Youth Vote

Herman Cain gave his own response to the State of the Union at the National Press Club where he talked about how grateful he is with the endorsement from Stephen Colbert because he wants to keep the "youth vote inspired" because

"they're not gonna go and watch the shows that some of us more mature people watch to find out what's going on in the race . . . they're watching The Stephen Colbert . . ."

As Stephen remarks:

"Well said The Herman Cains! The more mature people watch other things. But the more immature youth vote watches this show…"

Then, unfortunately, I realized the only reason I knew about this story was because I was watching The Colbert Report because I don't care about the Tea Party.... DAMN YOU HERMAN CAIN!

The fact is, this isn't about maturity, this is about connectivity. Young voters aren't going to pay attention to people that don't represent their issues or their values, even if the train wreck of their campaign is fascinating and hilarious. I encourage more Tea Party members to go on Colbert - at some point, however, they have to realize that he's just making fun of them thought, right?

Jon Huntsman, in campaigning for the Republican nomination for the presidency, is encountering a rough reality five months removed from the New Hampshire primary: voters don't know who he is. And if general voters don't know who he is, I'm guessing young voters aren't well aware of the former governor-turned presidential candidate either.

While Huntsman has some work to do with the general electorate, And maybe some his daughters are attempting to do their part in reaching out to young voters through Twitter.

On July 28, Huntsman's three oldest daughters started their own Twitter account. At the outset, the Twitter account was created based on the daughters' desire to share where they are and what they are doing with friends. But then they thought about other uses.

Abby Huntsman, 25, said she and her sisters came up with the idea on their own as a way to keep friends informed.

'All our friends are like, "Where are you? You’re always in different places and doing interesting things!"

'And we thought, "This is a great way to reach out to, not only our friends, but to the youth and to anybody interested in following the campaign",' she said.

[...]

Abby Huntsman said she’s not sure what role the @Jon2012girls account will play in the upcoming election, but she believes she and her sisters have a basic duty to their dad.

'I think our involvement is pretty simple. It’s just getting out there, getting people excited and getting them to know a little bit about my dad,' she said.

I'm not one to knock efforts to appeal to young voters or engage in social media, so kudos to the Huntsmans.

However, I think we need to remember that technology in 2008 campaigns and technology in 2012 campaigns are entirely different phenomena. So while simply "getting a Twitter or Facebook" might have been able to pass as some kind of appeal to youth in 2008 (even that is highly doubtful), doing that alone definitely won't work in 2012.

If the Huntsman daughters legitimately want to appeal to young voters, maybe they need to tell their dad to campaign and advocate for true pro-growth policies, strategies that create jobs and increase government revenues. That's what we want and need. That he definitely wouldn't get out of the GOP primary after spreading this message shows you just how far the Republican Party is from young voters' priorities.

Politico published an op-ed piece this morning examining both parties' use of younger messengers on television to attract the 35-60 crowd. Martin Frost, a former Democratic representative from Texas and the author, attempts to rationalize this.

Both parties know that the key electorate in the 2012 is voters between the ages of 35 and 60. Younger voters are likely to stay with President Barack Obama, but older voters are a battleground to be fought over on traditional issues like Social Security and Medicare.

It is these voters between 35 and 60, increasingly identifying as independents, who are expected to be the true battleground in both Obama’s re-election and the Democrats’ effort to re-take control of the House.

Emphasis is mine.

It's pretty simple: if the Democrats and the Obama campaign make similar assumptions about young voters and the campaign takes the youth vote for granted, the 35-60 year old vote won't matter.

Republicans just can't figure out what they want to do with young voters.

We see some momentum behind actually courting young people, which Sarah discusses in her most recent post. Conservative media outlets like Fox News, the National Review, and the Washington Examiner, are hot on Margaret Hoover's book (the great-granddaughter of Depression-inducing President Herbert Hoover), which argues that Millennials are sympathetic to the fundamental principles of conservatism and that the GOP should accordingly engage these young people. Sarah does a pretty good job of explaining why Hoover is misguided in her analysis, but the GOP establishment seems to be embracing her argument. And you know what? The civic engagement-enthusiast in me doesn't necessarily mind that; at least young people appear to be the target of some kind of outreach effort.

But while Hoover is feeling the love from conservative media, Republican officials across the country are doing everything they can to keep young people from exercising their rights as citizens. In the name of eradicating voting fraud (there are 44 one-millionths of one percent of votes impacted by voter fraud), these Republicans are actively intimidating and restricting the rights of the very same Millennials Hoover wants to attract to the Republican ranks.

The latest example? Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster, who is apparently clueless on election law.

Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster is claiming that college students who pay out-of-state tuition rates and vote in state are committing voter fraud.

At a press conference at the Maine State House, Webster gave the media a list of over 200 students -- their names redacted -- who paid out-of-state tuition rates but were registered to vote in the state.

[...]

...Webster provided absolutely zero evidence that the students -- the vast majority of whom were born in the late 80s and early 90s, based on Webster's list -- voted both in their home state and in Maine.

Webster doesn't understand that just because students are not originally from Maine does not mean that they aren't afforded the right to participate in the community where they live (provided they do not vote in their home state and in Maine). The Sun Journal, a Maine newspaper covering the story, describes it well.

According to Maine state law, students are eligible to register to vote in the municipality in which they attend school, as long as they have established residency there. There is not a period of time required for a person to establish residency. The University of Maine System has different guidelines to establish student residency. A student may only be granted in-state tuition if he or she has proven that she has established residency for reasons other than academic, regardless of the length of time that he or she has lived in Maine.

So yes, there are absolutely cases in which students, deemed as "out of state" by the University of Maine, would be legally and correctly registered to vote in Maine.

Again, all this is on top of other moves across the country to disenfranchise young people and minorities. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, for example, recently shepherded a law through the state legislature that would require young people to secure a photo ID in order to vote. And now he just announced the closing of 10 DMV bureaus, making it harder for young people to get those photo IDs. And it's not just a coincidence that most of these closures are happening in traditionally Democratic areas, while other DMV offices are seeing their hours extended by the governor.

Hoover might be persuading some of the Republican establishment that appealing to young voters is the trendy thing to do. But the GOP isn't about to persuade young people, who are seeing Mitt Romney-like waffling from the Grand Old Party. Are you interested in us or not? You can't have it both ways.

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.

This just in from our friends at Rock the Vote:

Today, a group of United States Senators, lead by Michael Bennet of Colorado urged the U.S. Department of Justice to carefully review the highly restrictive photo ID laws that have been passed – or are under consideration – in states across the country. This is a huge development, and we hope the DOJ will use its authority granted by the Voting Rights Act to protect those who would be disenfranchised.

[...]

Senator Bennet’s letter was signed by Majority Leader Harry Reid (NV) and U.S. Sens. Dick Durbin (IL), Chuck Schumer (NY), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Sherrod Brown (OH), Jeanne Shaheen (NH), Jeff Merkley (OR), Mark Begich (AK), Ben Cardin (MD), Mary Landrieu (LA), Patty Murray (WA), Ron Wyden (OR), Tom Harkin (IA), Herb Kohl (WI) and Tom Udall (NM).

Since January, photo ID laws have been enacted in Wisconsin, South Carolina, Alabama, Texas, Kansas and Tennessee. In Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire and North Carolina, Governors have vetoed bills that passed their state legislatures; those vetoes likely will be challenged with override votes in New Hampshire and North Carolina. Ohio and Pennsylvania are actively considering proposals, joining over 30 states that have introduced legislation to require only government-issued photo IDs at the polls.

Bennet's letter is provided below:

Dear Attorney General Holder:

We are writing to express our concerns about highly restrictive photo identification requirements under consideration or already signed into law in several states. These measures have the potential to block millions of eligible American voters without addressing any problem commensurate with this kind of restriction on voting rights. Studies have shown that as high as 11% of eligible voters nationwide do not have a government-issued ID. This percentage is higher for seniors, racial minorities, low-income voters and students. Voting is the foundation of our democracy, and we urge you to protect the voting rights of Americans by using the full power of the Department of Justice to review these voter identification laws and scrutinize their implementation.

Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act vests significant authority in the Department to review laws before they are implemented in covered jurisdictions. As you know, the burden of proof in this preclearance process is on those covered jurisdictions, which must be able to show that legal changes will not have a discriminatory impact on minority voters. New photo identification laws, for instance, must be subjected to the highest scrutiny as states justify these new barriers to participation. In Section 5 jurisdictions, whenever photo identification legislation is considered, the Department should closely monitor the legislative process to track any unlawful intent evinced by the proceedings.

Restrictive photo identification requirements are also being considered or have passed in states and jurisdictions that are not covered by Section 5. The Department should exercise vigilance in overseeing whether these laws are implemented in a way that discriminates against protected classes in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Additionally, federal civil rights law – 42 U.S.C. 1971(a)(2)- prohibits different standards, practices or procedures from being applied to individuals within a jurisdiction. We believe the Department should ensure that these photo identification laws do not violate this statute or other federal voting rights statutes.

Highly restrictive photo identification requirements at the polls can make it more difficult for well-intentioned voters to cast their ballots, and as far as America’s civil rights trajectory is concerned, that sort of effect takes America in the wrong direction. We urge you to exercise your authority to examine these laws so that voting rights are not jeopardized. We also request that you brief us on the efforts the Department is undertaking to ensure these new laws are implemented in accordance with the Voting Rights Act.

Thank you for your work protecting the civil rights of all Americans.

These new laws and proposals, largely from Republicans, target constituencies that are traditionally unfriendly to the GOP and that were, in fact, a large piece of the coalition voting Obama and Democrats into office in 2008. Rock the Vote has been great at covering this story and advocating for the voting rights of young voters in these states. We at Future Majority echo RTV's call for the Department of Justice to intervene and safeguard the voting rights of the poor, of minorities, and of young people.

A few weeks ago, Republican Iowa State Sen. Shawn Hamerlinck told five Iowa university student government representatives to "go home" and to not worry about the work the senate is doing in the state house.

Here's the video in case you need a reminder:

He rightfully faced a steady barrage of flak for that, with Campus Progress taking the lead on a petition effort that asked Hamerlinck to apologize for his condescending remarks.

For a week, Hamerlinck was silent. But last Thursday he was moved to write an op-ed piece that posed as an apology. Get a load of this crap:

After offering eight years of instruction at a local community college as well as being a politician, my goal has always been to keep students out of the political fray in order for them to form their own opinions and ideologies. With that objective in mind, perhaps I should have reworded my comments in such a manner as to avoid the political fray which a politician should know would follow from opposing political parties and the media. Let’s face it; this is political fodder at its best and I let my frustrations get the better of me. I was trying to keep students from being used and I fear they have become the very theater I hoped to shield them from. I apologize for not catching the motivation of the event sooner and wording my speech in a manner which allowed students to focus on their studies rather than playing into partisan politics at the Capitol.

In the end, my attempt to keep impressionable students out of the fray has instead ingested them into it, and for that I apologize. The betterment of Iowa is a great goal to have, and as statistics have shown, post-college graduation trends indicate that educated youth are our greatest export. I want students’ ultimate goal to be obtaining and retaining knowledge with the mindset of solving the problems in Iowa that my generation has been unable to do.

You know, I think the "apology" may be worse than Hamerlinck's original comments.

First, Hamerlinck continues to treat these college students as if they are 13. Legally, they are adults who, whether he likes it or not, have the constitutional right to participate in the political process. A little research alarmingly reveals that Hamerlinck, in addition to being an adjunct professor, works with the Iowa State University Scott County extension office as a "Youth Field Specialist." One of his responsibilities in this position also apparently forms a large piece of his childhood development; overseeing 4H must be a dream come true for Hamerlinck, given the 10 years he spent in the organization.

One might wonder what values 4H stands for, given that it is such a large part of Hamerlinck's life. Disengagement? Staying in the toy room while the adults yuk it up and play cards? Remaining content with learning how to tie one's shoes and play Gameboy?

From the 4H website:

Who We Are

4-H prepares young people to step up to the challenges in their community and the world. Using research-based programming around positive youth development, 4-H youth get the hands-on real world experience they need to become leaders.

Wow. You can't make this stuff up. Perhaps we should initiate a petition with 4H. Surely they don't want someone who believes that youth shouldn't get involved with their community to represent them?

Our communities are stunting themselves by not asking young people to learn about politics and civics firsthand. Research overwhelmingly shows that youth and college students learn best through active, collaborative, and engaged learning. Using this pedagogy actually prepares young citizens for the challenges inherent in a democracy. His apparent contempt for young people aside, what kind of good does Hamerlinck think he is doing by telling college students to sit down and shut up? Politics is everywhere, and in a healthy democracy, we need to have the experience to recognize systems of power and privilege and navigate them to pursue personal and social success.

You know that Saved By the Bell episode when Zack switches places with Mr. Belding and runs the school (Season 4, Episode 2 - check it out)? Maybe college students need to do the same with Sen. Hamerlinck. Yeah, students could teach the 4H program Hamerlinck administers, educating Hamerlinck on how to operate in "[a] world in which youth and adults learn, grow and work together as catalysts for positive change," otherwise known as the 4H vision statement.

In the end, officials like Hamerlinck will spurn young people at their peril. Somewhere, among your condescending speeches and phony apologies, you've forgotten that despite your party's efforts to the contrary, college students can and do vote. I trust that Iowa's young people will remember this when they cast their ballots on November 6, 2012.

Update: Of course, as a Facebook commenter suggests, we could also just get an engaged young person to run against him and kick him out. That would be great, too.

Here is some youth news to get your week started:

• Does the Millennial Generation need to produce more career politicians? This guy argues that the Anthony Weiner saga demonstrates that they do.
• You know that whole thing where Republicans try to keep young people from voting because they know they pursue policy that is at odds with what young people want/need? Well, apparently that happens in Canada too, with conservatives.
• Meanwhile, E.J. Dionne demonstrates how states are rigging the 2012 elections. Yes, folks, it is happening.
• Here is Firedoglake's recap of the Netroots Nation Young Voter Turnout Session. Check it out.
• Tracy Morgan decided that telling people that he'd kill his son if he ever acted gay might not be a good thing (in fact, it's disgusting). Looking to make amends, Morgan recently met with gay youth.
• High school and college student activists are uniting to protect ethnic studies courses in Tucson's high school curriculum. Gov. Jan Brewer recently signed House Bill 2281 into law, which "prohibits a school from including in its program of instruction any course or classes that are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnicity or promotes resentment towards a race or class of people."
• Have law school debt? Here are six ways to tackle it.
• Did anyone catch the U.S. Open this weekend? Rory McIlroy kicked some major ass. He's 22 and the youngest U.S. Open winner since Bobby Jones in 1923.
• MTV's True Life is set to explore some compelling issues in youth culture.
• Continuing our commentary on K-12 history and civic education, the Wall Street Journal recently interviewed popular historian David McCullough. McCullough expressed his own concerns regarding history education:
  

  "'We're raising young people who are, by and large, historically illiterate," David McCullough tells me on a recent afternoon in a quiet meeting room at the Boston Public Library. Having lectured at more than 100 colleges and universities over the past 25 years, he says, "I know how much these young people—even at the most esteemed institutions of higher learning—don't know." Slowly, he shakes his head in dismay. "It's shocking."

  [...]

  And teach history, he says—while tapping three fingers on the table between us—with "the lab technique." In other words, "give the student a problem to work on."

  "If I were teaching a class," he says, "I would tell my students, 'I want you to do a documentary on the building at the corner of Fifth Avenue and 42nd Street. Or I want to you to interview Farmer Jones or former sergeant Fred or whatever." He adds, "I have been feeling increasingly that history ought to be understood and taught to be considerably more than just politics and the military."

  What about textbooks? "I'd take one of those textbooks. I'd clip off all the numbers on the pages. I'd pull out three pages here, two pages there, five pages here—all the way through. I'd put them aside, mix them all up, and give them to you and three other students and say, 'Put it back in order and tell me what's missing.'" You'd know that book inside and out.

  Though the Wall Street Journal leans conservative and the story's writer is from the right-wing National Review, I was impressed with this interview and the relatively radical problem-based pedagogy McCullough suggests.

• Joan Walsh provides some interesting food for thought regarding the health of the Obama coalition as we move toward 2012. How might this coalition of disaffected Republicans, progressives, young voters, first time voters, labor, and African Americans and Latinos look this time around, and more importantly, will it be as powerful?
  

  "One big problem for Obama is that he assembled an unprecedented electoral coalition in 2008, but it wasn't a governing coalition. Progressives like to think of the themselves as the president's base, and it's partly true: Obama won thanks to an unrivaled turnout of young voters, first time voters, African Americans and Latinos; and an energetic labor effort. But they – we – weren't enough by ourselves. He also did well with independents and even some Republicans who were ashamed of what the Bush Cheney years did to their party. Predictably, a lot of those voters are going home now. I'm not sure they'll be entirely happy with what they'll find when they get there, or whether they'll discover the Tea Party ransacked the place. But they're uncomfortable with the way Obama used government to solve the banking crisis, stimulate the ailing economy and extend health insurance to more people. Of course, on the left he hasn't done enough on those fronts. When both sides are carping, the common wisdom goes, that means you must be doing something right. I'm not sure that's true when you're facing re-election."

• Rock the Vote President Heather Smith argues that state voting systems restrict young Americans, and demands improvement in The Hill. The youth movement can't talk about this enough!
• Colbert tackles the youth vote:

  "The GOP brand is about as popular with kids as an episode of "60 Minutes" hosted by a tube of Sensodyne."

  
  

  The Colbert Report
  Tags: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

• Does Facebook exacerbate our society's obsession with "Keeping up with the Jones'?" This article suggests that yes, it does, and the consequences could lead to depression.
• Meanwhile, here is a report suggesting that for all the widgets, tools, and gadgets meant to connect young people to various initiatives online, they won't improve political participation in young people.
• It's nothing new, but it probably remains to be the largest story impacting youth today: unemployment.
• Just in case you didn't see it yesterday, an interesting video from Lee Camp calling on the Millennial Generation to get out of the metaphorical basement.
• 20 Questions with Paul Ryan, including, "Do you think the GOP could win back young voters?"
• KPAX out of Montana discusses the state's #4 ranking on the Rock the Vote Scorecard.

You can find the Agenda here
Thursday

• Cultural Organizing, Youth and the Left
  THU, 06/16/2011 - 9:00AM, M100 H

  During election years, both the right and the left jockey for position to utilize pop culture and powerful artists and youth to help sway the discussion. In the past two elections, these efforts have become more and more localized. What is the relationship of the left to cultural organizers and what role does technology play in this conversation?
  PANELISTS: Molly Moore, Shamako Noble, Davey D

• Why Organizing around Community Colleges Matters
  THU, 06/16/2011 - 10:30AM, L100 H

  2010 marked the first year when more than 50 percent of undergraduates chose to attend two-year community colleges over traditional four-year colleges and universities. Because traditional youth organizing has largely centered on four-year colleges and universities, a large proportion of the potential progressive base is routinely overlooked and underrepresented in organizing, advocacy and movement-building. Community college students tend to live, work and play in the same community after completing their studies, so community colleges present huge opportunities for progressives to invest in long-term, place-based infrastructure-building. Imagine if every one of the 12 million community college students was armed with organizing and advocacy tools. Who are these students and why are they the backbone of the progressive movement? And why does this approach have the potential to be truly local and sustainable over the long-term?
  PANELISTS: Catalina Ruiz-Healy, Sujatha Jahagirdar, Ayofemi Kirby, Lena Carew, Toody Mafua'ofa

Friday

• Changing of the Guard: Youth Leading Democracy
  FRI, 06/17/2011 - 4:30PM, M100 FG

  The Middle East is blowing up, and pro-democracy youth are lighting the fuse. Youth are oftentimes pegged as perpetrators and purveyors of conflict and violence, but what goes less noticed is that youth are also the agents of positive social change around the world, particularly in peaceful pro-democracy movements. Social media is paving the way to make this possible. Youth took front and center stage in orchestrating the recent revolutions in Iran, Moldova and now thus far in Tunisia and Egypt. Is social media just a common platform linking these movements together? Or does this up and coming generation also share common democratic values that tie us together like never before? Chances are, it's a little bit of both.
  PANELISTS: Erin Mazursky, Lamees Dhaif, Trinh Nguyen, Mohammed Zouhair Ait Benhamou

• Friend of FM Christine Pelosi is leading off the Netroots Candidates Reception Friday June 17 at 5:45pm in Exhibition Hall. They will have one minute speeches from candidate running at all levels of service from ditch digger to Congress. Join DFA, WCF, and friends for cocktails and candidates.

Saturday

• 40 Under 40: Political Rising Stars
  SAT, 06/18/2011 - 3:00PM, M100 FG

  The game has changed. What is it like to be a young politician in the modern world? Meet the nation's political rising stars--a group savvy at utilizing Twitter, Facebook and the blogospehere to engage and educate young voters. Also, we'll talk about why you should avoid photo tags of your Everclear jello shots and eliminate email adresses like keggarboy69@gmail.com.
  PANELISTS: Representative Ellie Hill, Assemblyman Elliot Anderson, Senator Shannon Augare, Senator Kyrsten Sinema, Representative Jefferson Smith

• We need Netroots for the Troops volunteers Saturday June 18 at 1pm to help prep military CARE packages. please help! Click here to sign up.