college youth

Personal note - I'm currently in New Orleans both to plan my wedding ('m getting married here in March), and to have Thanksgiving with my fiance and future in-laws. It's going to be hectic and I don't know how often I'll be able to post. I'll try to get at least one thing up per day, but if not pardon the lack of content. I'll be back in New York on Saturday. - Mike

Here's some interesting data. Mother Jones conducted a survey of recent and former students, asking them about the future of activism. It's an interesting look on how students - who receive the bulk of the attention - view the current political landscape and their most effective means of engagement vs. their non-college and often neglected counterparts. Some of the findings:

Looking at the first chart, it's interesting to see so many non-college students viewing the marketplace as a locus of activism. I wonder if that refers to the creation of green jobs and "doing well by doing good," protesting with the purse, or some other concept of activism. In the wake of massive youth participation in the last election, I think no one is surprised to see that a majority of both students and non-students view Congress as a locus of activism.

Clicking through to the full report, there are some interesting contradictions that become apparent when you compare these charts to more specific questions about how students and non students want to engage. For instance, many students say that the future of activism is on campus, but many of them also believe that it's more important to act off campus. A large portion of students also claim to want to spend more time protesting, yet common definitions of "protest" are also declared to be "the lamest forms of activism.

All very interesting, if not as comprehensive as I would like.

• Marc Ambinder notes that for the first time, MTV will accept paid political advertisements. Gawker has the appropriately snarky response.
• Kevin Bondelli notes that SMS is one of the best tools for organizing rural youth.
• McCain has a Facebook App! Called "Pork Invaders," the game lets you sling vetos at unnecessary spending projects symbolized by big flying pigs. I can already envision the Democratic response - a Facebook App that lets you play wack-a-mole with McCain's lobbyist buddies.
• Speaking of campaign-related video games, does anyone else remember the Bush Game from back in 2004? Good times.
• Because I'm a geek and I already miss Battlestar Galactica, I'll post this essay on Why I'd Vote for Baltar. It's the new "I voted for Kodos."
• Facebook has finally surpassed MySpace in unique viewers per month.
• Michael Hais and Morley Winograd note that political coalitions are changing, but the pundits can't shake their old models.
• Student PIRGs report that lower interest rates beginning in July on Stafford Loans will save students thousands of dollars.
• The Seattle Times wonders if Obama will be able to help down-ballot candidates.
• At WireTap, Kristina Rizga has a few ideas about closing the participation gap between college and non-college youth.
• For those who couldn't attend, this was one of the highpoints of the PDF conference - Tracy Russo (former Edwards blogger) smacking down McCain internet advisor Mark SooHoo about McCain's understanding of the potential of the internet to transform governance:

• Finally, I'm wondering what y'all think of this Blogging Heads video about the political implications of Hip Hop:

For a number of reasons, I'd like to revisit the data on college turnout vs. non-college turnout that I blurbed on Thursday. First, to note that I've spoken with some people and cleared up the confusion of the precise definition of "non-college" youth. The term non-college applies to anyone who has not attended or received a degree from an institution of higher education. It does not, as the NPR story seemed to suggest, apply to graduates not longer in school.

Looking at the data once again in that light, I have to agree with Karlo that the disparities are shocking. 79 percent of young voters this cycle are college youth and just 21 percent are classified as non-college. When you consider that In 2007, only 18 percent of 18-29 year olds had a B.A. or more, it does not seem outlandish to suggest that we're seeing some version of the Pareto Principle (80/20 rule) playing out in the youth vote surge.

CIRCLE notes that one cause for these disparities is inequality in high school education, particularly opportunities to learn about politics:

Instead of making things more equal, school systems exacerbate this political inequality by providing more opportunities to learn about politics to higher income students, white students, and academically successful students, according to a new CIRCLE study written by Joseph Kahne and Ellen Middaugh of the Civic Engagement Research Group (CERG) at Mills College. Students in higher-income school districts are up to twice as likely as those from average-income districts to learn how laws are made and how Congress works, for example. They are more than one-and-a-half times as likely to report having political debates and panel discussions.

Over at WireTap, Karlo Marcelo of CIRCLE has some good suggestions on how we can alleviate these disparities:

We need to address this gap now -- during this election -- and while the emphasis on the internet and online organizing is effective this year in delivering information about the voting process to college youth, it leaves out non-college youth, whose voices need the most amplification. Complicating outreach tactics even more, places that were once venues for mobilizing non-college youth, such as unions, and community organizations, are less effective today because of declining membership rates.

One way to engage non-college youth, in the long term, is to improve access to and affordability of college; but not everyone wants to attend. For those young people that do not want to attend college -- or can't afford or access it -- the focus needs to turn to high school civic education. A new CIRCLE working paper found that students in higher-income school districts are twice as likely as those from average-income districts to learn how laws are made and how Congress works. More than that, they are more than one-and-a-half times as likely to report having political debates and panel discussions.

The implication being that there is a direct correlation between this kind of early civics education and voting habits. I'm in full agreement with Karlo that all youth should receive the same quality of civics education in high school, but I would go further. We also need to create new institutions that can fill in the role previously played by those unions and community organizations.

As David Sirota wrote in his recent columen, The New Permanent Campaign, political involvement can't just spool up at the height of an election cycle and then disappear for the next four years. That doesn't build anything and offers little in the way of real, substantial involvement. Progressives need to put serious thought into creating institutions that involve progressives 24/7/365. Progressive donors should invest in nontraditional outreach like that provided by Drinking Liberally and Democrats Work, and the creation of healthy, state-based youth organizations with a focus on reaching non-college youth.

Typically these types of organizations are the least funded institutions in the progressive movement. Real investment in these types of organizations - combined with research into best practices for such groups - would also go a long way towards brining non-college youth to the voting booth and into the progressive movement.