Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Don’t give up on democracy, fellow young voters

Opinion

Don’t give up on democracy, fellow young voters

"We have the power to unrig the system. Political apathy is not the answer," argues Amanda Shafer.

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Shafer, a junior at the University of California, Berkeley, is the director of external affairs for BridgeUSA, a national, student-run organization seeking to depolarize college campuses and increase youth civic engagement.

Do you feel like your vote actually matters? I sure don't. Though I proudly registered two years ago on my 18th birthday at city hall in my Chicago suburb, and have voted in every single election since, I know my vote does not truly matter. It is a drop in a bucket in a safe district.

The reality is, most of our votes do not matter; 85 percent of House districts are not in jeopardy for the party that holds the seat. Millions are misrepresented by politicians they oppose. Candidates from third parties, who may be most representative of a district, are dismissed as "spoilers" ruining the election for the two-party duopoly. And safe districts encourage candidates to pull away from the middle to win primaries, but never move back in time for an assured victory in the general election.

We all know the troubles riddling the Electoral College — from granting a voter in Wyoming 57 times the voting power as a voter in California, to giving a single white voter the power of 1.05 voters but an Asian voter the influence of 0.58 of a vote. This system has grown horribly out of step with the wishes of the majority; three out of the five instances of a popularly elected candidate losing an electoral vote occurred in the past 16 years.


As young people flock to coastal urban areas, their votes matter less and less in "safe" states and districts. Despite "one person, one vote," gerrymandered House districts and the Electoral College clearly favor a particular kind of voter: rural, older and white, stacking our democracy against the increasingly young and diverse populace the millennial and Gen Z generations are creating.

Uncompetitive House races and a rigged presidential electoral system have contributed to political polarization, grinding governance to a standstill. Despite mounting crises — climate change, vast wealth inequality, ballooning student loan debt and unprecedented levels of gun violence, to name a few —- our politics has become polarized to the point of being ineffectual. Obstructionism has become a winning political tactic, leaving massive societal ailments to worsen.

Millennials and Gen Zers look at this disfunction and increasingly dismiss politics as impossibly gridlocked and incapable, fueling vast political apathy in the leaders of tomorrow. Older generations love pushing the narrative that "young people don't vote." But with a rigged, uncompetitive democracy and an impossibly polarized government, it's no wonder young people don't think the answer lies in government.

We, the young adults, should not discount government, though. We can and should aim to make democracy work once more. And democracy reforms should be an American issue, not a partisan one. Come 2020, millennials and Gen Zers will comprise the largest bloc of eligible voters, outpacing the long-dominant baby boomer generation. We have the power to engage with democracy and demand systemic change to address the crises our government is failing to act upon.

If we want to solve the issues defining our generations' struggles, we have to make our voices heard. We need to vote. We need to knock on doors for a candidate we support, or at the very least post Instagram stories about political issues we care about. If we want to enact change, we need to take our rightful seat at the long table of democracy and start advocating for ourselves.

At BridgeUSA, the leading multipartisan organization on college campuses, we work for students to actively engage with our democracy through the "bridge mindset." To mitigate polarization, we encourage students to explore ideas and learn to articulate their preferences through civil discourse. In doing so, we create empathetic young leaders excited to join the political process in productive ways.

Sharpening youth political engagement is certainly the first step. But once we begin to fulfill our civic duty as active citizens, we need to demand changes to make our democracy more democratic. A laundry list of effective reforms would be effective, and they can be boiled down to simply: Unrig our elections to make them more democratic.

Ridding the system of institutions that enable tyranny of the minority should be the first step. Since abolishing the Electoral College is a pipe dream, we should urge our state elected officials to embrace the interstate compact under which a state's electors are committed to vote for the candidate who wins the national popular vote. If states with a combined 270 of the 538 electoral votes do this, we can achieve a system where every individual vote does matter.

Our election maps are also hopelessly gerrymandered to favor the incumbent party that drew the lines. Just looking at Maryland, Illinois, North Carolina and Pennsylvania reveals the transpartisan appeal to ending this: Both parties use it to disadvantage the other, so both parties should have a stake in ending it to make our elections more competitive and ensure our representatives are truly representative of their states. Seventeen states have adopted independent commissions, or other innovative measures that remove power from legislators' hands, to draw their lines following the 2020 census. Hopefully more will follow.

American democracy, despite how broken and dysfunctional it is currently, can be saved. But it requires young people to engage the system and press for change. If not us, the older politicians who continue to benefit from the system will never concede power by altering it. We have the power to unrig the system. Political apathy is not the answer. As a generation, we must turn to peaceful activism and civic engagement to demand a government that listens to us and a democracy that works for every American.


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less