Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The student vote provides an important roadmap for democracy and higher education

Students register to vote

Students at the University of Vermont fill out voter registration forms to participate in the March 2020 primary.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Unger is co-founder and executive director of the Students Learn Students Vote Coalition. Rin directs the Student PIRGs New Voters Project.

According to all available evidence, youth and college student voters turned out in force this election cycle, making a decisive impact on the 2022 midterms. While those results exceeded public expectations, they came as no surprise to organizers who work closely with the youth vote – especially those on college campuses, where the story of the student vote may offer a roadmap to strengthening democratic participation across the board.

After decades of underperformance, by any objective measure, college student voter turnout exploded over the 2018 and 2020 federal election cycles, significantly outpacing turnout growth among the overall electorate – and they appear to have sustained high turnout levels in 2022. Student voters achieved this new normal despite often facing logistical obstacles due to complicated housing situations, psychological obstacles as first-time voters, and systemic barriers due to policies that seek to block or dilute their vote – not to mention the unprecedented circumstances brought on by the continued Covid-19 pandemic.

We’ve spent much of our careers working to grow the college student vote, and supporting youth voter engagement on both the local and national levels. We can say with confidence that this level of accelerated growth in voter participation could not have happened without sustained engagement through a local-first, nonpartisan approach that focused resources on grassroots efforts to engage voters in their communities and on their terms, with national organizations playing a crucial role of support and coordination.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter


At the local level we’ve seen dozens, if not hundreds, of stories like the one co-author Manny Rin worked on first-hand as a local organizer in Southern California, where in 2014, prior to the formation of the nonpartisan student voting coalition BruinsVote, the University of California, Los Angeles’ student body voted at a 13.6 percent rate. Over the next several years, BruinsVote, led by campus faculty, student government, and local CALPIRG-affiliated student leaders, coordinated an effort to reach every UCLA student with resources and information about voting.

While student organizations, led by CALPIRG’s New Voters Project, registered and educated thousands of students in the classroom, in the dorms, over the phone, and at on-campus events, UCLA Student Affairs administrators made sure voter registration resources were made easily available online by integrating it into their website and sending emails that reached every student on campus. In the 2018 elections, 44.5 percent of UCLA’s students voted, more than tripling its 2014 voting rate. In 2020, 76.5 percent of UCLA’s students voted.

During that same timespan a network of national organizations got to work ensuring local efforts have the resources, knowledge, connections and institutional backing to sustain gains like those made by UCLA. One such example is ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge’s Presidents’ Commitment, a pledge signed by 537 college presidents, including UCLA’s, to achieve full student voter registration and voter participation of eligible students in all elections – and saw a 5.7 percent average increase in voting rates among participating campuses.

Importantly, both the local and national programs are nonpartisan, which enables organizers to speak to everyone in their communities and maintain credibility that their work is done to help members exercise their voice rather than dictate what they have to say – such as in the case of the 289 schools that participate in Ask Every Student, the national program that seeks to help schools achieve 100 percdent voter registration by asking every student to participate in elections in a 1-on-1 or small-group setting, and has made a measurable impact on student voting.

Nonpartisanship also paves the way for college student vote leaders to leverage the unique ability of a college setting to spark movement and celebration in their communities by rallying everyone – regardless of political persuasion – to a common cause. This fall, for example, more than 600 campuses participated in Campus Takeover by hosting celebrations for the Civic Holidays (National Voter Registration Day on Sept. 20, National Voter Education Week on Oct. 3-7 and Vote Early Day on Oct. 28), national voting-focused mobilizations that saw college campuses host everything from parties with DJ’s on campus to carnival-like gatherings with stilt-walkers and lawn games, to marches to the polls with costume themes.

In other words, today’s students have access to significantly more institutional support, more resources, and more cultural touchpoints that promote voter participation than they did a decade ago. They no longer live in circumstances where voting is just a possibility – it’s an expectation. And those touchpoints and expectations are conveyed to them through channels that lie outside the often-polarizing arena of partisan politics. This has helped improve turnout rates in recent elections and explains, in part, the high youth voter impact on the 2022 midterms.

Duplicating the exact steps taken to get here wouldn’t work with the broader electorate – obviously. But understanding the principles at play – empowering local leaders, offering institutional support, ensuring inclusivity through nonpartisanship, and leveraging cultural norms to make voting a positive, even fun, community touchpoint – can be instructive in helping other underrepresented parts of the electorate make similar gains, and are areas in which higher education leaders can play a prominent role.

An important first step in this process is to acknowledge the successes of the youth and college student vote for the achievement that it is, and not simply a biennial surprise. Their gains are intentional, sustainable and predictable – even if conventional political wisdom is still catching on to this new normal. The sooner we understand the forces creating this positive change, the sooner we can use them as a roadmap to build a more inclusive and equitable democracy for everyone.

Read More

The Fragile Ceasefire in Gaza

A view of destruction as Palestinians, who returned to the city following the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, struggle to survive among ruins of destroyed buildings during cold weather in Jabalia, Gaza on January 23, 2025.

Getty Images / Anadolu

The Fragile Ceasefire in Gaza

Ceasefire agreements are like modern constitutions. They are fragile, loaded with idealistic promises, and too easily ignored. Both are also crucial to the realization of long-term regional peace. Indeed, ceasefires prevent the violence that is frequently the fuel for instability, while constitutions provide the structure and the guardrails that are equally vital to regional harmony.

More than ever, we need both right now in the Middle East.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money Makes the World Go Round Roundtable

The Committee on House Administration meets on the 15th anniversary of the SCOTUS decision on Citizens United v. FEC.

Medill News Service / Samanta Habashy

Money Makes the World Go Round Roundtable

WASHINGTON – On the 15th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and one day after President Trump’s inauguration, House Democrats made one thing certain: money determines politics, not the other way around.

“One of the terrible things about Citizens United is people feel that they're powerless, that they have no hope,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Ma.).

Keep ReadingShow less
Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less