Jackson Free Press

If you're under 25, you don't count, at least not for much. Now, before you get huffy, let me explain. Only 42 percent of you voted in the last Mississippi election (compared to 70 percent of voters over 25). I've heard your reasons why, and I tend to agree with most of them. The candidates suck. The system is screwed up. The process mystifies you. Nobody's speaking your language. I feel the same way, but I still vote. Maybe you are all smarter than I and have just decided to turn a collective back to the whole thing, cranking up your music and changing the channel. But maybe it's time to accept the invitation to the dance (or party). Use it or lose it, baby, it's up to you.

I'm going to attempt to explain your side. Who knows, it could help. And y'all are going to outnumber the baby boomers and Generation X combined within the next decade. So why not decide to vote and see what dust you can kick up?

ARE YOU TALKIN' TO ME?
The vast majority of candidates only appeal to older generations. They don't look like you, they don't talk like you, and they certainly don't act like you. In essence, most politicians are plastic. They have no bad history. They are just perfect, to hear them tell it. "You never hear about a candidate getting an F on an English Lit question," says Malcolm White, co-owner of Hal & Mal's (where I also work), local activist and concert promoter. He says politicians need to be real people, warts and all, to establish credibility with other real people (and that doesn't mean being a loser and lying about it until you get caught red-handed).

Charlotte Dixon, vice president of Mississippi Young Democrats and a student at Jackson State says, "They target people they think would be their primary voters." True: Each election, we all hear that, say, Midwestern moderates are the key, or Mississippi rural white women are the fish to reel in. And they put their energies on not offending those constituencies and forget about the rest of us and what we care about. Candidates don't address issues concerning younger generations, and we know it. Sure, Social Security and affordable prescription drugs are important. But, to the younger generation, job security and affordable college tuition and access to quality education are even more important. We need our turn. Charles Christian, a student at Madison Central, spells it out. Candidates don't "talk about anything I care about," he says.

The only national candidate in recent history to successfully woo the youth vote was President Clinton in his first run for office in 1992 when today's young voters were not even born yet. He was all over MTV (boxers or briefs?) and late-night talk shows, playing the sax for Arsenio in his Blues Brothers sunglasses. He knew the lingo, or he at least tried. For the first time since the 26th Amendment made it possible for 18-year-olds to vote in 1972, there was actually an increase in youth voter turnout (up to 43 percent in 18-30 year olds from 23 percent in the last election). This is proof that if candidates talk the talk, young folks will vote (well, at least more of them will). Of course, the media needs to show them talking to young people. One of candidate Al Gore's best and most relaxed public appearances was before an MTV audience, but it attracted little attention beyond that network; the lengthy discussion didn't fit well into sound bites.

Candidates and parties could do many things to be more appealing to young citizens, yet so far they make very little effort, pretending that you're invisible to them (you are, if you don't register or vote). John Hooks, a 27-year-old candidate for the Mississippi Senate in the 52nd district, has his campaign headquarters in the mall in Jackson County. "If you're going to reach the younger demographic, you have to be where they are," he says wisely. He suggests that candidates speak to government classes and learn what young voters' interests are. "How many candidates know how much it costs to go to college?" he asks. And, he says, what about campaigning on music television channels such as BET, MTV, VH1 and other media you enjoy? Hooks is a good example of how it could be done; he's paying radio stations to do live broadcasts from his rally in May.

USE YOUR DISILLUSION
Like many, young people are disillusioned with our broken, yet-still-limping, political process. You are intelligent enough to realize that in the present system, there's no real power without money. Big money, from labor to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, buys their candidate in. Sure, the young could vote, but for whom? Often, they simply refuse to choose "the lesser of two evils," so you just don't vote. Meisha Moses—director of the Algebra Project at Lanier High School and daughter of civil-rights vote champion Bob Moses—says too many young people feel hopeless and alone. "The system is so entrenched that people are feeling like they're not going to change it," she says. Moses suggests a more grass-roots way of organizing and reaching out to young voters such as discussion groups that take place where young people are, like at schools and clubs.

According to a Harvard University Institute of Politics study, 74 percent of college students believe that politicians are motivated by selfish reasons. "I think the candidates are the problem," White says. Most young people are tired of politicians and politics in general and are looking for new ways to make their communities better. The Harvard study says that "85 percent of college students prefer community volunteerism to political engagement as the better way to solve important issues facing their communities." In fact, a study by the National Council of Secretaries of State found that 72 percent of young people ages 15-24 had donated money, clothes or food to a community or church group. "If you could somehow convince kids that politicians wanted to be public servants again, then maybe they would vote," White says.

There are ways to improve some of the voter-turnout problems across the board, yet most of these are still in questionable stages. You'll find many suggestions out there, some better than others. Some of the better ones are: same-day voter registration (would allow eligible citizens to vote on Election Day even if not previously registered), combining Veteran's Day and Election Day to make it a work-free/school-free holiday, instant runoff voting (voters can choose first, second and third choices on the ballot), and a mothballing of our "winner-takes-all" system of elections (where 51 percent of the votes means 100 percent of the power).

Knol Aust, the 27-year-old head of the Mississippi chapter of Rock the Vote (see "Jacksonian," p. 3), says the election system needs to be overhauled, from voting machines to the electoral college, before more young people will trust enough to get heavily involved. "On a grand scale, reform is necessary to rekindle many voters' interest." (Ironically, though, that system may not be truly reformed until more young people start speaking up.) Aust says he thinks young voters are generally aware of the benefits of voting but have been "disenchanted by the current political state." In light of the 2000 campaign that barely acknowledged the existence of a young generation and Bush's subsequent "win" and now the administration's derision of anti-war protests, this is all quite understandable.

YOU'VE GOT ISSUES
So what are the issues facing generation Y? Truthfully, they run the gamut of what you would expect from idealistic youth, and you believe in the issues more strongly than you do in the politicians, whether local, state or federal. According to a poll conducted by The Tarrance Group, 65 percent of young people say issue stands are the most important consideration in choosing a candidate. You want "candidates that face powerful interests and stand up for what they believe is right." Kellyanne Fitzpatrick, of CNN and The Polling Company and a key pollster for the Republican Party, says that "young people will not buy into what they feel is an issue-less campaign" (as reported by a Center for Policy Alternatives statement).

"Legality of consensual crimes, education and inner-city social opportunities involving the arts," Daniel Johnson, a student at Millsaps College, says are the issues important to him. Hooks, the Senate district 52 candidate, says, "They're worried about where the jobs are going to be when they get out of school." He goes on to say that while the prices of college tuition are on a steady increase, financial aid remains stagnant. Aust claims educational funding, the failing economy and "most importantly, war" to be the issues vital to him.

A survey conducted last year by MTV found that young people are overwhelmingly progressive (meaning anti-status quo and against regressive policies). They want tougher gun control (84 percent support mandatory waiting periods and criminal background checks). Eighty percent support extensive sex education in schools. Seventy-seven percent favor expanding hate-crimes protections for gays, and 61 percent favor legal civil unions for gays and lesbians forming civil unions. Eighty-eight percent support efforts to expand health coverage. In this survey the top five issues for 18- to 24-year-olds were education, jobs and the economy, crime and violence, health care and civil rights.

CITIZEN BLING
Many young voters are unclear on the meaning of citizenship. A National Association of Secretaries of State survey found that when young focus groups were asked what it means specifically to be an American citizen, "most young people are at a total loss, having never really thought about the role of a citizen."

I admit that I was too, so I looked it up. A citizen is a person, especially one entitled to vote and enjoy other privileges, owing loyalty to and entitled by birth or naturalization to the protection of a state or nation. Voting is part of being a citizen. Most voting older adults consider voting to be not only a privilege, but also a duty. Many young people believe it to be a choice that they take for granted (perhaps because they are too young to remember the fights by blacks in the South and then 18-year-olds for the mere right to vote over the last 40 years). The Tarrance Group poll found that 34 percent see voting as a choice, 20 percent a responsibility and only 9 percent a duty.

Today's younger people understand your rights and freedoms but are unsure as to your responsibilities. As the Secretaries of State report says, "[O]ther than identification of basic legal requirements like obeying laws and paying taxes, notions about the responsibilities of citizenship revolve around very vague ideas like helping others and being a good person." Your notions, the survey says, are more heavily centered on what you can do in your own private realm rather than the public realm. "In fact, the survey found that 94 percent of 15 to 24-year-old youth agree that 'the most important thing I can do as a citizen is to help others.'"

Young adults are also confused about government and politics. Meisha Moses says that "it takes work to be an intelligent voter." And the younger generation is unsure on how to find good information. MTV found that you tend to depend on cable news networks and the Internet, and heavily distrust most newspapers, especially dailies, because they are biased against young people, put too many "old, white dudes" on the cover and look for negativity where they can find it. And bland corporate media simply do not engage young people. "The information in mainstream media is generally not very informative," Moses says. White says it's tough to get younger people to be interested. "I can hardly get Mallory (his 18-year-old daughter) to even watch the news."

Mallory White, who graduates from high school this year, agrees. She admits that Mississippi's insular society has turned her away from concern over current events, although she is well-versed and opinionated over the recent conflict in the Middle East. Traditionally, newspapers and TV have been considered two of the primary sources of information about politics and government. "Yet, 41 percent of young people say they either never read a newspaper or they do not read one very often," says the Secretaries of State survey.

Many young adults say they would respond to political information from family and friends, yet they don't get it there, either. Either their families don't care about current affairs, or don't bother to engage in conversation and debate, perhaps assuming that one party or ideology has all the answers. Moses says she was influenced early about the need for the vote; she remembers watching her aunt spend hours and hours going over the ballot to get ready to vote. "I don't think I was the norm in that sense," admits the daughter of the man beaten for trying to help fellow blacks register in the 1960s.

LET'S GET PHYSICAL
So you've heard the arguments, and made some yourself. But, what are you going to do about it? We're still hovering around No. 49 or 50 in most social indicators. Will getting off your butt and getting involved help improve (starting with dusting out the cobwebs)? Mississippi has a long history of rebellion: from the Civil War to the Civil Rights Movement. Just how tired are you of being on the bottom? I know I am. I'm sick of the elected officials that I don't elect being my face to the world and embarrassing us.

Let me pose a little scenario for you: Imagine that young people, women and people of color, along with all the beautiful progressive men of our lovely state, banded together and overthrew status-quo thinking. Imagine Mississippi becoming the most progressive state in the union, the most willing to improve ourselves, the most willing to harness our resources. Do you see what that could do? We could change the whole damned country. Other states would follow in our wake.

As the Rev. Jessie Jackson said once while speaking at Galloway Methodist Church downtown, "As goes Mississippi, so goes the United States." Screw California! Screw New York! We could go down in history as the little state that would. Game?
J. Bingo Holman is a bartender and the assistant editor of the Jackson Free Press.

Previous Comments

ID

76820

Comment

"A mothballing of our "winner-takes-all" system of elections (where 51 percent of the votes means 100 percent of the power)." So what would we rather see? An assembly where you have 80 factions who say they are prepared to resist against any government that any group in the lot deems insufficiently representative of their interests/minority group/religious affilation? Welcome to Iraq, y'all. Or Afghanistan, for that matter. The 51% concept relies on the fact that successful candiates have to appeal to a range of interests and build coalitions among different groups--that are fluid enough to shift depending on the issues (Witness the strange-bedfellows matchups of the ACLU and Christian groups working together in support of certain forms of free speech expression). Coalition-building is most obvious in the the history of so-called "third party" movements that are effective in raising awareness of issues ignored by the D's and R's--and a study of history shows that when those issues are found to resonate with large numbers of voters, third-party positions are co-opted into the larger parties' platforms. Those groups get their concerns listened to--and more power within the political structure we have built. The two-party structure was not ordained by God nor embodied in the Constituion so it can stand a lot of tinkering and reform. But kill "majority rules"--and the Balkans would have NOTHING on us when it came to interceine warfare.

Author

JW

Date

2003-04-17T22:04:13-06:00

ID

76821

Comment

JW writes... [quote]So what would we rather see? An assembly where you have 80 factions who say they are prepared to resist against any government that any group in the lot deems insufficiently representative of their interests/minority group/religious affilation? Welcome to Iraq, y'all. Or Afghanistan, for that matter.[/quote] Maybe that's a touch hyperbolic. Actually, what doing away with "winner takes all" generally refers to is the idea that 51% of the vote in a particular state wins 100% of the Electoral College votes in that state. A few states have moved to a proportional system of dispensing electoral votes and, to my thinking, it makes some sense. If 49% of Mississipians vote for Ben Allen for president in the next election, shouldn't he get at least 2 electoral votes from us? Or are you going to give them all to Jesse Jackson? (I'm assuming that next year's presidential race is between Ben Allen and Jesse Jackson. I know it seems unlikely at this moment in time, but things change...) Frankly, it would make even more sense to get rid of the Electoral College system, which was created to placate slave-owning states that had proportionately fewer qualified voters than free states at the time the system was drawn up. In my opinion the deeper problem would be addressed by run-off elections. The problem with our current system (particularly for President, but it applies to other offices as well) is the candidates who win with 47% of the vote like W did in 2000 or even the 43% that Clinton won with in 1992. Why did they win? Because votes presumably against them (Perot in '92, Nader in '00) helped them instead of hurting them. That's what runoff elections could fix -- a liberal voter might choose Nader first, but then Gore second, so that when the two highest-rated candidates were compared, a Nader vote wouldn't have helped Bush win. Ironically, this is not a partisan issue, as Perot voters helped Bush Sr. lose his second term. Runoff voting might have kept Clinton out of office. The only entities that a runoff system really hurts are the Democratic and Republican parties themselves, as it would allow people to express support for third-party candidates without fear that they're aiding the "enemy." Of course, with the parties both against this sort of reform, it'll be tough to make happen.

Author

Todd

Date

2003-04-18T17:11:40-06:00

ID

76822

Comment

Ah... much clearer now. I was thinking Bingo was advocating proportional representation as we see in multiparty governments, which are seem to be less stable than ours (witness Israel's recent string of weak coalition governments or the wild mood swings of Italy's electorate--Reds getting as many votes as Fascists, etc.) What would it take for MS to move to apportioning electoral votes by percentage? Legislative action?

Author

JW

Date

2003-04-18T22:23:18-06:00

ID

76823

Comment

This question is Todd's arena, so I'll let him answer your question when he sees it. Meantime, though, here's a column we ran earlier by Jim Hightower about the possibilities of grass-roots elections reform ... in the South (OK, North Carolina). http://jacksonfreepress.com/columns_comments.php?id=500_0_7_0_C

Author

ladd

Date

2003-04-19T12:26:40-06:00

ID

76824

Comment

Maine and Nebraska use an alternative method in casting their electoral votes in presidential elections. It has made no difference in the electoral vote tally as of the 2000 election.

Author

Ex Libris

Date

2003-04-21T10:43:11-06:00

ID

76825

Comment

So what? It may some day. And if it's more fair and representative of the people, it's more fair and representative, whatever the outcome. In a democracy, the means are as important as the ends, if not more so.

Author

ladd

Date

2003-04-22T18:18:57-06:00

ID

76826

Comment

That's true. I didn't mean to give you the impression that such a system would be useless. I was simply commenting that it hasn't yet affected the electoral vote in Maine and Nebraska.

Author

Ex Libris

Date

2003-04-22T18:30:24-06:00

ID

76827

Comment

No problem. Gotcha. Sorry if the e-tone was snippy. ;-D

Author

ladd

Date

2003-04-23T10:21:53-06:00

ID

76828

Comment

Maisha Moses' first name was mispelled in the above story. We apologize for the error.

Author

ladd

Date

2003-04-23T11:00:09-06:00

ID

76829

Comment

Reclaim voting privileges? So they were lost? Were they taken away? No, they weren't lost or taken away, they are still there. The privileges never went away. They are not being exercised and that is a big difference. Is it the "system of government" that needs to be changed as Aust suggests or just the players? Holman spends a great deal of time bemoaning that the candidates aren't paying attention, that their messages seem to be targeted to a different, older demographic. Well is it any wonder? Candidates are like a divining rod. They focus on the segments of our population that actually VOTE. The system isn't "screwed up" as Holman states nor is it about young voters morphing from a state of invisibility in the eyes of Candidates to one of visibility just by registering. You actually have to vote. That one single action is what gets attention. I have to wonder what came first, the idea for the Mississippi Voter Project or the idea for a Jackson Free Press edition focused on how something is supposedly not working and then presenting the MVP as a solution? To all of you young(er) people of voting age out there. You want candidates focused on your issues? Vote. You want candidates to pay attention to you? Vote. You want to make a difference? Vote. You want candidates who come clean about getting bad grades? Vote. Just don't be fooled into thinking that registering to vote is good enough. It isn't. You have the power but you have to also make the effort. You need to get off your butts and vote or, please, quit complaining. The buck stops with you.

Author

Reader

Date

2003-04-23T15:09:00-06:00

ID

76830

Comment

I agree with Reader and would like to follow up on his comments (or at least what I perceive to be his comments vis-a-vis the focus of the article). First, the public has to make the effort to be engaged in civic activities such as voting. The opportunities are there. You just have to take advantage of them. Second, the focus of the article. While I like to follow politics, I think that Holman's article was perhaps framed too broadly for my taste. The subject of youth voting could have been turned into a series with separate smaller stories with a national overview, a Mississippi overview, youth in national politics, youth in Mississippi state politics, as well as metropolitan Jackson-area politics-- just to name a few topics off the top of my head. Third, issues matter, but in this case IMO they detract from this story on youth voting. The great majority of the responses to this article (including mine) concern the Electoral College-- it sounds like that'll be a story for a future issue of the JFP.

Author

Ex Libris

Date

2003-04-23T16:55:33-06:00

ID

76831

Comment

Of course, voting privileges are still there! No one's arguing that they're not. It's the perception (that word again) that there are no decent candidates, for instance, or that the ones there can be easily bought and sold that is a problem that leads to voter apathy. And I'm sure not going to sit here and tell many thousands of people under 25 who believe that the system is cracked or not for them that they're wrong. I personally think there are, indeed, some problems with the system that I also believe can be fixed if enough people pay attention and demand fixes. Ultimately, I agree with the conclusion of both Ex Libris and Reader and Tom, Dick and Harry: Voting makes a huge difference, and everyone should do it, no matter what their views. I'm of the diehard belief that if all, or most, Americans voted, we'd have many fewer problems, but those problems will exist and cause apathy until more people vote. It's a rather classic dilemma. Otherwise, you're not going to find a conspiracy here this time, Reader. You'll learn if you hang around long enough that the JFP is pretty danged transparent. We wear our thoughts and our desires on our sleeve for all to see, agree or disagree with: We want civic involvement, a compassionate electorate, positive change, a healthier and more educated Mississippi, a vibrant Jackson that rivals Austin, Texas (or such). Voter motivation was in our business plan (literally) months before we launched last fall. And I've been calling for volunteers for our "voter think tank" on the Web site and in the mag for months. Yes, indeed, we used this issue to help kick it off with its new name, Mississippi Voter Project. No secret there. And Ex Libris, this was indeed an overview story to kick off future political coverage of various sorts; your story ideas are good. Maybe you'll see some of them here in upcoming months. And you can rest pretty assured that the JFP will use any opportunity possible to educate folks about the genesis and effectiveness of the electoral college. Thanks for writing, y'all!

Author

ladd

Date

2003-04-23T17:37:51-06:00

ID

76832

Comment

One other point: It's not enough to try to silence voices by saying that if you don't vote, you can't complain. It's inaccurate, and it's un-American. Some people intentionally choose not to vote, especially for a "lesser evil," so to speak. Even so, they still have the constitutional right to complain all they want. It's their country, too, and their First Amendment, whether or not they choose to vote. Personally, I'd rather see them vote and complain (and then get involved to help change things). That's the best way to participate in this messy democratic experiment we've got going. And, who knows? Maybe the complaining will then lead to the voting. There's not only one way to skin a catfish, you know.

Author

ladd

Date

2003-04-23T17:44:52-06:00

ID

76833

Comment

I used my First Amendment rights to express that I don't care for the whiners and complainers who don't vote. I asked them to quit complaining. I didn't state that they couldn't. Un-American? Nah. It was your linkage, not mine.

Author

Reader

Date

2003-04-23T18:15:50-06:00

ID

76834

Comment

Fair enough; I shouldn't have implied that you are "un-American." I apologize. But note that I didn't say you don't have the *right* to tell people to stop complaining; you certainly have that right (unless your name is John Ashcroft, and you're enforcing it by law). I maintain that trying to silence dissent, or complaint, in any way doesn't honor the spirit of America's freedom that we hold so dear. Having the right to do it doesn't mean it's always the best or most productive approach; that's what I'm challenging your words on. I think we're at a place with voter apathy where it's not enough just to say "quit whining if you don't vote" and figure out WHY people don't vote and address those issues. The apathy serves some ideologies well, I suppose, but I'm not sure how much it helps true democracy. I know, it's mighty "liberal" of me to want to find dreaded root causes of problems, but I'm all for curing, rather than treating (or ignoring) symptoms. And some of those answers may well lie in the complaints if we take time to listen to them.

Author

ladd

Date

2003-04-23T18:59:49-06:00

ID

76835

Comment

I absolutely adore all of this discussion! That's one of the main reasons that we did this article (and all of the rest of them). But one of the things that was missed by Reader and Ex Libris is that I in fact am not one of these "young voters", I was just trying to figure out why they don't vote, and let the rest of the population and candidates in on the information. These kids aren't "whining" in fact, they are actively getting out in their communities and volunteering their time and energy, where they can see the effect. But you have to admit that the first step in finding a cure is recognizing the symptoms. That's what I was trying to do. Bill Clinton, however you think of him, was proof that young voters want someone to talk to them, address issues that concern them, and they will vote. I agree with the Vote-Vote-Vote way of thinking. We have to use our voices before they're heard. It's basic supply and demand. Personally, I can't change the candidates but I can make a positive impact on motivating voters, and so can everyone, if they take the time.

Author

Bingo

Date

2003-04-23T22:06:09-06:00

ID

76836

Comment

I'm a little late getting "in" on this discussion... But, I'm totally game. I have seen the potential of this State and the lack of action. I think think it has every opportunity to become the best State in the South and more importantly the US. We are centrally located to nearly all Southern cities... Have a major port and Gulf port... Have miles and miles of untamed nature including foothills, beaches, and forests... a rich, diverse and enthralling history... and most importantly Creatives of all mediums willing to use their talents! If we can motivate more people and educate even more, we are on the right path... then the wheels of change will begin spinning naturally. Actually, it appears as those wheels have already started... Count me in (if you haven't already)! ;)

Author

Knol Aust

Date

2003-04-24T16:58:46-06:00