently perform their duties in elected office. Started by Andrew Gillum, who was elected to the Tallahasse City Council at the age of 23, YEO teaches the basics, from reelection to learning the ropes of your new job, and provides a support network of peers to America's youngest representatives. Camp Wellstone also offers numerous trainings new elected officials and those looking to make their first run at public office.

I'd also recommend two books. For the nuts and bolts, check out How to Win a Local Election. It doesn't say jack about the internet, but it's great for learning the basic pitfalls and "must-dos" for running a municipal campaign. For inspiration, read How to Get Stupid White Men Out of Office, by The League. It's short on specifics, but has some inspiring stories about young people taking the initiative and winning local races.

You'll get the full winners list after the jump. Where possible, I've also noted what youth organizations they come from/are active in. I'm sure this list is far from complete. If you know anymore, please add them in the comments. Journalists occasionally stop by here, and this could be a great story. Let's make it as comprehensive a resource as possible.

Over the last four months I have been MIA from this site as I served as a Campaign Manager for a City Council candidate in Philadelphia, a task which sucked every last minute of my waking time (and some of my dream time too), but a task which ended last Tuesday when my candidate lost his bid to become the Democratic nominee for city council (my father ran, and lost, as well).

This was my first foray into candidate centered electoral politics, and it could well be my last. While I care deeply about getting good people elected to public office at all levels, there are things about working directly with a candidate that seem to leave a bad taste in the mouth of almost anyone willing to try it. At the very least I can say that I won’t work for a candidate that I don’t know exceptionally well, and trust completely. Given the amount of dedication and time you are asked for when you take on such a project; the financial, social, and familial sacrifices you are forced to make, I simply don’t think I’ll be going down that road again any time soon (unless Al Gore calls, then all bets are off).

That’s not to say that I didn’t enjoy myself, learn a ton, or meet lots and lots of amazing people and organizations, I most certainly did. But, more than anything, my little adventure into local politics reminded me of what I really want to be doing: building infrastructure for the future of our emerging progressive majority; working with/training/empowering young people to take control of their lives and their world; pushing issues and ideas that will make my city and our nation into a better, more friendly, place.

I’ll try to write some more about the last few months of my work in Philly, and the insane changes that seem to have started happening here during the election (including the emergence of my little brother’s local political blog—that I helped to build—into the center of online politics in the city and the Democratic nomination of a pretty amazing reformer for mayor), but for now I just wanted to say: “I’m baaaaack!”

Google Bomb after the jump. Read what this is all about.