College Students

A Washington Times editorial today by some guy named Ted Nugent, who apparently is an unknown expert on the Millennial generation, states that Millennials "are being led to their own slaughter and are blindly following along instead of fighting for their own survival."

Nugent is "stunned that they are not participating more in the Tea Party" and says Millennials "appear to be terminally stoned on apathy."

While I personally condemn violence of any kind, I am stunned that they are not participating more in the Tea Party, even rioting in the streets, clashing with the cops, conducting sit-ins at their colleges, interrupting political events and so on. Instead, the young people of this generation appear to be sound asleep, lethargic and seemingly unaware of how badly their generation is being royally abused by the deep-seated corruption and abuse of power in the government. They appear to be terminally stoned on apathy.

According to Nugent, students should be raging against the things that matter most, like the deficit and not kicking enough ass overseas (or staying at home if we aren't going to "implement total war and break the will of the enemy and all who harbor enemy actors. We have the weapons, warriors and technology to wreck everything.")

While he may be right that Millennials aren't flocking to the Tea Party and rioting in the streets protesting raising the debt ceiling, he is dead wrong about students not protesting at all.

A number of student protests have received national attention over the last couple of years: the California tuition protests, AZ SB 1070, Wisconsin and Ohio, the nationwide tuition protests. I decided to do a quick search on Google to see if it was truly that difficult to find other examples of recent student protests. Here are some of the results:

Students across USA protest over college funding, tuition
March 4, 2010

Dickinson College students protest school's handling of sex assaults
March 3, 2011

Cerritos College students protest proposed summer cuts
May 18, 2011

Half-naked college students protest coal
April 15, 2011

‘Students are not ATMs'; college students protest budget cuts
March 15, 2011

College students, staff protest budget cuts
April 13, 2011

College students protest higher fees
January 12, 2010

Three Arrested at Hunter College Protest
March 4, 2010

College students protest death penalty
March 27, 2010

College students protest PA budget cuts
March 30, 2011

'Ramen' protest highlights community college fee increases
March 2, 2011

California college students protest higher ed budget cuts
April 13, 2011

High school, college students to protest state education cuts
March 19, 2011

PSU students, State College mayor protest funding cuts
April 5, 2011

College students protest HOPE cuts outside State Capitol
March 2, 2011

Vt. college students protest planned cuts
March 16, 2011

Phoenix high school, college students organize Capitol protest
March 4, 2011

Michigan College Students Protest Higher Ed Cuts
March 24, 2011

College Students Protest Voter ID Bill
April 4, 2011

Allegheny College students protest education cuts
March 18, 2011

College students protest strip mine plans
September 14, 2010

Carthage College students protest anti-gay speaker
February 24, 2010

College students protest HB 176
February 24, 2011

Emory protesters arrested during student protest
April 26, 2011

TUSD on image control after student protest cancels meeting
April 27, 2011

Supporters rally for students arrested at SB 1070 protest
November 16, 2010

Thousands of students flock to Capitol to protest SB1070
April 22, 2010

Wisconsin Students Protest Governor's Attack on Unions
February 15, 2011

Zombie protesters lurch for voter, student rights
June 8, 2011

That's just from a quick Google search. There have been a lot more protests, sit-ins, and flash mobs than this. A conservative over at TownHall.com even referred to college students as hot-to-protest. Though it is true that I couldn't really find a lot about students protesting over the deficit. Perhaps this Nugent guy's problem with Millennials is that they don't protest the things he wants protested.

Photo by Steve Rhodes

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.

In my work with college students, one of the things I have observed is that anytime students hear the word "politics," they tend to exclusively link it with our national political discourse. With our national political dialogue and process failing to solve the large problems we face, we shouldn't be surprised that many students consequently develop a negative attitude toward politics and believe the political world is unproductive and difficult to access and navigate. Basically, trying to get through the large mess isn't worth the effort.

These observations have led me to question a few things.

First, isn't everything political? Politics isn't merely a game we play (the notion of someone "playing politics" is false and misleading); it's a reality that, if analyzed, reveals the power dynamics at work in our society that impact everything, from our national budget to whether a student or an administrator reads the morning announcements in a high school. If everything is political, we all bear responsibility as citizens to examine and critique not only the large-scale debates -- about job creation (for young people especially), education, climate change, voting rights, and social justice issues -- but also the smaller, seemingly insignificant and taken-for-granted aspects of our life. One does not need to be in, or thinking about, all things Washington, D.C. to be an activist or create positive change.

So, if we as young people adopt this view of politics -- that it's everywhere -- don't we produce more opportunities for engagement in politics, on a smaller, somewhat more manageable level? One challenge that young people and activists often face in working with local governments to create change is the community's adherence to tradition: "It's always been done this way, and who are you to drop in and suggest we change it?" Local elected officials have the least to gain personally from transforming the way they operate, as they believe they will be shouldering the blame for whatever might go wrong in the future. Yet, sadly -- and in a way, luckily -- the dire fiscal status of many local governments can serve as an opportunity to try new things. As the idea that moving forward in the same direction is no longer comforting to local officials, but actually a threat, innovation suddenly becomes more enticing.

In order to recognize and take advantage of these strategic opportunities, though, I propose that we need to begin with our local media, especially newspapers. Last week, a federal study reported that state and local reporting had severely weakened over the last few years, as news operations shifted their priorities elsewhere.

“In many communities, we now face a shortage of local, professional, accountability reporting,” said the study, which was ordered by the Federal Communications Commission and written by Steven Waldman, a former journalist for Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report. “The independent watchdog function that the Founding Fathers envisioned for journalism — going so far as to call it crucial to a healthy democracy — is in some cases at risk at the local level.”

On Thursday, Mr. Waldman is to issue a number of recommendations, none binding. Those include making actual in-the-field reporting a part of the curriculum at journalism schools, steering more government advertising money toward local instead of national media and changing the tax code to encourage donations to nonprofit media organizations.

Unfortunately, as the article goes on to note, many of today's local media outlets simply relay a politician's press release word for word, strengthening the government's power in its relationship with citizens, whether this official is a member of Congress, or a city council member. The lack of youth reporting in local media outfits is also troubling, and I believe this blame lays at the feet of young people, as well as these media operations. We need to wise up and understand that reporting on local news is just as civically critical as teaching in a challenging classroom environment or working in a low-income setting; simultaneously, local media also need to look for ways to shift funding to allow for a younger, fresher reporting staff, more familiar and comfortable with technology. Further, I would argue the copy-and-paste fest also leads to heightened use of Associated Press content rather than local reporting.

The problem with these tendencies is that citizens do not play on a level playing field with their representatives. Community members, lacking the "expertise" about local public affairs, self-select out of the political process because they receive little information about community issues, and the information they do receive is not properly vetted by the media.

If we as young people want to take advantage of these difficult economic times to create positive change, we must embrace our responsibility to critique, infiltrate, and strengthen our local media. We must be willing to voice our displeasure with its current product, pointing out where and how coverage could improve. We must accept strong, quality journalism as a critical component of active citizenship, incentivizing young people who choose to give back to their community through reporting on local current events. And we must beef up local journalism, exploring better ways to deliver local, scrutinized information to citizens to encourage their engagement (even if these local outlets are operated by larger conglomerates).

A more robust local media would enhance our efforts to beat back the tradition-minded crowd by allowing for the articulation of challenging questions and the examination of new ideas in our local politics. Politics is not an episodic game in which we can choose to participate or not participate. We are all engaging in politics whether we admit it or not. Improving the quality of our local media will make it easier to embrace the role we all have in our democracy and ever-present political world.

Update 2: Campus Progress has been working on this issue over the past day, creating an opportunity for us to directly e-mail Hamerlinck and demand an apology for his demeaning and condescending remarks toward young people.

You can visit the site here. Let him hear it!

Update: The Iowa State Daily has more on this incident:

...After the student representatives were finished, Hammerlinck [sic] gave a response. Hammerlinck told students to "go home" and that they were being used as props in the Democratic propaganda effort to increase state spending.

"We were shocked that he would say that," Knight said. "I was insulted, disappointed and upset that a public leader like himself doesn't like it when students [and] constituents, as well as taxpayers in the state, come and talk to their elected officials about what their votes would do to them. I don't understand why he would feel that way and much why he would say that."

[...]

Sen. Herman Quirmbach (D-Ames) was also present at the hearing.

"They talked very seriously about the quality of the programs, class sizes and [students] not leaving school in so much debt and [with] limitations on their career choices," Quirmbach said. "All the students did a bang-up job in articulating their views."

Quirmbach was shocked when he heard Hammerlink's remarks.

"It was unprofessional," Quirmbach said. "I hope to never see another display like that again."

Quirmbach believes that it was the students' duty to be there and speak as elected officials representing the students.

"It's not just disrespecting the students there, but all the students that they represented," Quirmbach said. "They were elected on behalf of the students to speak for all students."

Despite Hammerlinck's comments, the GSB will not discourage the student body from lobbying.

"Our plans aren't going to change just because one senator tells us to go home," Knight said. "If anything, it's going to strengthen our resolve to continue lobbying in Des Moines and continuing letting our representatives know both here and from our students' constituency districts what a seven percent cut to the regent institutions will do."

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You would think someone who held the title of "Youth Field Specialist" in the Iowa State University Scott County Extension office, who developed and oversaw programs such as 4-H, and who currently serves as a college professor, would want students to be engaged in their communities.

You'd be wrong.

On Tuesday, Republican Iowa State Sen. Shawn Hamerlinck told five student government leaders from Iowa universities to "go home" and to not worry about the work the senate is doing in the state house. Think that's exaggerated?

Sadly, it's not:

The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee reported on this in their blog, explaining that Hamerlinck's hissy fit wasn't the only condescension students faced that day from Republicans.

North Carolina GOP state Rep. Mike Stone called it “unconscionable” and said “anger completely shot through me” when he learned that elementary school students – including his own daughter – had written letters to state legislators as part of a school writing assignment. And who could forget New Hampshire GOP House Speaker Bill O’Brien’s stunning admission that his party’s discriminatory voter ID bill was intended specifically to disenfranchise students, because “they are kids voting liberal, voting their feelings, with no life experience”?

Yet, we find out from the Iowa Senate Democrats that these students who appeared--all student government officers from across the state--did so as part of an already organized set of open hearings on the budget.

The students were invited to the Capitol as part of “Open Budget Hearings.” The goal of the hearings was to hear feedback from Iowans impacted by the proposed budget cuts, including the effects of what some have described as the Republican’s “two-year starvation diet for Iowa schools.”

The students testifying before the committee included President of Northern Iowa Student Government Spencer Walrath, Iowa State University Student Body Vice President Jared Knight, University of Iowa Student Government President Elliot Higgins, Former President of Council of Graduate and Professional Students Lyndsay Harshamn, and current Vice President of the Executive Council of Graduate and Professional Students Michael Appel.

The students testified that the Republicans’ proposed budget cuts making higher education unaffordable for many students and their families, increase class sizes, and reduce course offerings.

So this is why Republicans are failing so horribly at attracting political support from this generation of young people. And this is also why it's only a matter of time until we turn the tables on sad, fearful politicians like Hamerlinck and tell them to go home.

In the meantime, you should remind Hamerlinck that because of his party, students have more than enough life experiences to understand the real-world implications of budgets.

Call him: (563) 843-3922

E-mail him: shawn.hamerlinck@legis.state.ia.us

Some interesting reads for you as we prepare to move into another week.

• With all the economic strife Millennials are experiencing these days, perhaps we need a National Youth Administration to help dig our way out?
• Democratic political strategist Donna Brazile outlines the extent to which Republicans plan to suppress votes in future elections.
• NPR explores how young people can improve their financial literacy; this article is one of a series of articles on the topic.
• Did you know? The largest number of American hate groups are located in Idaho and Mississippi.
• A Huffington Post piece discusses the importance of young people starting businesses and how we can enhance youth entrepreneurship in the future.
• Montana college students will be hit with a 10 percent tuition increase over two years. Why? State budget cuts.
• Allowing concealed guns on college campuses appeared to be sure to pass in Texas. However, some Democratic tactics appear to have dealt the bill a fatal blow.

Wednesday Rutgers University's John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development released a survey of college students (PDF) and some of the only numbers I have seen on youth "underemployment."

So many statistics today show data on the unemployment levels in the US which are based on those that are filing for unemployment. If you're still working your college job part time, or you don't qualify for unemployment, or your unemployment has run out - these numbers aren't counting you. This leads many to assume that the unemployment rate in the US is higher. Since the youth unemployment rate is almost double the national average it would only stand to reason that these more accurate numbers would also show the true unemployment level for youth to also be double.

According to Rutgers

"In order to better understand the American public’s attitudes about work, employers, and the government, and to suggest ways to improve workplace practices and policy, the Heldrich Center began conducting a series of nationwide surveys titled Work Trends. Since 1998, more than 20 surveys have polled employed and unemployed Americans on critical workforce issues. While prior Work Trends surveys had focused on a cross‐section of workers, the prolonged “Great Recession” prompted a closer examination of the experiences and opinions of unemployed workers. A new paper highlights the key findings from the Heldrich Center’s effort to capture the experiences of American workers during the worst labor market in a generation."

And highlight it does. According to the paper just over half of 2006-2010 college graduates are working full time. According to the chart below - 47% of 18-34 year olds are looking for full time work. (click to make bigger)

Nearly
 three 
in 
four 
(73%)
 Americans 
in 
a 
random
 sample
 of 
employed
 and 
unemployed
 said that they were impacted by the most recent Great Recession between 2007 and 2009. Whether it was them personally, a family member, or close friend, lost a job. The survey also says that the average starting salary for students graduating from four-year colleges in 2009 and 2010 was $27,000 - this is down from $30,000 for those who started entry level jobs in 2006 to 2008.

According to a piece in the NYTimes yesterday

"Among the members of the class of 2010, just 56 percent had held at least one job by this spring, when the survey was conducted. That compares with 90 percent of graduates from the classes of 2006 and 2007. (Some have gone for further education or opted out of the labor force, while many are still pounding the pavement.)

Even these figures understate the damage done to these workers’ careers. Many have taken jobs that do not make use of their skills; about only half of recent college graduates said that their first job required a college degree. . . . .

An analysis by The New York Times of Labor Department data about college graduates aged 25 to 34 found that the number of these workers employed in food service, restaurants and bars had risen 17 percent in 2009 from 2008, though the sample size was small. There were similar or bigger employment increases at gas stations and fuel dealers, food and alcohol stores, and taxi and limousine services.

This may be a waste of a college degree, but it also displaces the less-educated workers who would normally take these jobs. . . . "

Other Quick Stats from the Report

• Seven percent are unemployed, and seven percent are working part-time and looking for full-time work.
• Twenty-one percent are in graduate or professional schools.
• Among those working, up to one-third of the recent graduates said they accepted a job that paid less than they expected or was below their level of education or was not in their field of interest.
• Eighteen percent took a job without health benefits.
• The median starting pay for 2009 and 2010 graduates was 10 percent lower than in 2006 and 2007
• Half the graduates said they'd taken jobs that didn't require a bachelor's degree.
• The survey found that the male graduates were making more than the women. "There is more than a $5,000 difference in starting salaries, with a median for men of $33,150 compared to just $28,000 for women," the report said.
• Nearly one-third of the graduates said they had quit a job since graduation. Twelve percent said they'd been laid off. Twenty-three percent said they'd worked for temporary agencies or done seasonal work.

Some reading to get you through Friday and on to the weekend. Enjoy!

• Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert announced their Rally to Restore Sanity to America last night (October 30, 2010 in Washington D.C.). The event is now posted on Facebook.
• Related, Stewart and Colbert both enjoy unparalleled credibility among the 18-49 crowd, as illustrated in a news consumption survey released by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press:
  

  In terms of age, the “Colbert Report” (80%), “Daily Show” (74%) and New York Times (67%) have the biggest percentage of viewers and readers in the coveted 18-49-year-old demographic. Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly (35%) and Sean Hannity (33%) have the smallest.

• The National Conference on Citizenship and the Corporation for National and Community Service released the first Civic Health Assessment on Thursday, finding that millions of Americans are working together to solve problems. Read the full report here.
• Nick Troiano, a Georgetown student and an advocate for technology and open government, comments on the goings-on on the first day of the National Conference on Citizenship from DC.
• "Young people lead the way in volunteerism," writes Mikhail Zinshteyn from Campus Progress.
• Young people don't support the Tea Party movement, as surprising as that may be. (Please recognize my sarcasm.)
• What, exactly, is the Tea Party?
• NPR explores conflicting Millennials views: optimistic about their long-term ability to be better off than their parents, but worried about the myriad problems they face.
• Rock the Vote poll of 18-29 year olds: If you problem-solve, you'll be supported.
• Two college students from Colorado lobbied their senator, Sen. Michael Bennet (D), to end Don't Ask Don't Tell by recording themselves leaving him a voicemail on YouTube and posting it. Bennet recorded his own YouTube video in response. Watch here.
• What should Obama do? John Della Volpe, Director of Polling at Harvard's Institute of Politics, says engage Millennials. Now.

Two voter-purge programs have now been put to rest now that the state of Michigan has agreed to stop unlawfully disfranchising thousands of Michigan voters (many of these voters being college students). The agreement ends a legal battle commenced in September 2008 when organizations like the Advancement Project, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Michigan and the law firm of Pepper Hamilton LLP on behalf of the United States Student Association Foundation (USSAF), ACLU of Michigan and Michigan State Conference of the NAACP all filed suit against the state.

“This is a true victory for Michigan voters,” said Bradley Heard, a senior attorney with Advancement Project. “Voter-removal procedures like those at issue in this lawsuit, which allow eligible and registered voters to be suddenly stricken from the rolls without notice, are bad for democracy. We are happy that the state of Michigan finally agreed to right these wrongful practices.”

Michigan’s voter-purge programs disfranchised Michigan voters with out-of-state driver’s licenses or voter-identification records associated with incorrect mailing addresses.

Many of these out-of-state driver's license issues and incorrect address problems occur when non-Michigan college students relocate to go to school within the state. Though this makes them a legal resident, the Michigan voter removal program ignored that.

Michigan’s voter-removal programs had a particularly detrimental impact on students and minority and low-income communities. These populations tend to be more transient and to live in multi-family housing or in dormitory settings where mail can be unreliable and unpredictable. Students often have driver's licenses from different states than where their colleges are located.

“This ruling ensures that, despite the transient lifestyle of college students, they will continue to have an influential voice in the electoral process," said Gregory Cendana, President of USSAF.

Props to Cendana and the organizations fighting this unlawful behavior. This is the kind of injustice that a healthy progressive youth movement can eliminate. Though it took nearly two years, students and low-income voters in Michigan just had some of their rights restored.

Matt Bai wrote an interesting piece in the Times last week, noting how far we've come in our various debates since the 1960s, while acknowledging that, in some ways, we have not come far at all. Bai used the controversies surrounding Rand Paul and Richard Blumenthal to make his case.

Why then, to quote the ubiquitous Bono, is our political debate so stuck in a moment it cannot get out of? In part, it is probably because so many of the Americans most engaged in politics — as well as those who run campaigns and comment endlessly on them — are old enough to remember Altamont. It is your classic self-fulfilling prophecy: the more the ’60s generation dominates the political discourse, the less that discourse engages younger voters, and the longer the boomers hold sway over our politics.

On a deeper level, though, this all probably has as much to do with our basic human tendency toward moral clarity. As much as conservatives may view the decade as the crucible of moral relativism and the beginning of a breakdown in established social order, there remains something powerfully attractive about the binary, simplistic nature of it all, the idea that one could easily distinguish whether he was for war or against, in favor of equality or opposed.

By contrast, war today seems more a question of degrees and limits, while equality seems less about the laws of the land than about disparities in economic and educational opportunities that are subtler and harder to address. The choices of our moment are not nearly so neat or so satisfying as they were a generation ago, which makes them less useful as a basis for one’s political identity, and harder to encapsulate in some 30-second spot or prime-time rant.

Emphasis is mine. I find myself agreeing with Bai's explanation, especially given my work with college students. Our students today are getting their bachelor's degree and I would wager that, the way we construct our educational system in this country, a significant number get out of it without having to think critically about issues. If I'm a student and I have followed external formulas guiding my behavior, never having this behavior challenged, I am not even aware that there is anything other than my cozy dualistic system from which I can choose (Harvard developmental psychologist Robert Kegan would say I am subject in my meaning-making capabilities). Of course a simplistic, yet disingenuous politics is going to thrive.

In order for us to challenge this lack of preparation we are offering our students, we must challenge the hegemonic structure dictating that campaigns or discussions on public affairs must run this way. Simultaneously, we must purge ourselves of the assumption that we must go to college to have a chance to learn this. These are big tasks; these notions unobtrusively penetrate our lives everyday, seducing us to believe that, because its the way things work, we must follow it. You go to college, get a four degree, and then work somewhere because you are deemed to be bright enough to do so and be a citizen. There's a code for it: it's "tradition." It's romanticized. The degree is money, we're taught. Yes, our realities are much more contextual than they used to be; our technology, while improving our lives and making them more efficient, gives us a tangential responsibility of learning supplemental skills to be able to cope with the effects of the improvements.

Yet, how many of these college degree-holding, former students come home from work and sit in front of their TVs, allowing the sonorous voices of Bill O'Reilly, Wolf Blitzer, and/(but most likely) or Keith Olbermann to fill their living rooms? Many, I'd be willing to bet. And it's because "we're tired." We've been thinking all day. We need someone to explain things to us, not help us understand anything better. And so when Blitzer's voice gets pitchy with excitement, indelicately discussing stories as complex as the history of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the opportunity to parse what he is saying, to explore it, to uncover it, comes and goes. "Why is this garbage on TV?," someone might ask. But given the way we tackle education in this country, we are all too often incapable of answering our own questions.

So when I read Matt Bai's piece last week, I couldn't help but get excited. A writer for one of the main cogs in this hegemonic structure takes notice of the primary problem -- it's a welcome event. Yet, until we have younger people willing to challenge the status quo of journalism and education in this country (and older ones courageous enough to assist), our external formulas will triumph.