How Voter 'Hunger Games' Could Increase Turnout...and Other Student Ideas

I sat down to write a post about the 2012 Election, but let's be honest - if you're like me, you've probably already read your fill.  But one final statistic struck me today - 57.5% nationwide voter turnout.

Sharing this number with my students came at a most opportune time - we've just begun studying voting patterns and political participation.  They are coming to the stark realization that Americans don't much care for voting.  In fact, the biggest election in recent memory (2008) saw a whopping 62.3% turnout rate.  For all the fanfare and excitement of that election, we didn't even break the two-thirds threshold.

My standard comment when introducing this topic is to remind students that more Americans vote for contestants on 'American Idol' than vote in presidential elections.  They, in turn, instantly remind me that you can vote multiple times on shows like that, and that anyone at any age can vote. I then chastise them for wasting their time on reality television instead of quality programing, and so the classroom banter goes.  The point that is ultimately made, however, is the truly sad rate at which Americans turn out at the polls nationally.

In our discussion today, we focussed not only on the problem but also solutions.  Here are some of the problems we identified as to WHY Americans vote in smaller numbers than other industrialized democracies:

• Voter registration and voting is elective, not mandatory. 
• Voting can be inconvenient. (not here in Washington where we vote from home!)
• Elections are held on Tuesdays, people are busy during the week.
• Voter apathy

I challenged my students to propose solutions.  I told them they had just been appointed to a presidential  commission to study, and propose solutions to, the issue of non-voting.  Here are some of the highlights.  Never mind that many would require a constitutional amendment; I applauded them for their creativity:

• Make voting mandatory, with tax or financial penalties for non-voting.  
• Automatic voter registration on the 18th birthday.  
• All mail elections, nationwide. (again, already here in Washington!)
• Voting via text message
• Incentivized voting using food, tax breaks, gift cards, or other rewards.  
• Penalized non-voting by requiring an extra round of unpaid jury duty
• Federal requirements to states to reach 85% turnout or lose federal funds (from something?)

But the most creative option (unfortunately, also the least realistic) came from my 6th period.  A group of three students proposed a 'Hunger Games' style arena spectacle to punish non-voters.  Electoral freeloaders would be required to complete their ballot, then run through a gauntlet of obstacles and challenges just to submit it, all the while being jeered by a taunting crowd.  The lesson, I was told, would be to show how much easier it would have been to just to vote in the first place.  

While their knowledge of civil liberties and constitutional protections are clearly still emerging, I was proud of the variety and ingenuity of these ideas.  Indeed, that will be the enduring challenge for their generation - to make an important, yet antiquated practice both palatable and relevant to a youth culture that is used to having everything at their fingertips.  

The After-School Remix: Wednesday, April 11th

Here's a few clips and links to content related to class discussions this week:

Santorum Drops Out
Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum dropped out of the race for the Republican nomination this week.  Mitt Romney's delegate count had begun to pile up in recent weeks, making the likelyhood that Mr. Santorum could win even slimmer.  Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has not signaled he's leaving the race, even though he places a distant third to Romney and Santorum.  With the former Pennsylvania senator dropping out, Romney is almost assured the nomination, and both he and President Obama's campaigns have signaled a noticeable shift toward general election mode this week.  Here is NBC's David Gregory with more analysis.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Washington State Legislature's Double-Overtime All-Nighter
The supposed-to-be 60-day legislative session finally wrapped up early this morning in Olympia on day 91.  When lawmakers could not agree upon a budget after the regular 60 days, Governor Chris Gregoire called them back into a 30-day special session.  That session was over at midnight last night, so a third, one-day session was called to give lawmaker's the opportunity to finish their work early this morning.  The budget was the final sticking point between the state House, controlled by Democrats, and the Senate controlled by a coalition of Republicans and conservative Democrats.

The AP's Rachel La Corte summarizes the late-night wheeling and dealing.  

Jerry Cornfield from the Everett Herald has more analysis and links to budget documents

Test Your Knowledge of Political Parties
Think you now a lot about the Republican and Democratic parties?  Test what you know with this quiz from the Pew Research Center, and compare your results with people in your age group and level of education.

The News IQ Test:  Political Parties - Pew Research Center  

"Your 'swag' will be used against you in a court of law..."
All this week we've been talking about civil liberties, particularly Miranda rights.  A judge in Galveston, Texas ruled that security camera footage of a burglary suspect was admissible in court as evidence because the young man's dance was a distinctive identifying trait, even though his face is not visible.  (Read the article here from Slate.com)  Apparently, his fellow high school students know him from his dance.  So watch out where you bust a move - it could be "used against you."

Follow the Money - Federal 'Tax Receipt' Calculator

I'm often asked by students how Americans' tax dollars are spent.  They want a dollar-for-dollar breakdown of where their (or more likely their parents') money goes.

The White House has produced this interactive tool that's the best thing I've seen yet for answering their question.  It works best if you are able to provide your exact tax amounts, but there are also some general categories you can select.

Great for prompting discussion and learning the intricacies of the federal government.

WA Attorney General McKenna on Supreme Court Health Care Suit

As we discussed in class, the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court heard three days of arguments this week in the case of twenty-six states, including Washington State, suing the federal government over the 2010 Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as "Obamacare."  Washington joined that lawsuit in 2010, under the direction of state Attorney General Rob McKenna.

In an in-depth interview with TVW's The Impact, McKenna, who is also a Republican candidate for governor, outlined his reasons for joining the suit as well as how he believes parts of the law will survive.  Note some of Attorney General McKenna's discussion on constitutionality are the same topics we debated this week.

Look for the use of two key terms we covered in class:

Individual Mandate - the requirement in the law that nearly all Americans be covered by some form of medical insurance by 2014, or face a tax penalty.  This is the most contentious portion of the law and the center of constitutional debate:  under the commerce power, can the federal government force you to buy a product?

Severability - if the individual mandate portion is struck down by the Court, does the entire law become invalid, or can certain parts remain legal?  For instance, the law includes a section that makes it illegal for insurance companies to discriminate based on pre-existing medical problems.  Would this remain in effect if the mandate is declared unconstitutional?

"25, 50, and 1" - A Special Session Explainer

As the Washington State Legislature enters its second week of special session, it appears the House and Senate are no closer to a budget deal that could send lawmakers home.  A visibly frustrated Governor Chris Gregoire held a press conference on Thursday where she threatened to veto dozens of bills passed by both houses until a compromise could be reached.  Check out the video from TVW:



Why the Stalemate?

First, lets understand the mechanics of our state's law-making process.  Like many states, Washington's legislature only meets for part of the year - 60 days in even-numbered years; 105 in odd.  They have that short amount of time to both pass new laws and submit an operating budget to the governor's office.  Unlike the federal government, states must keep their books balanced and cannot run a deficit.  So in economic times like these (and in the past four sessions) when tax revenue is down because people are spending less, lawmakers are forced to make tough choices to keep state government afloat.

The Friday Night Senate Coup

The center of the conflict is a disagreement between the House version of the budget and the Senate's.  While both houses have a Democratic majority, Republicans were able to seize control of the Senate in dramatic fashion the night of Friday, March 2nd when they convinced three Democrats to start voting with them on the budget.  With a slim majority, Republicans were able to pass their version of a budget which was dramatically different from the one Senate Democrats wanted, and had already passed the House.  This set the stage for the showdown we now see between the House, Senate, and Governor's office.

The Governor's Power of the Pen

As you saw in the video above, Governor Gregoire is frustrated with the lack of progress and reminded reporters that it's costing the state $1 million per day to not have a budget.  Hoping to spur the process along, she's held meetings with House and Senate leadership all week trying to forge a compromise.  Gregoire is also threatening to veto bills that were passed in the regular session as a way to get legislators to bargain - a political tactic that asserts the power of her office as a co-equal branch of our state's government.  Repeatedly throughout the news conference she used the phrase "25, 50 and 1" - the number of votes in the Senate, House, and her signature as governor, required to pass a budget.

Choose Your Budget Weapon - Axe or Scalpel?

The legislature has thirty days from March 12th to reach a compromise on the budget or the special session will be over.  At that point, Governor Gregoire can either call them back into a third session, or institute across-the-board cuts (meaning equal by percent to all areas of state government) in order to balance the budget.  By state law, the governor can balance the budget herself only by those means - the equivalent of taking an axe to the state budget.  Many state officials, including the governor herself, would like the cuts to be more surgical, with strategic cuts to certain departments instead of all areas.

Pay No Attention to Man Behind The Curtain: A Quick Guide to Political Ads

I started to write a post about the complex rules and federal laws surrounding campaign finance, 501(c)(4) groups, 527 groups, independent expenditure only groups, or "Super PACs", all in light of the 2010 Citizen's United v. Federal Election Commission landmark Supreme Court Decision...

...and then I hit delete.

Campaign finance law is incredibly complex, boring, and frustrating to the lay-person - which is exactly what political elites want:  a system that appears straightforward on the surface, but is totally inaccessible to the average voter.  Just like in the classic film The Wizard of Oz, it's important to know who is "behind the curtain" controlling what we see.

So here's a quick guide to being an informed citizen while watching political ads.  It's not a crash course in federal election law, but it will at least get you started in asking the right questions.

RULE #1:  Who Produced the Ad?    
It's not always easy to figure out, but federal law requires candidates (or their voice) to appear in ads that come directly from their campaign.  They must say the words, "I'm (candidate), and I approved this message."

For example, here's an ad from Mitt Romney's campaign


This rule is straightforward and simple - if it's from the candidate, you will see or hear them at the end of the ad saying those exact words.  If they aren't there, that should instantly raise a red flag.

RULE #2:  Then Who PAID for the Ad?  
Now it gets complex.  Again, an ad paid for by the campaign will have the candidate saying the magic words.  But if not, then someone else paid for it.

Following a 2010 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, independent groups may form in support of a presidential candidate and produce their own ads in favor, or criticizing another candidate.  By law they are not allowed to have any association or coordination whatsoever with the actual campaign, but they can spend as much time as they want on air supporting that candidate.

These independent expenditure groups - or "Super PACs" - are fundraising Goliaths.  Unlike campaigns, there are no limits to how much money groups or individuals can donate to Super PACs, turning them into what comedian Steven Colbert called "giant megaphones of cash."

Where candidates must not accept donations larger than $2000 and have to plaster their name, voice, and likeness all over the ads they produce, Super PACs can raise huge sums of money and create blistering attack ads, without fully divulging who they are or who they actually support.

For example, here's an ad from a group called "Restore our Future" - can you figure out who they support?


The answer - Mitt Romney.

Again, notice the veiled information about who they are and which candidate they support.  Also notice the lack of a candidate endorsement.

Super PAC ads can also be fluffy and warm hearted - here's one from a Super PAC called "Make Us Great Again" who supports Texas Governor Rick Perry.


RULE #3 - Don't Get 'Swiftboated'
Perhaps the most well-known attack ads of the modern era were those from an unknown group calling themselves the "Swiftboat Veterans For Truth" in the 2004 presidential election.  Back then, Super PACs were not allowed, but small non-profit groups could produce their own ads so long as they did not advocate for any specific candidate.  They could, however, drag others through the mud.

To understand their impact, one must understand the backdrop of the 2004 Election - the War in Iraq and national security were the top two issues defining the debate between incumbent President George W. Bush and Massachusetts Senator John Kerry.  In their ad (play below), the Swiftboat Vets contended that John Kerry's Navy service in Vietnam was marked with lies, distortions, and dishonor towards American troops.  With the U.S. fighting two wars, the ads struck a nerve with those who had doubts about Kerry's ability to be commander-in-chief.

It's unlikely that ads with similar subject matter will surface in the 2012 election cycle, as the candidates and environment of the race is completely different from 2004.  But do beware of blistering attack ads that come from groups that are unknown and difficult to track down.  You might agree with their position, but it's always important to know the full agenda.

Sunday Political Roundup

Look for this post weekly, featuring the top three interviews and newsmakers of the Sunday political shows.  

As we have discussed in class, Sunday morning is the best time to find in-depth interviews with key political figures.  Each of the major networks has their own program, competing for the best one-on-ones.  The result is usually a good mix of spin from the guests and a reading of the political tea leaves from each program's "roundtable" of news analysts.

Clip #1 - "There's Too Much Government in My Life!"  ABC News This Week
This week's winner introduces the debate on the show about the role of government in people's lives.  The entire show was a debate between four panelists that we will likely view in class, but I thought the intro clip was especially good at explaining the heart of the debate about government in America.


Clip #2:  House Speaker John Boehner on NBC's Meet The Press
Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner (R-OH) speaks with David Gregory at length about last-minute negotiations with the White House about the payroll tax cut and the 2012 Presidential Race.  Watch how careful Boehner is not to take David Gregory's bait to endorse a GOP candidate.  Well played Mr. Speaker!


Clip #3:  Congresswoman Michele Bachmann on NBC's Meet The Press
I've mentioned before that Rep. Bachmann is a well-disciplined candidate, regardless of whether you like her or not.  Watch how she handles this interview with David Gregory - one of the best political reporters on TV today.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy