Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Here's a business plan: Wooing millennials to the polls with prizes, not guilt

Motivote's Jess Riegel

Co-founder Jess Riegel (right) leads a demonstration of Motivote near Pittsburgh, where it was tested in a special election in 2018.

Courtesy Motivote

Traditionally, voter registration and turnout drives go right for the moral argument.

Registering to vote and going to the polls is your obligation in a democracy, the organizers plead. People have died to make it possible for us to vote. And, of course, every vote counts so yours could decide the election.

Noble thoughts, all, but the relatively poor turnout through the years — including just north of 30 percent of voters ages 18 to 29 in last year's hard-fought midterm — argues for a different approach. Maybe one as truly American, if in a totally different way, as the appeals to duty and civic pride.

Think teams. And competition. And, best of all, prizes.


This out-of-the-box strategy is the brainchild of graduate school classmates Jess Riegel and Rachel Konowitz. With their fledgling venture Motivote, they hope to put an unusually youthful stamp on the electorate in some off-year contests this fall but especially in the coming presidential election.

Riegel studied political science at the University of Pennsylvania and was then assigned by Teach for America to schools in New Orleans and Newark, N.J. Konowitz worked as a student organizer on issues including voter registration but grew frustrated with traditional methods, such as door-knocking, that never seemed to move the needle much.

Armed with their millennials' native knowledge of social media, an understanding of behavioral economics from their graduate work as well as their own research, the pair put together a business plan particularly focused on getting younger people to vote.

What began as a capstone project for master's degrees in public administration at New York University became their passion and now their jobs.

"It's very easy to say that young people are apathetic," Riegel said. "But really, it's understanding voting as a behavior and what is getting in the way of socially conscious, politically opinionated young people from voting."

What they found is that a series of seemingly insignificant obstacles — what they call "micro-barriers" — end up causing plenty of people either to never get registered to vote, or to not follow through with their desire to cast a ballot even once they are registered.

While conducting a research and development phase after some preliminary Motivate testing during last fall's midterm campaign, Riegel and Konowitz said, they were struck by what has become a seminal essay on millennial burnout by Anne Helen Peterson published in January. It begins with the story of a young man who never registered to vote because thoughts of filling out and mailing in the form filled him with anxiety.

To Riegel and Konowitz, this sounded a lot like what happens when people intend to start a diet or an exercise program but fail to follow through.

To overcome these hurdles, the two created an online program that breaks down the voting process into bite-sized actions and uses a series of "behavioral nudges" to get people to the finish line. Participants become part of teams, perhaps all the men in one college fraternity class or all the women sharing a group house, to create additional competition and peer pressure for getting the mission accomplished.

Points are given for completing tasks and prizes doled out.

"At the core of what we are doing is creating social accountability around following through to vote," Riegel said.

For the prizes, such as gift cards, Motivote reaches out to businesses looking to promote young people voting.

And since it is a business, Motivote charges a licensing fee to groups that use the system.

Currently, Motivote is working with the group Mississippi Votes to create teams on 11 college campuses in preparation for the state's hotly contested 2019 elections for governor, other statewide offices and the Legislature.

The company is also planning to work with an African-American voting group on the Memphis municipal elections, with Mi Familia Vota in time for the Houston city elections, and with several groups in Virginia in advance of its General Assembly and local elections.

Its successes and setbacks in these contests will help refine the company's motivational strategies in time for the 2020 presidential contest, when both nominees are sure to be playing close attention to turning out younger people.

Motivote stays on the right side of election law by not providing prizes for actually voting but for the steps leading up to act of casting a ballot.

And how does the company know its success rate, as measured by the number of people its targeted who actually vote? Participants are asked to post a selfie from their polling place afterward.

As for the potential criticism that Motivote's methods infantilize young voters and trivialize the most sacred of civic responsibilities, Riegel has this emphatic rebuttal.

"This is too important to just keep throwing money into things that don't work," she said. "It's not how many doors I knock on. It's not how many texts I sent. We kind of glorify those metrics but that's not connected at all to how many people actually vote. That's what we are driving for."


Read More

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less