youth engagement

Some Sunday reading:

• The New York Times reports that President Obama may have to give up his blackberry. It certainly is nice to have a technologically-engaged president in the White House who is at least pushing the envelope on these issues.
• Meanwhile, Obama's not procrastinating at staffing his White House. Some more roles have been filled today.
• An examination of young voters' preoccupation with merit and what that meant in the Minnesota senate race.
• A panel discussion on "Generation We" will be held tomorrow at Noon at the First Amendment Lounge at the National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor, in Washington, DC. Sponsored by Eric Greenberg, author of the book "Generation We: How Millennial Youth Are Taking Over America And Changing Our World Forever," and moderated by The Politico's Ben Adler, the panel will include the following confirmed panelists: Ruy Teixeira, Senior Fellow at both The Century Foundation and American Progress, who will present new findings on the youth vote this election cycle; Alexandra Acker, national executive director of Young Democrats of America; Michael Moschella, director of outreach at the Truman National Security Project; and Kat Barr, political outreach director at Rock the Vote.
• Bruce E. Cain, a professor at UC Berkeley, offers his thoughts on the GOP's demographics problems. He discusses youth and their current politics and nails it:
  

  Finally, there is the new generation. Even before this election, the Generation Y kids were participating in public life at higher levels than their Generation X predecessors. What strikes me as I read their resumes and talk to them at the university is that they are more service-oriented (partly because community service is a requirement at many schools), technologically oriented (they have been running computers and electronics for their parents for years) and world-savvy (they intern as a way of testing out the world). Generation X was the "me" generation; Y seems to be the "us" cohort. Republicans may want to think about what that means for them.

• An examination of the new electorate in American politics.
• The Nation has a "You Voted. Now What?" post-election guide for young voters on how to stay engaged. Check it out.
• Young Australians are also politically engaged at record levels.
• "Liberal" just isn't pejorative with young voters. Deal with it.

Note: Mike wrote about this story on Thursday, but I wanted to dig deeper into the story. You can read Mike's post here.

Since Election Day, many a journalist has written pieces cautiously exploring the changes that Millennials will bring to electoral politics, given their "sudden" emergence. Some conclude that Obama has raised expectations too high. One comically questions whether or not it was a good thing for young people for Obama to win. There's a story in New Hampshire, though, that gives all of us a clue on the kind of transformative change we're in for thanks to civically-engaged Millennials.

Grafton County, New Hampshire contains the town of Hanover, home of Dartmouth College. A Republican, Carol Elliott, has held various local government positions over twenty years; she probably figured running for county treasurer would be a walk in the park, even if it was 2008 and she's in the GOP.

But Vanessa Sievers, a 20 year old Dartmouth College student (also a member of the DNC Youth Council), decided to give Elliott a run for her money (no pun intended). Sievers paid $42 for a Facebook ad aimed at Dartmouth and Plymouth State students. The Dartmouth College Democrats backed her up with a superb voter registration and GOTV operation:

Hanover registered 2,436 new voters this year, and David Imamura, the president of Dartmouth College Democrats, yesterday said 2,268 Dartmouth College students voted in the election, about 30 percent of Hanover's record turnout.

Town officials yesterday confirmed more than 2,000 Dartmouth students voted in the election and said that would be a record.

Sievers could not be reached for comment yesterday, but Imamura said she and other active Dartmouth Democrats went door-to-door on campus to tell students about candidates on the ballot other than Barack Obama and victorious U.S. Senate candidate Jeanne Shaheen.

“I think Dartmouth students have a genuine interest in how government works in New Hampshire,” Imamura said. “It wasn't just us going out there saying ‘vote straight Democratic' … it was a big effort to educate Dartmouth students about why they should vote down ticket.”

All of this came together in the form of an Election Day surprise:

Sievers won 21,389 votes across the county to 20,803 for Elliott. Sievers' largest margin of victory was in Hanover, home to Dartmouth, where she defeated Elliott by 2,438 votes. The Democrat also won 411 more votes than did Elliott in Plymouth, home to Plymouth State University.

It's quite obvious that Dartmouth College students were responsible for Sievers's victory. What isn't so obvious to Elliott and the county GOP chairman -- much like their national party compatriots -- is that they lost because they've either chalked up young voters for the Democrats and not pursued them or they're outright hostile to their political participation.

Elliott, doing her best to emulate Sarah Palin's patriotism, whined a bit about the loss:

Elliott yesterday said the heavy college turnout doomed her candidacy.

“The real people … ” she stated, “with a 600-vote (margin), it was the brainwashed college kids that made the difference.”

[...]

“You've got a buffoon for a register of deeds, and you've got a teenybopper for a treasurer,” Elliott said. “I'm concerned for the citizens of Grafton County.”

[...]

Meanwhile, Ludlow Flower, has no interest in actually doing his job and trying to attract people to the Republican Party, because, well, these people don't count.

Grafton County Republican Chairman Ludlow Flower yesterday also did not embrace Elliott's comments about her opposition, but said he was concerned that college students who live in Grafton County for a limited time were tilting elections for county offices.

“I think it's a terrible shame that the Dartmouth student vote is able to distort the outcome of the vote for Grafton County officers,” Flower said. “I have no problem with them voting for national political tickets, because they do have a stake in this whole country, but they don't have a stake in our local community here.

“Nothing against Ms. Sievers, but she's a 20-year-old college student,” Flower continued. “By comparison, Carol Elliott is a public servant of some 25 or 30 years, with a lot of public experience. It just seems a shame that we have yet to figure out a way to make this democratic process for county offices more reflective of our local circumstances.”

Of course, we know that the Supreme Court decided in 1979 that college students do have the right to vote wherever they go to school.(SYMM v. U.S, 439 U.S. 1105 (1979)) So why spend time griping about a ruling that's been static for nearly three decades; why not try to stem the tide against the national party and pursue these young voters who, more and more, are joining an ever-solidifying and powerful political coalition in the Democratic Party?

The "local circumstances" talk is hilarious, given the snowbirds who only live there for part of the year, never questioned by the GOP. Also, quite frankly, I think it's a "terrible shame" that, as a leader of that community, Flower doesn't want to keep people in Hanover after they've graduated from Dartmouth, expanding the tax base and improving the economy. But then again, Mr. Flower is exhibiting that "country first" attitude, provided the country looks, thinks, and acts like he does.

This is a perfect example of what will happen to the Republican Party should it continue on its current course. Joe the Plumbers are starting to leave us, as younger, browner, and more progressive voters expand. If the GOP refuses to adapt, they're screwed. If the Republicans don't act, the crystal ball becomes clearer: the GOP becomes irrelevant while Millennials run the country as progressive Democrats.

Short story? Carol Elliott and the GOP has come to realize what change means thanks to an enterprising Millennial, and they're stomping their feet, covering their ears, and crying because they don't like it.

Advice? Grow up. Literally.

Peter Panepento, a blogger at Outside Erie, has a post up about Erie's biggest enemy being its past. Simply put, Erie can't move forward because it's always looking backward.

When I think about my experiences in Erie and also the smaller cities of Meadville, Pennsylvania and Salem, Ohio, I think the same thing could be said of them. It's a cliche anymore to discount local politics as too bitter and nasty to accomplish anything, and I think in each place I've been over my 24 years, this has held true. People can't separate the common good from the personal, and so they go to the mud, taking the public with them (there are too many who go willingly).

Yes, I said the word "bitter." And maybe this is what Barack Obama was trying to say when he famously slipped up last spring in San Francisco. People are too scared to change; they're paralyzed by fear, because, as Panepento notes, the last memory these people have of success is too far gone.

I’ve heard many people over the years talk about how we can get Erie back to where it used to be — back in the days when the factories were booming and people were flocking to the region in search of family-sustaining blue-collar jobs. The days when men with calloused hands could put in a honest 8 hours at the plant, head to the corner bar for an after-work beer, then get home for dinner.

Older citizens of these northern cities and small towns are in this thirty-year depression, and they just can't snap out of it.

Now that change is on the way, it's our responsibility to grab these people by the shoulders and shake them. Change relies on these people. Panepento concludes his post with a rallying cry to pressure government like they haven't been pressured before. I'd certainly agree with this. Contrary to what these "Yes We Did" people think, our job isn't over. Elections aren't the be-all, end-all of our political system. As citizens of these communities, we young people have a duty to push those representing us to lead in the right direction -- forward. And until a significant number of citizens living in the Great Lakes region realize this, these communities will continue to sulk and become pathetic shells of their former selves -- at the expense of the common good.

One of the things we've learned in the Rovian age of the last eight years is that you can dress up public policy with a flattering name -- even if it actually forms the antithesis of its description -- and people will believe it. The Clean Skies Act is one such example.

Whether intentional or not, a South Dakota ballot issue this November has the same misleading characteristics. The South Dakota Open and Clean Government Act, while sounding like a boon for transparent government activists everywhere, could actually stifle political participation and the voice of college students in the state.

The proposal itself -- Initiative 10 -- "would prohibit using taxpayer money or government resources for lobbying or campaigning. It also would make changes in campaign donation laws and require a Web site giving details of state contracts." The problem, of course, is rooted in the fact that many state-funded schools find themselves receiving this same taxpayer money. With student groups being funded by this money, the problem is obvious now, even if it wasn't when it was passed. The fact that legislation like this is passed or proposed (perhaps with the public interest legitimately in mind) without a review of further ramifications is troubling. Lately, this legislative laziness has led to restricted abilities among students to participate in democratic responsibilities, while also tying the hands of institutions of higher education within the state. We saw an example of this in the episode I wrote about a few weeks ago with the University of Illinois restricting the rights of students, faculty, and staff to contribute to any public discourse regarding the election.

In the South Dakota initiative, we once again see lawmakers and proponents of this issue overlooking its consequences, as a student explains.

“When you first read this initiative, I don’t think anybody could be against clean and open government,” said Alex Halbach, executive director of the South Dakota Student Federation, an organization of student governments. “But when you read into the text, it’s so much deeper than that and affects so many different areas.”

Halbach goes on to point out that should this initiative be passed, any student newspaper funded by a university in South Dakota would be prohibited from endorsing a political candidate -- not exactly encouraging civic responsibility and a free exchange of ideas on campus. Furthermore, if the state's Board of Regents needed/felt compelled to lobby politicians on issues in higher education, this initiative, if passed, would prohibit that action.

If you happen to live in South Dakota, please vote no on this issue. While I'm not convinced this initiative was drafted with bad intentions, it nevertheless is faulty as its framers did not take into account the consequences of its passage, especially as it relates to student political participation.

This may not be ground-breaking news, but I thought I'd post something about it anyway.

In a survey of 2,406 18-24 year old Americans conducted by Harris Interactive from September 12th through October 6th, 2008, the Harvard University Institute of Politics found that youth continue to be a strong force in this campaign, and they have, by and large, placed most of their enthusiasm and energy behind the Obama campaign.

• U.S. Senator Barack Obama is favored among 18-24 year-old likely voters by nearly a 2-1 margin over U.S. Senator John McCain in the race for President. Just weeks before Election Day, Senator Obama holds a twenty-six point lead (56%-30%; 15% undecided) over Senator McCain in the 2008 presidential race, a lead that has remained virtually unchanged since July (55%-32%) and March (53%-32%) 2008 IOP polling. Obama’s lead grows slightly among young people saying they will “definitely” be voting (59%-31%). As IOP polling also showed in July, young people continue to say they “trust” Obama more than McCain on eight out of ten major domestic and foreign policy issues facing the country.
• Youth are ready to answer a new call for public service, including working in government. Almost six in ten (59%) 18-24 year-olds say that they are personally interested in engaging in some form of public service to help the country. Nearly one-half (47%) of this group said engagement could include working for the federal, state or local government; almost a third (32%) said they would think about getting involved in a political campaign; and nearly two in ten (17%) said they would consider running for office. Importantly, this is one issue where strong support is seen regardless of party (Democrats 68%, Republicans 63%, Independents 57%), presidential candidate supported (67% Obama supporters, 63% McCain supporters), or gender (63% women, 55% men) of young people today.
• Economy is ten times more important to young people today than one year ago. More than half of young people (53%) say economic issues are their top concern. IOP polling showed 30% of young people expressing the same opinion in March and only 5% in the fall of 2007. During the same time period, the percentage of young people who said Iraq and the War in general was their top concern fell from 37% (fall 2007) to 20% (March 2008) to 9% today. No other issue in this year's poll garnered more than 9%.
• Sen. Biden Vice-Presidential pick shows little effect, while Gov. Palin pick has hurt among Independents and women. When 18-24 year-old likely voters were asked whether each candidate’s vice-presidential selection made them more or less likely to support that ticket in November, six in ten (60%) said that Senator Obama’s pick of U.S. Senator Joe Biden made no difference with just 21% saying the pick made them more likely and 19% saying less likely to support the ticket (Net effect: 2% points positive). However, while only 35% of young people said Senator McCain’s selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin made no difference, 40% of young voters said the pick made them “less likely” to support the ticket with 25% saying “more likely.” (Net effect: 15% points negative). Among young people self-identifying as Independents, the Biden VP pick had a net 8% point negative effect, while the Palin VP pick had a net 22% point negative effect.
• More than half of young people currently supporting a presidential candidate are interested in volunteering for their candidate’s campaign. Among 18-24 year-olds currently supporting Senator Obama, nearly six in ten (57%) say they would be interested in volunteering for the presidential campaign if asked (17% very interested; 40% somewhat interested). Slightly less than half (47%) of Senator McCain supporters said they would volunteer on their candidate’s campaign if asked to do so (16% very interested, 31% somewhat interested).

[...]

• More young people see the effectiveness of political engagement than one year ago. Nearly seven in ten 18-24 year-olds today (69%) say they see political engagement as an effective way of solving our nation’s problems, up six percentage points from fall 2007 (63%) and fall 2006 (60%) IOP polling. Fewer young people today agree that politics is not relevant to their lives (28%) than did one year ago (32%) and fewer believe that elected officials don’t share their priorities (69%) than did one year ago (71%) or two years ago (75%). In addition, over six in ten young people (68%) say running for office is an honorable thing to do, up from one year ago (67%) and two years ago (66%).

The thing that sticks out to me is the total rejection of McCain and his philosophy. At the top of the bulleted list of outcomes, the first two are the most telling. Obama's lead has largely stayed the same; if it did change at all, he gained a few more percentage points compared to March's numbers. But when we pair that with the bullet point immediately below, we get that basis for the strong, rock-solid support for Obama: activism through sacrifice and working within the system. With Obama repeatedly linking a call to service with this nation's young people, he's clearly established trust with this age group on this issue -- even among Republicans and McCain supporters. This notion of serving something greater than yourself is very appealing to them, given their loads of experience with volunteerism and the large-scale social traumas they've gone through (9/11, Katrina, financial meltdown). While McCain pushes the military as a way of serving the greater good, Obama sees more diversified opportunities. And you can even see this dedication to serving others in the numbers that are willing to volunteer for their candidate's campaign. Obama's recognized this and with his fundraising advantage, has enabled hundreds of thousands of youth to have those opportunities in many small towns across the country. With McCain's limited financial resources, he doesn't offer those same opportunities (even though his supporters also want to be more involved).

The other thing I noticed is the job this election has done in raising enthusiasm for the political process as a means of creating positive change. Over the past few years, this election cycle has convinced one person in every group of ten 18-24 year olds that the political process is effective. With six out of ten already agreeing with this premise two years ago in 2006, seven out of ten now agree.

Finally, as we've been able to establish for a few weeks now, the idea that Palin somehow attracted and mobilized a large segment of youth for the GOP ticket is, well.. bunk. Young people are repelled from the ticket (40% said it made them less likely to support the ticket, compared with 25%, who said it made them more likely).

Sunday reading material:

• The New York Times concern trolls a bit, as they explore whether or not Obama should worry because youth might be disappointed by his responses to the realities of his political situation.
• The GOP thinks they have young voters and that they will continue to add more once young people leave college -- "the bastions of liberal indoctrination." You'd almost think this was a parody.
• A note from the editor of the Jackson Free Press analyzing the movement for change in Mississippi and the demographics behind it.
• Bucks County, PA has launched an effort to increase the number of Millennial tourists with a new PR campaign.
• New Media versus Old Media in Denver: A conference attendee describes the conflict.
• A slightly ignorant analysis of the Obama campaign's use of technology and whether or not his "friends" will turn out to vote.
• What is news? The difference between Millennial news and Boomer news and how it impacts questions of Millennials' knowledge of public affairs.
• Another overview of "Generation WE" (or Millennials) and its impact on politics.
• The apparently necessary annual profile of incoming Millennial college students.
• The AP marvels at the diversity of the four candidates on the tickets of the two major parties.