Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Gen Z is key to securing America’s elections

"Election" withing binary code
400tmax/Getty Images

Levine is the senior elections integrity fellow at the German Marshall Fund's Alliance for Securing Democracy, where he assesses vulnerabilities in electoral infrastructure, administration, and policies. Albanese is associate professor and associate chair for research in the Department of Information Science and Technology at George Mason University.

America's elections are under unprecedented threat. From foreign interference in the 2016 presidential race to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, the integrity of our democratic process has been repeatedly targeted in recent years. Safeguarding it against future attacks requires an often-overlooked resource: Generation Z.


Young Americans have come of age during a time of unparalleled challenges to our democracy. They have witnessed the erosion of trust in our institutions, the rise of polarization and misinformation, and the vulnerability of our electoral systems to both domestic and foreign malicious actors. This tumultuous introduction to the political landscape has left many in Gen Z both disillusioned and eager to be part of the solution.

Yet when we speak with election officials and their partners about engaging the next generation in their work, the conversation centers mostly on poll worker recruitment and awareness-raising. While these are important initiatives, they fail to recognize the full potential of young people as partners in the fight for election security. To truly empower Gen Z to make a difference, we must invest in programs that provide them with hands-on experience and training, engaging youth to ensure a continuous pipeline of knowledgeable individuals joining the space. The Virginia Cyber Navigator Internship Program, a collaboration between the Virginia Department of Elections and six Virginia universities, offers one powerful model.

After Russian-affiliated actors targeted voter registration databases and state election websites across the United States in 2016, Virginia lawmakers required that local election offices meet minimum requisite cybersecurity standards. However, many officials still lacked the money, personnel, or knowledge to both meet these standards and upgrade their election infrastructure security.

The VA Cyber Navigator Internship Program, which deploys college students with elections and cybersecurity training to help Virginia’s local election offices improve their security posture, was created to address that gap. The students first take an election security course developed by the universities and the Virginia Department of Elections. The course provides specialized training on the significance of voting and the technical issues associated with securing election processes (the authors of this piece co-teach the election security course offered at George Mason University).

Upon completing this training, students are eligible to apply for the internship program. Selected students work as interns at local election offices throughout Virginia for 10 weeks in the summer. To kick off each year’s summer internship, an election security bootcamp is hosted by the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. This event brings together all interns, faculty from participating universities, elected officials, and experts such as Chris Krebs, the first director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Participating election offices benefit from the expertise of the cybersecurity interns, and the interns gain hands-on experience that connects them with academics and elections officials, an experience that could create a pipeline of talent to mitigate the loss of institutional knowledge that occurs when older, more experienced election officials leave the field.

Deploying technically savvy students with specialized cybersecurity training to assist local election offices provides valuable hands-on experience for students while addressing a critical need for officials. However, recent developments at both the federal and state levels raise concerns about our commitment to prioritizing election security. The paltry $55 million allocated for this purpose in the fiscal 2024 federal budget, along with some states' reluctance to collaborate with CISA, suggests a troubling failure to treat the integrity of our democratic process as the national security imperative that it is.

Investing in the education and engagement of young people cultivates a cadre of informed, committed individuals who understand the gravity of the threats we face. We can build a stronger, more resilient democracy that is better prepared to withstand the challenges posed by those who seek to undermine it. This is not merely a matter of good governance but of national security. Our adversaries, both foreign and domestic, have demonstrated their willingness to exploit any vulnerability in our electoral infrastructure.

Strengthening that infrastructure demands fresh thinking and new perspectives — precisely what Gen Z has to offer. The future of our democracy depends, in part, on our ability to inspire and empower young people to take up this cause as their own.


Read More

AI, Reality, and the Pygmalion Effect: Why Human Judgment Still Matters
Woman typing on laptop at wooden table with breakfast.

AI, Reality, and the Pygmalion Effect: Why Human Judgment Still Matters

When the World goes Mad, one must accept Madness as Sanity, since Sanity is, in the last analysis, nothing but the Madness on which the Whole World happens to agree. (George Bernard Shaw)

Among the most prolific and famous playwrights of the 20th century, Shaw wrote “Pygmalion,” the play upon which “My Fair Lady” was based. Pygmalion was a Greek mythological figure, a sculptor from Cyprus, who fell in love with the statue he created. Aphrodite turned his sculpture into a real woman, promoting the idea that the “created” is greater than the “creator.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Humanoid Educators Will Widen Inequality—And Only Tech Overlords Will Benefit
a sign with a question mark and a question mark drawn on it

Humanoid Educators Will Widen Inequality—And Only Tech Overlords Will Benefit

In March, First Lady Melania Trump hosted an AI-powered humanoid robot at the White House during the Fostering the Future Together Global Coalition Summit, and introduced Plato, a humanoid educator marketed as a replacement for teachers that could homeschool children. A humanoid educator that speaks multiple languages, is always available, and draws on a vast store of information could expand access in meaningful ways. But the evidence suggests that the risks outweigh the benefits, that adoption will be uneven, and that the families most likely to adopt Plato will bear those risks disproportionately.

Research on excessive technology use in childhood has found consistent results. Young children and teenagers who spend too much time with screens are more likely to experience reduced physical activity, lower attention spans, depression, and social anxiety. On the same day that Melania Trump introduced Plato, a California jury ruled that Meta and YouTube contributed to anxiety and depression in a woman who began using social media at age 6, a reminder that the consequences of under-tested technology on children can be severe and long-lasting.

Keep ReadingShow less
An illustration of a block with the words, "AI," on it, surrounded by slightly smaller caution signs.

The future of AI should be measured by its impact on ordinary Americans—not just tech executives and investors. Exploring AI inequality, labor concerns, and responsible innovation.

Getty Images, J Studios

The Kayla Test: Exploring How AI Impacts Everyday Americans

We’re failing the Kayla Test and running out of time to pass it. Whether AI goes “well” for the country is not a question anyone in SF or DC can answer. To assess whether AI is truly advancing the interests of Americans, AI stakeholders must engage with more than power users, tokenmaxxers, and Fortune 500 CEOs. A better evaluation is to talk to folks like Kayla, my Lyft driver in Morgantown, WV, and find out what they think about AI. It's a test I stumbled upon while traveling from an AI event at the West Virginia University College of Law to one at Stanford Law.

Kayla asked me what I do for a living. I told her that I’m a law professor focused on AI policy. Those were the last words I said for the remainder of the ride to the airport.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close up of a person on their phone at night.

From “Patriot Games” to The Hunger Games, how spectacle, social media, and political culture risk normalizing violence and eroding empathy.

Getty Images, Westend61

The Capitol Is Counting on Us to Laugh

When the Trump administration announced the Patriot Games, many people laughed. Selecting two children per state for a nationally televised sports competition looked too much like Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games to take seriously. But that instinct, to laugh rather than look closer, is one the Capitol is counting on. It has always been easier to normalize violence when it arrives dressed as entertainment or patriotism.

Here’s what I mean: The Hunger Games starts with the reaping, the moment when a Capitol official selects two children, one boy and one girl, to fight to the death against tributes from every other district. The games were created as an annual reminder of a failed rebellion, to remind the districts that dissent has consequences. At first, many Capitol residents saw the games as a just punishment. But sentiments shifted as the spectacle grew—when citizens could bet on winners, when a death march transformed into a beauty pageant, when murder became a pathway to celebrity.

Keep ReadingShow less