Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Gen Z voters could swing key races in November

Josh Shapiro and John Fetterman

Josh Shapiro (center) and Josh Fetterman (right) could see their electoral fates hinge on young voters.

Mark Makela/Getty Images

The youngest voters in swing states are highly motivated to cast ballots this fall, according to a recent poll, and they could prove to be difference-makers in a number of key races.

The Gen Z Swing State Survey, conducted by Generation Labs for the left-leaning Voters of Tomorrow, found that 67 percent of people ages 18-24 in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin said they are “absolutely” or “likely” to vote in November’s midterm elections.

In the previous midterm election, 32 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds voted. In 2020, when more voters than ever cast ballots, 51 percent of that cohort participated.


“Young people are under attack from the far-right on so many different fronts — from abortion restrictions to book bans to gun violence –– and realize that this election could determine what rights we have going forward,” said Jack Lobel, deputy communications director for Voters of Tomorrow.

Each of the surveyed states features competitive House, Senate and gubernatorial races. Democrats in Generation Z are more likely to vote than Republicans (78 percent, compared to 63 percent).

This year, the members of Generation Z in those states say they are primarily concerned abortion rights, with 37 percent saying that issue will influence how they vote. Both jobs/economy and health care were identified by 35 percent (respondents could name three issues.)

Concerns about democracy fell near the bottom of the list: democracy reform/voting rights (11 percent), the Jan. 6, 2021 riot (6 percent), reforming/eliminating the Senate filibuster (5 percent).

“The far-right has given us so many reasons to show up this November. Our mission to protect access to abortion care is just one of them,” Lobel said.

A recent survey by The New York Times found that, among all registered votes nationwide, the economy is considered the most important problem facing the United States (26 percent), followed by inflation/cost of living at 18 percent and abortion running a distant third at 5 percent. Even among those 18-29, abortion remained in third (at 10 percent).

Earlier this year, the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement identified the House, Senate and governor’s races where youth voters can have the most impact.

The Senate races in each of the seven states included in the survey made CIRCLE’s list of 10, including the top five (Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin).

In terms of gubernatorial races, four of the states made CIRCLE’s 10, including Wisconsin (no. 2) and Arizona (no. 2).

“Young people in Wisconsin, which is in the top-5 of both of our rankings, make up 16% of the state’s population, have a 68% voter registration rate, and have demographic characteristics correlated with high voter turnout,” wrote the researchers for CIRCLE, which is part of Tufts University’s Tisch College.

Lobel identified a handful of candidates who have done a particularly good job of reaching out to young voters, including Democrats Josh Shapiro and John Fetterman, who are running for governor and senator, respectively, in Pennsylvania.

“Young people make up 16% of the state’s population, 69% of youth are registered to vote, and young people had above-average voter turnout in the past two federal elections,” CIRCLE wrote.

Voters of Tomorrow has a particular affinity for a particular Democrat seeking a House seat in Florida.

“It also goes without saying that Maxwell Frost, who will soon become the first Gen Z member of Congress and whom we were proud to endorse early on in his candidacy, is one candidate who appeals to us, not just because he is one of us, but because he will fight for our future,” Lobel said.

Read More

​DCF Commissioner Jodi Hill-Lilly.

DCF Commissioner Jodi Hill-Lilly speaks to the gathering at an adoption ceremony in Torrington.

Laura Tillman / CT Mirror

What’s Behind the Smiles on National Adoption Day

In the past 21 years, I’ve fostered and adopted children with complex medical and developmental needs. Last year, after a grueling 2,205 days navigating the DCF system, we adopted our 7yo daughter. This year, we were the last family on the docket for National Adoption Day after 589 days of suspense. While my 2 yo daughter’s adoption was a moment of triumph, the cold, empty courtroom symbolized the system’s detachment from the lived experiences of marginalized families.

National Adoption Day often serves as a time to highlight stories of joy and family unification. Yet, behind the scenes, the obstacles faced by children in foster care and the families that support them tell a more complex story—one that demands attention and action. For those of us who have navigated the foster care system as caregivers, the systemic indifference and disparities experienced by marginalized children and families, particularly within BIPOC and disability communities, remain glaringly unresolved.

Keep Reading Show less
Framing "Freedom"

hands holding a sign that reads "FREEDOM"

Photo Credit: gpointstudio

Framing "Freedom"

The idea of “freedom” is important to Americans. It’s a value that resonates with a lot of people, and consistently ranks among the most important. It’s a uniquely powerful motivator, with broad appeal across the political spectrum. No wonder, then, that we as communicators often appeal to the value of freedom when making a case for change.

But too often, I see people understand values as magic words that can be dropped into our communications and work exactly the way we want them to. Don’t get me wrong: “freedom” is a powerful word. But simply mentioning freedom doesn’t automatically lead everyone to support the policies we want or behave the way we’d like.

Keep Reading Show less
Hands resting on another.

Amid headlines about Epstein, survivors’ voices remain overlooked. This piece explores how restorative justice offers CSA survivors healing and choice.

Getty Images, PeopleImages

What Do Epstein’s Victims Need?

Jeffrey Epstein is all over the news, along with anyone who may have known about, enabled, or participated in his systematic child sexual abuse. Yet there is significantly less information and coverage on the perspectives, stories and named needs of these survivors themselves. This is almost always the case for any type of coverage on incidences of sexual violence – we first ask “how should we punish the offender?”, before ever asking “what does the survivor want?” For way too long, survivors of sexual violence, particularly of childhood sexual abuse (CSA), have been cast to the wayside, treated like witnesses to crimes committed against the state, rather than the victims of individuals that have caused them enormous harm. This de-emphasis on direct survivors of CSA is often presented as a form of “protection” or “respect for their privacy” and while keeping survivors safe is of the utmost importance, so is the centering and meeting of their needs, even when doing so means going against the grain of what the general public or criminal legal system think are conventional or acceptable responses to violence. Restorative justice (RJ) is one of those “unconventional” responses to CSA and yet there is a growing number of survivors who are naming it as a form of meeting their needs for justice and accountability. But what is restorative justice and why would a CSA survivor ever want it?

“You’re the most powerful person I’ve ever known and you did not deserve what I did to you.” These words were spoken toward the end of a “victim offender dialogue”, a restorative justice process in which an adult survivor of childhood sexual abuse had elected to meet face-to-face for a facilitated conversation with the person that had harmed her. This phrase was said by the man who had violently sexually abused her in her youth, as he sat directly across from her, now an adult woman. As these two people looked at each other at that moment, the shift in power became tangible, as did a dissolvement of shame in both parties. Despite having gone through a formal court process, this survivor needed more…more space to ask questions, to name the impacts this violence had and continues to have in her life, to speak her truth directly to the person that had harmed her more than anyone else, and to reclaim her power. We often talk about the effects of restorative justice in the abstract, generally ineffable and far too personal to be classifiable; but in that instant, it was a felt sense, it was a moment of undeniable healing for all those involved and a form of justice and accountability that this survivor had sought for a long time, yet had not received until that instance.

Keep Reading Show less