Young voters, new voters, and where's the hope?

From the point of view of people who study US elections, "young people" are those from 18-34. I suspect that folks on the young end of that spectrum may not identify with those at the older end of the cohort -- and vice versa. But they do have something in common: they have usually actually voted in far less than their raw numbers, especially in midterm elections when the presidency isn't up for grabs.

A poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and MTV finds that anxiety about the midterms is rising among young people. Relatively large percentages are interested and hopeful about the vote, but they are uneasy. Conversely, smaller numbers for young people are feeling helpless or overwhelmed than was the case earlier in this year.

Does this emotional churning mean that more will turnout and cast ballots than past experience suggests? Maybe, though campaigns would be mad to count on this without organized work to push the group to the polls....One reason that young people don't vote is that states throw up barriers through hurdles in the process of getting listed on the voter rolls. Voter registration can be a bureaucratic stumbling block to participation -- but it doesn't have to be that way.

California now allows and encourages 16 and 17 year olds to pre-register.

The pre-registration program, which launched in 2016, lets high schoolers sign up and then be automatically registered once they turn 18. More than 104,000 pre-registered teens have already reached voting age and will be eligible to vote in the November midterms, and the number of pre-registered voters has doubled over the last five months. Many are among California voters registered when they obtain their driver’s licenses through the state’s motor voter law.

Interestingly, though Republican identification is rare among these new voters, "No Party" exceeds the Democrats.

Does this mean these young voters reject or are uneasy with both parties? Certainly. They don't trust either to make their lives better, though the Dems may seem at least a little bit the lesser evil.

But my experience canvassing in Reno suggests something additional. (This isn't California, but the people aren't so different.) I have come across several registered voters under age 20 who were eager to talk about the election. They had never yet voted. They readily admitted they didn't know much about the candidates or even what offices were up for a vote. They seemed a little pleased that someone would come to their door to talk with them about this strange upcoming activity in which they were newly eligible to participate.

What they didn't want was simply to be told what benefits politicians might offer them. Sure, they wanted candidates who stood for raising the minimum wage and for relief from student loan debt. But also, they wanted to be inspired. They wanted to feel that by voting they were doing something ethical for family and neighbors and community. I could feel the yearning.

It's hard for candidates for offices that most citizens barely comprehend to offer inspiration to their voters. Charisma is a gift not every candidate has, nor is it essential for good policy and honest governance.

Young people aren't the only voters who want more inspiration and less nasty ads that tear down opponents. Obviously attack ads work; that's why we are deluged in them. But everyone, young and old, wants to be called to a vision of something better -- though we may disagree mightily on what better looks like. Our politics feels empty without a vision of a better community, yet we have to play out the string, striving for increments of improvement. When people who want something better sit out the contest, those for whom the status quo is okay or beneficial win by default. That's a tough, even repugnant, truth, especially for first time voters. But it is true. Citizenship is not bean-bag.