If American democracy is in decline, as many commentators have suggested, then one need look no further than our youngest citizens to understand the problem. While declining numbers of young people vote each year, this trend represents just one of the symptoms of a more dangerous illness that has come to infect the roots of our democratic nation. Young people today lack interest, trust and knowledge about American politics, politicians and public life in general. In these and other respects, the future for American democracy seems gloomy, indeed.

Yet there is another side to the story that emerges from this study:  All is not lost, as young people still appreciate a role for government and at least acknowledge the importance of voting and greater involvement in the political process. It is here that one sees the possibility of democratic renewal, but only if parents and leaders in education, government, politics and the media commit themselves to a new, energetic, creative strategy for reconnecting American youth to politics and public life.

The Problem

The percentage of young people who vote continues to drop and youth participation in the community remains distinctly apolitical.

• Since 18 year olds were first given the chance to exercise their right to vote in the 1972 elections, the voter turnout rate of 18 to 24 year olds has steadily declined. In 1972, 50% of 18 to 24 year olds exercised their right to vote. By the 1996 elections, only 32% of 18 to 24 year olds turned out at the polls. Turnout among this age group in 1998 is projected to have been below 20%, perhaps the lowest in our nation’s history.

• Even with changes that have made voter registration easier, only half (49%) of 18 to 24 year olds were registered to vote in 1996.

• There is a double-digit gap in voter turnout between college and non-college educated youth. Forty-one percent of current college students or those with at least some college education report voting in November 1998, compared to just 25% of those with a high school education or less.

• There is a large gap between political and non-political engagement. Less than 20% of young Americans voted in 1998 and just 16% report having volunteered in a political campaign. In contrast, 53% say they have volunteered in non-political organizations. Our nation is at risk of losing this generation’s participation in democracy.

Youth Concerns, Individualism and Volunteerism

Young people today are generally apprehensive about their future and cautious in their dealings with others. They are also decidedly focused on personal rather than public goals; youth volunteerism rates are high but these volunteer activities most often take the form of social service rather than public service.

• This generation is divided about the country’s future and wary of other people. Barely half (51%) of the 15 to 24 year olds in the study said they believe that America’s best years are ahead of us, while fully 39% worry that our best years may already be behind us. Asked whether they generally believe that most people can be trusted (32%) or whether most people should be approached with caution (65%), young people take the more cautious posture by a two to one margin.

• Notably, the least trusting are also those who are most disengaged. They tend to be non-voters, those who say they pay very little attention to politics, those who rarely or never talked to their parents about politics, see no impact of government in their lives and rate being involved in democracy as unimportant.

• A stark contrast emerges between youth attitudes towards individual pursuits -- family, personal growth and career success -- and more group-oriented goals like being involved in the community or in democracy. The highest youth priorities include having a close-knit family (61% give it a "10," the highest importance rating), gaining knowledge, education and skills (60%), and becoming successful in a career (50%). In contrast, the lowest-rated youth priorities include being a good American who cares about the good of the country (27%), being involved in democracy and voting (26%) and being involved and helping your community be a better place (25%).

While youth today are actually more involved in volunteering than their peers were a decade ago, these volunteer activities are heavily focused on social services and one-on-one interaction within their community. As this study reveals, youth have primarily an individualistic frame of mind.

• Although it is true that young people rate being involved in democracy and the community among their lowest priorities, this study also supports many other study findings that have shown youth volunteerism is on the rise. Youth are more likely to report being involved in their community (up sixteen points), more likely to be involved in their religious/spiritual beliefs (up eleven points) and even more focused on family (up 8 points) than were youth a decade ago.

• However, this research uncovers new subtleties about youth volunteer activities; most often these activities take the form of social service in a one-on-one setting such as soup kitchens, hospitals, and schools. Our study also suggests that this type of volunteer work is motivated by a young person's desire to help others in a personal way.

Lack of Information and Skills

Young Americans have only a limited, vague understanding of what it means to be a citizen in a democratic society.

• While most young people subscribe to abstract statements about the importance of "being an American"(78%) and "being a good American who cares about the good of the country" (65%), the focus groups suggest that youth identify with the specific rights associated with citizenship, but have only vague ideas about the public responsibilities.

• Rather, they articulate a more personalized vision of good citizenship that includes volunteering, helping others, and raising children well. In the survey, 94% of all respondents agreed that "the most important thing I can do as a citizen is to help others." Traditional notions of citizenship, which include being politically interested and involved, are much less salient to this generation.

Young people suffer an information and skill deficit about politics and the process of voting. Their personalized and often vague understanding of citizenship deters them from getting involved in the political process.

• Many young people do not feel that they were given proper information about the political process from their families. Forty-six percent (46%) of survey respondents either never spoke or did not speak very often to their parents about politics. Parental political engagement is a critical ingredient in youth political engagement and, as reported later, many youth are learning not to vote from their parents.

• A majority (55%) of the young people agree with the statement that schools do not do a very good job of giving young people the information they need to vote. Focus group respondents reinforced this survey finding, explaining that their high school courses failed to teach them how to register or how to vote. As one focus group participant in Des Moines, Iowa said, "I know if I walked into an election [booth], I wouldn't know what to do. If I had known what's on the other side of the curtain in the booth, I'd have felt more comfortable."

• Information levels vary dramatically by education level. This information gap leads to higher voting and participation rates among college educated youth. However, given that as many as eighty percent of American adults do not graduate from college, education about the basics of voting -- from researching a candidate’s positions on the issues to learning how to cast a vote -- should start at the secondary school level or before.

American youth admit that they don’t have good information about candidates, parties and issues. For many, casting an ill-informed vote is worse than staying home on Election Day. As one non-voter summed it up, "I didn’t feel I had enough information to go out and vote." (Baltimore, college, non-voter)

• Young people feel they lack the information on candidates they need to cast an educated vote -- in their minds, casting an ill-informed vote is worse than not voting. Twenty-five percent (25%) of voting-age survey respondents named not having enough information about the candidates as being the main reason why youth do not vote.

• Youth also lack a clear understanding of the differences between the two major political parties. As one focus group participant in Baltimore, Maryland said, "I think [Democrats and Republicans] are kind of the same. I'm not sure what either of them necessarily stands for."

• Young people are uninformed about basic facts concerning government and current events. For example, only 25% of respondents could answer all three of the following questions correctly: Who is the Vice-President of the United States; Who is your Governor; What is the length of term for a member of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Political Socialization

America is in danger of becoming a divided nation of voters and non-voters. Absent the socializing influences of politically engaged parents, higher education, and other mediating institutions like churches and synagogues, young Americans may perpetuate the gap between voting and non-voting classes.

• Parental voting behavior and political engagement have a profound effect on whether their children vote. Forty percent of young people (40%) whose parents vote in every election report voting in November 1998, while only 20% of those whose parents vote infrequently or not at all report voting in November 1998. Half (51%) of youth who often discuss politics with their parents voted, compared to only 26% of youth who rarely or never discuss politics with their parents. As one non-voter said, "[My parents] don’t vote. So I guess that’s probably why I don’t vote." (Baltimore - Non-college, Non-voter)

• Religion has a strong effect on the political engagement of both youth and their parents. Young people who attend religious services every week were more likely to report voting in the 1998 elections (43% report voting) than those who never attend services (25% report voting). Religious youth are also more likely to talk to their parents about politics.

• Secondary schools -- a social institution to which virtually all youth are exposed -- have a critical role to play in political socialization. According to young people, schools fall far short in educating students about politics and their stake in the political process. Said one focus group participant, "To tell you the honest to God truth, I don’t really remember hardly any of it. I mean I just read the book and took the test. And right now I just totally cannot remember what I did." (Des Moines - Non-college, Non-voter)

• America is in danger of developing a permanent non-voting class. Non-voters are disproportionately non-white, non-college educated and not in school. They tend not to read newspapers or to use the Internet. If today’s non-voting, non-college youth become tomorrow’s non-voting parents, the cycle of political disengagement will be perpetuated.

Government, Politics, and Democracy

In theory, most young Americans believe that government has a legitimate role to play in people’s lives and acknowledge that government has at least some impact in their own lives. In reality, they also see few connections between government’s problem-solving role and the concerns they currently face in their daily lives.

• Six out of every ten survey respondents (60%) think government should help families achieve the American dream.

• A majority (56%) thinks that government’s impact on their own lives is desirable.

• Seven in ten (72%) think government has at least some impact on their lives, though only one quarter (24%) say government has a strong impact. Nearly half (48%) acknowledge government’s impact on their lives and classify this impact as positive. Another quarter (27%) say government has little or no impact on their lives. In focus groups, few participants could articulate any concrete ways in which government affects them. Said one Iowa non-voter, "...Most of the issues are for people who own businesses and have families and kids in college and stuff. I mean it’s not even really related to us." (Des Moines - Non-college, Non-voter)

Young people are pragmatic about political participation. Most abstract ideals – such as a sense of civic duty -- pale in comparison to concrete benefits or harm when young people contemplate reasons for voting.

• Civic duty is a motivator for only a small minority of young voters. When asked why they vote, 28% mentioned reasons related to obligation or duty. These young people are disproportionately women, white, well educated, older and raised by parents who voted in every election.

• Young people want concrete reasons about how voting will affect their lives. As one Baltimore non-voter explained "When I actually understand what I’m benefiting from, then I’ll actually go out and [vote]." (Baltimore - College, Non-voter)

• Indeed, many youths believe that they may vote at higher levels later in life when their concerns as parents, homeowners, and taxpayers seem to relate more to the decisions politicians make.

This generation has been raised in a time of successive political scandals by increasingly cynical parents. They have learned to be skeptical and distrustful of politics and politicians.

• Nearly two thirds of all young people surveyed (64%) agree that "government is run by a few big interests looking out for themselves, not for the benefit of all."

• A strong majority (57%) agrees that "you can’t trust politicians because most are dishonest." Distrust is slightly higher among 18 to 24 year old non-voters (64%) than among voters (58%) in that age bracket.

"Participation-optional" is the attitude most young Americans have about voting. Their lack of political involvement, coupled with the disinterest most politicians and campaigns show towards youth, reinforce pronounced feelings of inefficacy among non-voters. Nonetheless, young people seem prepared to listen to politicians who talk to them about the issues that directly relate to their lives.

• Young people have the distinct sense that politics is not about them. Two-thirds (66%) of all the young people surveyed agree with the statement, "Our generation has an important voice but no one seems to hear it."

• Focus group respondents recognized that politicians are making a rational choice by not actively courting the youth cohort. However, they would like to see this change: "I think if they’re speaking to us instead of over our heads, then we’ll pay more attention. If I feel like they’re speaking to me, I’ll...register to vote." (Salt Lake City - College, Non-voter)

The National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) commissioned The Tarrance Group and Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates to conduct bipartisan research to reexamine the profile of our youngest citizens. The purpose of the "New Millenium Project – Part 1" is two-fold:  To better understand the problem of declining youth engagement in the political process, and to gain insights into potential solutions to this growing problem.

The research included both quantitative and qualitative components--a telephone survey and six focus groups, respectively. The national telephone survey was conducted November 14 –19, 1998, among 1,005 youth, ages 15 to 24 [Click here for a .pdf copy of the survey questionnaire]. The focus groups consisted of six groups of 18 to 24 year olds, divided by education levels and voting history. The focus groups were conducted in three major cities: Baltimore, Maryland (November 19, 1998); Salt Lake City, Utah (December 7, 1998); and Des Moines, Iowa (December 8, 1998).

In Baltimore and Salt Lake City, two sessions of focus groups were conducted. The first sessions in each city consisted of 18 to 24 year olds who were non-voters in the November 1998 elections and non-college educated; and the second sessions consisted of 18 to 24 year old non-voters who were college educated. In Des Moines, the first session was a group of 18 to 24 year old non-voters, and the second was a group of 18 to 24 year old voters.

In the following report, key findings from the research are divided into six sections in which we: 1) re-assess the problem of young people’s declining public engagement; 2) identify youth concerns and examine young people’s apolitical approach to volunteerism; 3) measure the lack of information that contributes to their disengagement; 4) assess the socialization that shapes young people’s experience; 5) examine youth views on government, politics and democracy; and finally 6) discuss strategies and messages for change.

We share the belief that NASS can play a critical role in bringing about real, positive change to help motivate young people to become involved in the political process. In addition, it is the intent of NASS to develop an action plan and to encourage research on the state level – particularly with regard to programs and messages that might increase participation among young people. It is our hope that the following findings will help guide NASS in these efforts.

We need look no further than young voter statistics to appreciate the precarious position in which we our democratic system. These tangible, compelling measures show strong support for the contention that we are losing democracy’s next generation. A fundamental and defining element of democracy, the right to vote, represents one of the key freedoms of American citizenship. It is a right that crosses all racial and gender barriers, and it unites us as a citizenry.

With the ratification of the 26th amendment in 1971, that lowered the voting age to 18 years old, there was great hope and enthusiasm for the younger generation of this nation. It was hoped that young people would share a great voice in American democracy. Sadly, these great expectations have only been met with declining political participation among youth. The voter turnout rate of 18 to 24 year olds has steadily declined since 1972.

While the turnout percentage of all eligible adults (18 years +) has dropped nine points in Presidential years since 1972, young people (18 to 24) have shown a much more significant decline during this same period. In 1972, 50% of 18 to 24 year olds exercised their right to vote. Over the next two decades, this percentage reached new all-time lows in four out of seven Presidential election cycles -- with particularly low youth turnout levels in 1988 (36%) and 1996 (32%). By the 1996 elections, only 32% of 18 to 24 year olds turned out at the polls, and turnout among this cohort in 1998 is projected to have been below 20% for the first time. The trend and the actual figures are both very disturbing signs for our democracy.

Many public officials and lawmakers have recognized the need to increase voter registration and turnout of America's younger generation. But, even with changes that have made voter registration easier, a mere 49% of 18 to 24 year olds were even registered to vote in 1996.

The demographic portrait of young people who reported being registered to vote and voting is striking. Older and more educated youth, and voting-age young people whose parents are well educated are far more likely to vote than their younger, less educated peers. Regression analysis indicates that age and education (as well as parental voting behavior and frequency of religious attendance, discussed separately in chapters that follow), are the strongest statistical demographic predictors of whether young people vote. Young people age 21 and older are more likely to be registered than 18 to 20 year olds. Similar differences by age hold among those who actually report turning out on Election Day B 43% of 23 and 24 year olds voted, compared to 35% of 19 to 22 year olds and only 26% of 18 year olds.

Registration and voting levels among college and non-college educated youth are equally striking. College students are more likely to report being registered than non-students (76% versus 68%); among those no longer in school, college graduates (89%) and those with some college education (79%) are more likely to being registered than those with only a high school education or less (57%). Again, there are sharp differences in education level among those who report turning out to vote and those who stayed home B 41% of current college students or those with some college education or more reported voting in November 1998, compared to just 25% of those with a high school education or less.

Family demographics also influence the political behavior of youth. Young people who report that they are registered and turned out to vote in 1998 are most likely to come from families where at least one parent has a college degree (75% registered, 41% voted). This is compared to those who come from families with high school educated (66% registered, 33% voted).

The good news concerning youth voting statistics has centered around individual candidacies. Youth participation rose in 1992, when Ross Perot’s independent candidacy and a young and energetic Bill Clinton galvanized young voters. More recently in 1998, Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura’s message, persona, and direct appeals compelled many young people to vote for the first time.

While voting is central to engagement, it is just one of the ways we should measure citizen participation. Volunteerism is another. Many studies have shown that overall youth volunteerism is on the rise. Our research findings further support this conclusion, showing that today’s 15 to 24 year olds place a higher importance on helping in the community and are more likely to have volunteered than were youth ten years ago. Still, non-political volunteerism – largely focused on individual tasks (e.g. tutoring) – is far more common an activity than political volunteerism. To begin to understand the causes for this gap, its imperative that one understands some of the core attitudes that shape youth behavior regarding the political process.

Young people are divided in their outlook about the future of America. Slightly more optimistic about this country's future than were a similar profile of young people ten years ago, just over half of 15 to 24 year old youth today (51%) believe that America’s best years as a country are still ahead of us, while 39% are worried that our best years may be behind us.

Gender and education levels appear to influence one’s view about America’s prospects. The most positive attitudes about America’s future belong to college educated males. Looking at gender differences, men (56% best years ahead/32% best years behind) are decidedly more confident about the country’s future than their female counterparts who are more evenly divided on the question (47%/45%). Education levels, however, tend to have the greatest influence over youth attitudes about the future. Few differences emerge among current high school and college students. However, among youth who are out of school, college graduates are the most optimistic (57%) with just under one third (32%) of this group feeling worried that our best years may be behind us. In contrast, non-high school graduates show almost mirror-opposite attitudes with 23% optimistic and 57% worried about the future.

Notably, there are only small differences in attitudes based upon race; whites (52%/38%) are only slightly more optimistic than both blacks (50%/43%) and Hispanics (49%/46%).

Youth Issue Matrix

While young people consider crime as our country’s biggest problem, pocketbook issues like job security and wages evoke a much more personal reaction, particularly among voting age youth. Analysis of the survey data reveals that perceived (and sometimes real) threats of rising crime (16%) in our country rank at the top of young people’s concerns. During these times of relative economic prosperity, drop off of economic concerns often correspond with a rise in social issue concerns (like crime, drugs, education, etc.).

While crime concerns are high among all Americans, the importance of the issue is driven by youth under 18 years of age. Notably, concerns about crime drop with those out of high school (18 to 24 year olds) – the time when pocketbook concerns play a more tangible role in young adults’ daily lives. Education levels also influence these attitudes as college graduates (29% name economy/jobs as our country’s number one problem) are much more likely than high school graduates (11%) to put pocketbook concerns at the top of the list. Overall, economy and jobs (11%) take a distant second in the youth issue matrix, but among 18 to 24 year olds and college graduates, focus on their personal economy surpasses their concerns about crime.

Among focus group participants (all of whom were over 18 years old), these more immediate concerns about job security and being able to pay for school, cars, travel, owning a home, etc. were particularly evident.

Other issues like foreign affairs (9%), education (6%), budget/taxes/spending (6%) morals/values (4%), President Clinton (4%), environment (3%) and politicians/incumbents (2%) are lower level youth concerns. Still, some of these lower level concerns have stronger salience among specific subgroups of youth voters. For example, morals/values is the second highest rated concern among college graduates (15% named this issue as the top problem in the country).

Personal Distrust

One of the obstacles to youth becoming engaged in political activity is their distrust of people. When asked whether they generally believe that most people can be trusted (32%) or whether most people should be approached with caution (65%), by a more than a two to one margin, young people today take the more cautious posture. While every demographic youth group show a disturbingly low level of trust towards other people, geography, race, education and (to a lesser degree) age reveal significant differences in shaping youth attitudes about trust in other people.

The most trusting young people tend to be whites who live in the western part of the country, while the most cautious are minorities and those who live in the South.

Education levels also play a significant role, however no linear relationship exists within this demographic grouping. Over three-quarters of those with a high school degree or less (22%/77%) take a more skeptical approach toward people, as compared to those with some college (40%/59%) and those with college degrees (28%/69%) who are slightly more trusting. Personal distrust is also reinforced by political distrust. Of those who say that they generally approach people with caution, 65% also believe that "you can’t trust politicians because most are dishonest"; in contrast, just 43% of those who generally trust people and 57% of all youth believe this statement.

The polling results also show a strong relationship between lack of trust in people and lack of engagement in politics. Those who are non-voters, those who say they pay very little attention to politics, those who rarely/never talked to their parents about politics, those who see no impact of government in their lives and those who rate being involved in democracy as unimportant – all stand out as the least trusting of young people. In addition, volunteers are slightly more likely to trust people (35%) than non-volunteers (30%); however, both groups tend toward caution by significant margins.

Individualistic Orientation

Young people’s interests are extremely individualistic. Taking part in public life and collective activities like politics ranks at the bottom of their list of priorities. The survey asked a series of questions that tested nine potential future goals of young people on a scale from 1 to 10. The rankings of these youth priorities reveal a stark contrast between youth attitudes towards individual pursuits like family, personal growth and career success and the more group-oriented goals like being involved in the community or in democracy.

Specifically, the data show that having a close-knit family (61% give it a "10", the top rating), gaining knowledge, education and skills (60%), and becoming successful in a career (50%) all rank near the top. Youth rate these personal goals with much higher importance than being a good American who cares about the good of the country (27%), being involved in democracy and voting (26%) or being involved and helping your community be a better place (25%) -- which rank at the bottom. Interestingly, whether reflective of young people’s true attitudes or of a more politically correct response, young survey respondents rate doing well financially (29%) as no more important than civic pursuits.

In the focus groups, the gap in importance between career success and community or democratic participation was even more pronounced. When asked about their top priorities, respondents were not bashful about identifying financial security, being happy and healthy, having a good time and taking care of themselves. They seemed to be overwhelmed by their own personal responsibilities, feeling that they did not have time for other things further down their priority list.

While public pursuits like being involved in the community and in democracy show smaller age gaps overall, importance of community involvement, for example, does rise with a respondent’s age level. At the same time, the survey shows very little correlation between education levels and importance given to community service or democracy/voting. There is a notable difference in importance given to community service based upon interest and exposure to politics, however.

Volunteerism

Youth volunteerism is on the rise and is at record high levels. Our survey helps confirm this trend. While the 1989 Hart survey and this survey used somewhat different language to ask about volunteer interests, the comparison clearly shows an increase in volunteerism over the last ten years. For example, while 55% of 15 to 24 year old youth in 1989 said they had helped an elderly neighbor in the past, ten years later 87% report the same volunteer activity.

While youth volunteerism is on the rise, this involvement remains decidedly individualistic and apolitical. Survey and focus group findings demonstrate that young people are volunteering in much greater numbers, but this activity is distinctly apolitical. Instead, youth participation often takes the form of social service, with the goal of directly helping other people. In the minds of these young volunteers, there is no political end or motivational goal to their volunteer activities. This more personal one-on-one volunteerism most often takes place in community institutions like soup kitchens, hospitals and schools.

Exploring youth priorities, the survey gave respondents a battery of activities or experiences that they may have participated in or plan to participate in later in life. The data show convincing majorities of young people have donated to a community church (89%), helped an elderly or disabled neighbor (87%), played in organized sports (69%), volunteered at a religious organization (59%), joined a non-political organization (64%), or volunteered in the community (53%). In comparison, less than one-third had written a letter to a newspaper or government official (30%), run for an elected leadership position (24%), participated in a political march or demonstration (16%), volunteered in a political campaign (16%), or joined a political or government organization (14%).

Volunteering and voting are unrelated. Voting and volunteering are not statistical predictors of one another, nor are the two variables significantly statistically correlated. Voting-age youth who have volunteered are only slightly more likely than non-volunteers to have voted in November 1998 -- 39% of volunteers voted, compared to 32% of non-volunteers.

It is interesting to note that volunteerism and age correlate in the opposite direction. A larger share of 15 to 17 year olds are more likely to have volunteered (60%), than 18 to 21 year olds (56%) or 22 to 24 year olds (50%). A recent emphasis on school-based community service and volunteering likely accounts for part of this difference.

Political activity has captured the interest of only a small segment of youth. The comparison that provides the most vivid evidence of this disconnect between community and political involvement is the drop-off between young people who say they have joined a non-political club or organization (64%) and those who say they have joined a political organization (14%) in the last few years. Notably, youth subgroups who are most likely to join clubs – political or non-political -- share a common demographic profile. They tend to be younger, better educated, regular Internet users and higher levels of interest and knowledge about politics. Still, the findings show that these demographic characteristics by themselves do not automatically translate into political participation.

A small proportion of young people have participated in other politically-related activities, such as volunteering in a campaign, or attending a march or demonstration. Few of those who have not been politically engaged in the past show any interest in doing so in the future:

• Sixteen percent report having volunteered in a political campaign; only 23% of those who have not been campaign volunteers demonstrate even marginal interest in doing so in the future.

• Fifteen percent report having participated in a political demonstration or march; just over one quarter (26%) of those who have not participated in the past, show interest in doing so in the future.

 More educated voting age young people tend to have volunteered in a campaign or participated in a march or demonstration. Young people who talk to their parents about politics often and whose parents vote in every election are more likely to have done all three activities.

To begin to understand this gap between other forms of community involvement and political participation, it is helpful to look at three basic requirements for "participation": information, skills and motivation. While many critics have pointed to lack of motivation as the key culprit for youth disengagement, these charges often overlook the other two key ingredients. Before we can address the issue of youth motivation, we should first examine the deficits in information and skills.

In efforts to further explore these other components required for participation – information and skills – our research examined, among other things, young people’s view of American citizenship.

Citizenship

Young people’s lack of information includes lack of any real understanding of citizenship. Nearly half of young Americans (48%) gave "being an American" a top importance rating (a "10"), while another 30% gave it an "8" or a "9" rating. In another question, fully 65% of young people give "being a good American who cares about the good of the country" an 8, 9 or 10 rating of importance. Although responses to these abstract questions suggest that young people value American citizenship, when asked in focus groups about what it means specifically to be an American citizen, most young people are at a total loss, having never really thought about the role of a citizen.

After being pressed about the meaning of citizenship, many of today’s youth can identify only America’s freedoms and the rights associated with citizenship.

Young people are uncertain of the responsibilities that make up the other half of the equation. In fact, other than identification of basic legal requirements like obeying laws and paying taxes, notions about the responsibilities of citizenship revolve around very vague ideas like helping others and being a good person. Their notions of citizenship are heavily oriented toward the private realm rather than the public realm. In fact, the survey found that 94% of 15 to 24 year old youth agree that "the most important thing I can do as a citizen is to help others."

Political Learning

Most young people do not seek out information on government or politics. Although 60% of those surveyed say gaining skills and knowledge is extremely important, (a "10" rating -- and only second in importance to the goal of having a close-knit family), our research data suggests that the focus of their learning is on gaining tools to help them succeed personally in their daily lives. They are not trying to obtain information about citizenship or information that would stimulate political engagement. Traditionally, newspapers and TV have been considered two of the primary sources of information about politics and government. Yet, 41% of young people say they either never read a newspaper or they do not read one very often. When asked how much attention they pay to issues in politics and government through the traditional mediums of newspapers and television, 57% say they pay only some or very little attention.

When asked if they had read a book about politics that had not been assigned by a teacher, 37% of respondents said they have. When respondents were asked if they read a magazine about government and politics on a weekly basis, 53% said they did not. Another 71% say they are not very likely do so in the future. Just one quarter of respondents (25%) say they have read a magazine about government and politics weekly and they would be extremely likely to do so in the future.

In addition to media such as newspapers and TV, family and friends are also means for political learning. In particular, discussions among family members and friends can enlighten a person on politics and on current events in the news. The data shows this type of exchange severely lacking in many youth households. Forty-six percent (46%) of respondents either never spoke or did not speak very often to their parents about politics. Those who are college graduates and those who say they are registered voters are the only subgroups of young people to show any notable level of exchange with their parents about politics.

Young people also do not have much communication with their friends about politics. Less than one-third of respondents (31%) say they often talk about politics with their friends. Those with higher levels of education and those between the ages of 21 and 24 discuss politics more often with friends than others. Males are also slightly more likely to discuss politics than females (34% to 27%). Over one-third (35%) of Hispanics say they often talk about politics with their friends which is higher than both whites (31%) and blacks (28%). On the other end of the equation, those least likely to have had regular discussion with parent or friends are people not registered to vote, African-Americans, Hispanics, non-college bound, non Internet users and those with the lowest levels of education.

The Democratic Process

Young people also lack information and understanding about the democratic process. For example, many of the youth complain that they do not know how to exercise even the most basic of democratic rights – casting a vote. Both survey and focus group data suggest that high school government classes do not educate young people effectively about the mechanics of voting, about the current political issues, or about how to find reliable information.

The survey found that 55% of respondents agree with the statement that schools do not do a very good job of giving young people the information they need to vote. Young people with at least some college education are most likely to agree that high schools do not do enough (62% agree), while high school students and high school graduates are somewhat less critical (50% agree). In addition, many young people in the focus groups bolstered this charge by complaining that high school government classes do not teach students about politics or current events.

Focus group results also show that young people do not feel they know how to perform the action of casting a ballot.

This statement sums up many youth's views on the process of voting. The fear of not knowing how to operate the voting machine was often expressed in the focus groups. Many respondents mentioned they were embarrassed to ask for help in operating the voting machines.

The Candidates & the Parties

Youth not only lack information about government and the act of voting, they also lack information about candidates and political parties. It is not just ignorance about how to vote, but for whom to vote. Focus group and survey respondents felt that if they could not make an informed vote, they would not vote at all. When respondents were asked an open-ended question about why young people do not vote, 25% say they do not have enough information about the candidates who are running. This response is statistically tied with inefficacy as the highest cited reason why young people do not vote. Many young people do not feel comfortable voting because they do not feel they have a good handle on who the candidates are, what the candidates stand for, or even what their job responsibilities entail.

Many young people do not feel that candidates make an effort to reach youth voters. Because young people vote in such low percentages, many campaigns do not target youth voters. They see targeting youth as an inefficient use of campaign dollars. This "chicken vs. egg" dilemma poses a serious challenge to any efforts to engage young voters.

In the survey, the 18 to 24 year old respondents were asked if they had received a piece of mail or a telephone call from any candidate running for office. A majority (53%) said they had not. The 46% who had received mail or a phone call from a candidate were mainly registered voters and 23 and 24 year olds.

Young people also do not seem to have a firm grasp of the difference in political parties. This became apparent in our focus group research. Focus group participants were asked if the political parties are different or if they are the same. Many young people do not see a clear-cut difference in the two major political parties.

Political Knowledge

In order to evaluate young people's general knowledge about government and government officials, the survey respondents were asked to answer three basic questions about government leaders and the offices they hold. On the easiest question, the name of the Vice-President of the United States, the respondents scored highest with 79% being able to give his name. On the second test, the name of their Governor, a majority (67%) could answer the question, while one third of respondents (32%) were either unsure or could not recall a name.

The names of Governors and of the Vice-President are pieces of information that can be learned every day through television and print media. Knowing the term of office for a member of Congress is more fundamental. Only thirty-seven percent (37%) of respondents could give the correct answer when asked to give the length of term for a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. A rather substantial 63% gave an incorrect answer, or they were unsure.

The three political knowledge questions were combined to determine which subgroups could answer all three questions correctly. Only a quarter of respondents (25%) got all three of the political knowledge questions correct. The 25% who could give correct answers to the three questions were mainly respondents between the ages of 21 and 24. Notably, voters are among the most likely groups to answer all three questions correctly (36%); in contrast, 22% of registered non-voters and 26% of non-registered/non-voters got all three correct. Similarly, non-registered/non-voters were among the most likely to answer none correctly (15%).

Without guidance from schools and parents, youth have little exposure to politics. At the most basic level, youth see few practical reasons to participate in politics -- they do not see examples of how young people can influence the political process and cannot articulate concrete ways in which government policies affect them. Further, young people say that politicians rarely make appeals to them B no one asks for their support in ways that resonate. Often, young people doubt that their one vote will make a difference to the election or to anything in their own lives. As one young non-voter said,

"I kind of feel alienated from [politics] and I think that's kind of the consensus.... I'm too young to be involved in anything...plus, I have my own life. And politics is for old men B why get involved"? (Salt Lake City - Non-college, Non-voter)

The Family

Voter turnout has fallen among adults as well as among youth, and this change has affected young people. Most important among the findings in this study, youth today are just as likely to learn not to participate from their parents as they are to learn to participate. Overall, 42% of all of the young people surveyed report that their mother or father vote in every election, and another quarter (25%) say their parents vote in most elections. As noted previously, the incidence of youth engaging in political discussion is less common -- only one fifth (21%) of all respondents say they talk often with their parents about politics, while another third (33%) say they talk about politics with their parents sometimes. Nearly half (46%) say they do not talk often or never talk to their parents about politics.

As the focus groups made clear, parental discussion and voting behavior (or lack thereof) has a strong impact on youth. Young non-voters spoke in stark terms about how their parents approach politics:

"[Politics] just really wan't that important.  So [my parents] didn't talk about it." (Salt Lake City -- College, Non-voter)

"[My parents] didn't vote.  So I guess that's probably why I don't vote."  (Baltimore -- Non-college, Non-voter)

"I heard my mom talk about voting, but I don't know if she's ever actually gone.  We don't talke about it."  (Baltimore -- College, Non-voter)

"My parents would talk about it if it really made them mad.  If it was something they did not like, then we heard a lot about it.  But if it was anything else, then it wasn't really discussed." (Salt Lake City -- College, Non-voter)

Nonetheless, the Iowa focus group among young voters suggested the positive influence that politically engaged parents can have on youth political socialization:

"My parents taught me that voting was a key essential to be an American citizen. And I'm glad I was brought up that way." (Des Moines - Voter)

"I do remember that my mother voted each and every time... So I think that's something that I have got from her and that's why I feel very strongly about voting. It's a right and a responsibility." (Des Moines - Voter)

"If you're brought up with something, it [becomes] a habit. [Voting] is something you should be brought up with." (Des Moines - Voter)

Young people who grow up with parents who vote are far more likely to become voters themselves. This is one of the strongest predictors of youth voting, especially when we consider the high correlation between parent’s and children’s education attainment. Among the 18 to 24 year olds surveyed, nearly half (48%) of those whose parents vote in every election report that they turned out to vote in 1998, as did 40% of those who say their parents vote in most elections. In contrast, only 20% of young people whose parents vote only in important elections or less often themselves reported voting in November 1998. Similarly, political discussion in the home has a significant effect on young people=s propensity to vote. Half of those who often talk to their parents about politics said they voted in 1998, compared to one quarter (26%) of those who talk to their parents about politics infrequently or never.

Voting age youth report more frequent discussions (22% often, 35% sometimes, 43% rarely or never) than high school age youth (17% often, 29% sometimes, 54% rarely or never).

Community engagement makes a difference in both youth and parental political participation levels. Specifically, religiosity has a strong impact on the political engagement of both parents and youth. Overall, 39% of voting-age youth attend services at least once a week. In regression analysis, along with education, age, and parental voting behavior, attending religious services at least once a week is one of the strongest predictors of whether a young person votes. The relationship between frequency of religious attendance and voting is clear:

Young people of voting age who attend religious services every week are also more likely to talk to their parents about politics (25% talk to their parents about politics often, 39% talk sometimes; 37% talk rarely or never) than their less religious counterparts (21% of those who attend services less frequently than once a week talk often, 32% talk sometimes; 47% talk rarely or never).

The relationship between religiosity and engagement extends beyond voting to other aspects of civic activity, such as volunteering -- 73% of 18 to 24 year olds who attend religious services every week have volunteered with a community or religious organization in the past few years, compared to 40% of those who attend religious services less frequently. The same is true for high school age youth -- 70% of very religiously devoted teens have volunteered, compared to 50% of less religiously devoted teens.

The Schools

As institutions, schools have enormous impact on youth political socialization. As discussed above, educational attainment has a marked impact on young people=s orientation toward political participation B college students, young people with at least some college education, and college graduates are much more likely to be registered and to vote than those with lower levels of education, and are much more likely to have engaged in a political activities beyond voting. It is clear that the college experience is strongly related to political participation. However, because a significant share of American youth do not graduate from college, political education and socialization must start earlier.

Given the gap in voting rates between college and non-college youth, reaching non-college bound youth in high school and earlier becomes imperative. Schools are virtually the only social institution to which all young people are exposed. Therefore, schools have a critical role to play in political socialization. Our focus group research suggests that young people have an interest in elementary and middle schools playing a more pronounced role in teaching students about politics. According to young people, schools fall short in educating students about politics and their stake in the political process. Thus, young people who leave high school and do not continue on to college are left with a vision of politics and government as completely removed from their lives. One respondent in the Salt Lake City non-college, non-voter group said, AIt=s just a bunch of old guys talking about the country and stuff like that."

Focus group participants call their high school government classes Aboring@ and they feel that high school government courses are largely disconnected from current events. As one youth noted about a government course, AI got a lot of sleep in that class.@ (Salt Lake City,UT - Non-college, Non-voter). Another said, AI think [government classes] were just a waste of time... We learned about the different branches of government. And the only reason that we memorized those is that we were going to have a test on them.@ (Salt Lake City,UT - Non-college, Non-voter). Indeed, one respondent=s remarks suggest the absolute lack of impact that her high school government class had on her: ATo tell you the honest to God truth, I don=t really remember hardly any of it. I mean I just read the book and took the test. And right now I just totally cannot remember what I did.@ (Des Moines - Non-college, Non-voter).

Young people repeatedly mentioned that their high school government classes involved mostly book-learning about history and institutions. One respondent recalled, AMy government class wasn=t even like the current issues or anything. It was just like we learned about the judicial branches and stuff like that. Just basic [stuff]. I just don=t find that interesting at all.@ (Des Moines - Non-college, Non-voter). A respondent in Baltimore concurred: AIt=s important to know what happened in the past, ... [but] one thing that was missing [in my high school] was there was no current events classes.@ (Baltimore - College, Non-voter).

Further, as discussed earlier, youth do not feel that high schools give them enough practical education about how to register and how to vote, or about how to gather information on candidates and make decisions. Suggested one focus group respondent:

"I think the [importance of voting] should be brought into the classroom.... I think [students] need to be taught why its important.... I mean maybe they should bring in the actual voting process, you know, the registration and all that stuff right into the classroom.... Maybe they should spend a month or whatever right before the elections going over the issues. Going over the candidates= opinions on topics...." (Des Moines - Non-college, Non-voter)

Left with impressions of government and politics as things to be read about, memorized, and forgotten, non-college bound youth have little to incite their enthusiasm about political participation and few direct opportunities to receive further instruction or encouragement in political pursuits.

Efficacy

Feelings of efficacy -- the idea that voting makes a difference -- divide young voters and non-voters. Young non-voters show low levels of efficacy, while voters have internalized the sense that every vote makes a difference. Without parental direction, effective school-based education, or evidence that young people have a role to play or benefits to derive from political participation, young non-voters demonstrate low levels of political efficacy. Said one non-voter AI don=t have any idea how you would change [policies]. Tell me, how can I change it? I might be willing to do something if I would know how to have an impact on it.@ (Salt Lake City,UT - Non-college, Non-voter). As another respondent articulated, AI just feel like it=s not going to matter what I say anyway. I=m just one person.@ (Baltimore - Non-college, Non-voter).

When voting-age survey respondents were asked for their opinion of why many young people do not vote, one quarter (26%) chose the response Athey don=t think their vote makes a difference.@ This response, along with Athey do not have enough information about candidates@ (25%) topped the list. College graduates are more likely to cite inefficacy (31%) than either those with some college education or a high school education (25% each).

Voting-age youth who are not registered to vote cite inefficacy as the most likely reason for other young people=s failure to vote (25%). In contrast, young voters mention inefficacy as the reason that other young people stay home on Election Day (35%). As one Iowa voter explained, A[Many people] don=t realize they are part of the [political process] and that their contribution is very important.... They must realize that they are part of that political system and are made to feel a part of [it].@ (Des Moines - Voter).

In fact, young voters often say they vote for reasons related to efficacy (29%) and civic duty (28%). The youngest voters feel most efficacious (34% of 18 to 20 year olds cite efficacy, 20% cite civic duty), while the older part of the cohort votes more out of a sense of civic duty (32% of 21 to 24 year olds cite civic duty, 26% cite efficacy). Though there is nothing in this data that provides a conclusive answer, other voting studies have found that voting is developed as a habit. Some young people may start voting primarily out of the idealistic sense that their vote makes a difference; after an election or two, they begin to view voting as a duty and are much more likely to turn out to vote primarily because they feel it is something they should do. In this way, young people come to voting as a personal norm.

American youth are ambivalent in their views toward government. They believe that government has a legitimate role in people's lives. However, they see few connections between government's problem-solving role and the concerns they currently face in their own lives, and this furthers their sense that government and politics do not truly affect them. They acknowledge that government decisions may affect them later in life, and that, at that time, they may feel more inclined to pay attention to current events and make an effort to vote. However, given falling voter rates among middle-aged Americans, it remains to be seen whether this generation will become engaged over the course of their lifetime or whether they will remain removed from political life.

Overall, young people are negative about politicians and electoral politics. This generation has been raised in a time of successive political scandals by increasingly cynical parents. This is a generation that has already learned to be skeptical. In the current electoral climate, where negative campaigns often prevail, youth are wary of politicians= statements and promises.

Absent a perceived personal stake in electoral outcomes, and turned off by politicians who seem only to attack one another, voting-age youth see little that excites them about trekking to the voting booth. Young non-voters have a pragmatic approach to voting, feeling that people should vote if there is something that will specifically affect them. Traditional reasons to vote, such as a sense of democratic obligation, are not enough to compel most young people to vote. Civic duty motivates only about one quarter of voting age youth -- a small minority.

Government=s Role

Young people believe that government should help families realize the American dream. Sixty percent (60%) of young people surveyed feel that government Ashould do more to help families achieve the American dream,@ including nearly four in ten (39%) who feel strongly about this government role. In contrast, just over one-third (36%) believe that Agovernment should stay out of these issues and let people get ahead on their own,@ with just over one fifth (23%) strongly on the side of government non-interference.

Young women are particularly likely to see government=s role as activist. Seventy percent (70%) of high school age girls and 63% of voting age women agree that government should help families get ahead, compared to 54% of both high school age boys and voting age men. African-Americans (77%) and Hispanics (70%) are significantly more likely than whites (54%) to think government should help families.

Most young people believe that government should play a role in their own lives, however this sentiment is weaker among voting-age youth. Seven in ten young people (72%) say that government and elected officials have at least somewhat of an impact on their lives, but only a minority (24%) who classify government=s impact as Avery strong.@ An equal number (28%) think government has little or no impact on their lives; 10% definitively say government has no impact.

Among the young people who feel that government impacts them, nearly two-thirds (67%) have a positive view of this impact; a fifth (20%) are unhappy with government=s impact. Among those who feel government has little or no impact, nearly a majority (49%), are satisfied with a limited government role, while 28% say that this limited government impact is a bad thing. Men (28%), registered voters (28%) and youth whose parents vote in every election (27%) are among those most likely to say that government has a strong impacts in their lives. In contrast, young people whose parents never vote are among the most likely to say government has little or no impact on their lives (34%).

Overall, a majority of young people (56%) have an expectation or desire of government to impact their lives. Of this majority, 48% believe that government currently has an impact on their lives and it is good, and 8% believe it is bad that government currently has little or no impact on their lives. Just over one quarter of all young people (28%) see government=s proper role as more limited in scope. Of these, 14% think it is bad that government currently has an impact. The other 14% are currently dissatisfied with what they perceive as little or no impact on their lives.

Contrary to what one might expect, rather than feeling greater government impact on their lives, youth seem to feel less impact with age. There is some evidence, supported by the focus groups and corroborated by age differences in the survey data, that young people=s belief in government impact diminishes as they get older. In the survey, high school age youth are the most enthusiastic about government, while older youth are less certain about current and desired government impact. The youngest cohort in the survey was the most likely to express the desire for government impact on their lives (67%) and to think that government has a good impact on their lives now (59%). Both the desire for a government role and the feeling that government currently has an impact is higher among 18 to 20 year olds (57% desire government role, 48% government currently has a good impact) than with 21 to 24 year olds (46%/39%). In fact, a full third of 21 to 24 year olds desire limited or no government role (35%) and 30% say government currently has little or no impact on their own lives.

Indeed, focus group youth acknowledged that government is necessary, but they are often at a loss to cite the impact of government in their own lives. About the need for government, one respondent said simply, AI think government is needed, definitely. If we didn=t have a government, it would be chaos.@ (Baltimore - College, Non-voter). Yet, many if not most youth perceive the direct impact as minimal. As one participant said, AMost of the issues are for people who own businesses and have families and kids in college and stuff. I mean, it=s not even really related to us.@ (Des Moines - Non-college, Non-voter). Another agreed, AI guess when all of us are 35 and 45, I think that the laws and the government will directly affect our lives. We will be much more interested in the issues at that time.@ (Des Moines - Non-college, Non-voter).

Perceptions of politics and politicians

Ambivalence about government=s role and ability to act is compounded by skeptical views of politicians and a distaste for the current state of politics. Young people have come of age in an era when politics is rife with highly publicized scandal. In the survey, more than half of all respondents agreed with the statement, AYou can=t trust politicians because most are dishonest,@ (57% total agree, 31% strongly agree). Nearly two-thirds agreed that Agovernment is run by a few big interests looking out for themselves, not for the benefit of all,@ (64% total agree, 30% strongly agree). The older youth cohort is more skeptical of politicians than their younger peers -- voting age youth are far more likely than high school age youth to agree that politicians are dishonest (62% total agree compared to 47%) and that government is controlled by a few big interests (70% total agree compared to 50%).

The influence of parental political engagement on youth attitudes towards politicians is profound. Two-thirds of youth whose parents rarely or never vote (66%) agree with the statement that most politicians are dishonest, compared to just over half (54%) of youth whose parents vote more often. Similarly, 73% of youth whose parents vote rarely or never agree that government is run by a few big interests, compared to 60% of youth with voting parents.

Comments made by focus group participants corroborate the survey findings and suggest an unflattering portrait of politicians. One Baltimore respondent explained his perception of the probable transition a politician undergoes:

"...It's probably like politicians come and like start out, I think that they probably have like full intent to do what the people they represent, what they want to do.   But I think probably like the longer they're in there it just kind of weakens their spirit and they kind of like get more corrupt as time goes on."  (Baltimore -- College, Non-voter)

Or, as one participant in Salt Lake City said, in a more cutting remark:

"Most of the Presidents that we had were sleeping around and doing drugs...I mean that's what our history classes basically kind of teach us.  And like that thing that Jefferson...has like two different families.  And of course like Clinton right now.   No reason to look up to them."  (Salt Lake City -- Non-college, Non-voter)

The media has accentuated negative perceptions of politicians. Many young people point to the media=s propensity to relay mostly negative information about politician=s antics and to ignore the good things they do. As one respondent explained, AI think the nation probably has the general idea that politicians are liars and cheats, because of the way that the media portrays most of them. They don=t publicize anything that somebody would do good.@ (Baltimore - Non-college, Non-voter)

Campaigns

With heightened negativity and little targeting of youth and their concerns, modern campaigns exacerbate young people=s negative perceptions of politicians and the political process. When asked about the most recent elections, participants in every focus group immediately mentioned the negative tone of a campaign in their state or area and some suggested that negative campaigns make them even less interested in voting.

The youth in all focus group locations assessed their local campaigns in the same way – too negative. In Salt Lake City, one non-voter summed up the campaign season: AEveryone is ripping on everyone else. And they=re all running negative campaigns.@ (Salt Lake City - Non-college, Non-voter). About the two candidates a participant in one group said, A... They were both so awful and mean. And they didn=t address the issues. They were just dogging each other.@ (Salt Lake City - College, Non-voter). Another participant mused, AThat was the one race that almost would have gotten me to the polls to vote.... But I=m not sure who I would have voted for because by the end of the race I was disgusted by both of them.@ Another followed up emphatically, AThat=s why I didn=t vote.@ In Baltimore, one participant said, A... Glendening and Sauerbrey just badmouthed each other. ....Like I think there was one commercial that Sauerbrey did about herself. But other than that it was, >Sauerbrey collects this from the NRA. Glendening promised this but he didn=t do this,@. Another agreed, AYes. If you=re going to badmouth each other, then I don=t want either. Neither of you sound very good to me.@ (Baltimore - Non-college, Non-voter).

Even more fundamental, the absence of youth voices in public life leaves young people with little reason to think that politics relates to them. When parents do not vote or talk about politics and schools fail to make government and politics compelling, young people are left to rely on the image of politics they see in the news and hear about from their friends. This image does not include young people as actors in the political process, nor does it portray young people as benefiting from political or governmental decisions. Campaigns, candidates, and the media reinforce this void by rarely featuring youth, rarely targeting youth and rarely focusing messages on their concerns.

Two-thirds (66%) of all the young people surveyed agree with the statement, "Our generation has an important voice but no one seems to hear it." Four in ten (41%) agree strongly with this statement. While majority agreement with this statement is universal, an even larger share of non-college educated youth than college educated youth agree with this statement. Seventy-four percent (74%) of those who are no longer in school and have a high school education or less agree with this statement, compared to 60% of current college students or non-students with at least some college education. Current high school students fall in the middle (67% agree).

Candidates and campaigns make few efforts to appeal to youth, reinforcing young people's views that their participation is not important or necessary. The absence of youth voices is precipitated, in part, by the sense that politicians rarely make efforts to appeal to youth. Since youth do not vote in great numbers, politicians rarely target them. As mentioned earlier, this becomes a vicious circle, as the lack of attention they receive from politicians reinforces youth=s own sense that their participation is not important. As one focus group respondent noted,

In the focus groups, young people recognized that, since most young people don=t vote, it is not in politicians= rational interests to court the youth vote. Said one respondent, AThere aren=t enough people my age that vote, and therefore ... [politicians] really don=t care. It=s not that important to them.@ (Des Moines - Non-college, Non-voter). Another agreed, ALooking at it from a political standpoint, I mean what good is it for a politician to appeal to the younger generation that doesn=t even vote?@ (Salt Lake City - College, Non-voter).

Focus group respondents recognize that either politicians or young people need to change their attitudes in order to increase youth turnout. The consensus was that, by making attempts to speak to young people, in language they could respond to and about issues in which they are interested, politicians might capture the attention of this young cohort. Several participants suggested that politicians who alter their style to appeal to youth could affect interest and behavior among this class:

"I think if they=re speaking to us instead of over our heads, then we=ll pay more attention. If I feel like they=re speaking to me, then I=ll...register to vote." (Salt Lake City - College, Non-voter)

"If they would just make an effort to try to communicate with young people, then...younger people would get more involved in politics...." (Baltimore - College, Non-voter)

"[Candidates] don=t talk about issues a lot of the times that affect us directly and pull us in. Make us want to listen to them and make us feel like they care about us.@ (Des Moines - College, Voter)

In the focus groups, respondents had positive reactions to the idea of creating new venues for participation in which youth voices could be heard. About the idea of a youth-moderated candidate debates, one participant commented approvingly, AIf you have young people on the show, they=d probably ask questions more relevant to people our age.@ (Salt Lake City - College, Non-voter). Another respondent in a different city concurred, AYoung people are asking the questions, so they=re more likely to ask questions that you would ask and be more concerned about.@ (Baltimore - Non-college, Non-voter).

Traditional democratic norms do not work

Traditional appeals to civic duty do not mobilize youth. When young people themselves address the question of what could get young people to vote, the answer repeatedly focuses on personal stakes. AWhen I actually understand what I=m benefiting from, then I=ll actually go out and [vote],@ said one Baltimore (college) non-voter. The sense that one should know why they are voting and make a conscious choice to vote was common to participants across the focus groups.

As the focus groups demonstrated, youth felt that their personal concerns were more likely to be affected by voting later in life when they have bought a home, have children in school and are more connected to their communities. As one participant explained, AI think us being as young as we are, we don=t feel as much a part of where we live as maybe other people with families do. So that=s why we don=t feel as much need to vote.@ (Baltimore - College, Non-voter). Appealing to young people in individualistic, concrete terms that explain how their lives now are connected to election outcomes may be one of the most effective methods for engaging young people.

Young people feel that voting should be done for a concrete reason, not because of abstract ideals. In the focus groups, the notion that voting gives people a right to complain was articulated independently by respondents. Said one Baltimore respondent when participants were asked for their suggestions about a pro-voting message, AJust to put your opinion in, because some people complain about the government all the time and then you say, >Did you vote?= And they say, [no].@ (Baltimore - Non-college, Non-voter). When suggested by the moderator, respondents responded positively to the statement AIf you don=t vote you can=t complain:@ AThat=s me, that=s what I=d say,@ said one Salt Lake City participant. AI think you should say, >Well, you don=t like the way things are going? You don=t vote? Well then too bad.= And say it like that,@ another followed up (Salt Lake City - College, Non-voter).

It may prove difficult to mobilize already-skeptical youth with such a negative message. However, in the survey, the message AIf I don=t like the way things are going in the country, I don=t have a right to complain unless I vote@ did not have particular overall appeal relative to other messages (49% very convincing; 66% at least somewhat convincing). Young people who did not vote in the 1998 elections were particularly uninspired by this message.

Similarly, the notion that young people must vote to counteract people with interests different from theirs also fell flat among survey respondents. Only half (51%) were even somewhat convinced by the statement AIf people like me never vote and other people always vote -- the result will usually be decisions that benefit other people, not me.@ Ultimately, connecting to young people=s tangible concerns in a positive way B showing them how an election outcome might effect them B is likely to be a more effective mobilization strategy.

The idea that one should vote for abstract reasons had limited appeal. In the survey, messages about declining democracy tested well, however neither the assertion that AThe decline in young people voting is a serious national problem,@ (48% very convincing, 74% at least somewhat convincing) nor the statement, AIf people stop voting we will lose our democracy@ (49% very convincing, 72% at least somewhat convincing) resonated with focus group respondents. Said one respondent of the youth decline message, AI=m going to go out to vote for a reason.... And I know why it=s declining, because I=m young and I=m not voting.@ (Baltimore - College, Non-voter).

As the focus group participants puzzled through the rationale for voting, the idea that one should vote to uphold democracy seemed implausible. One participant commented, AI don=t think that if the majority will stop voting or whatever, we would lose our democracy and we=ll be run by somebody. I just don=t think that=s ever going to happen.@ (Baltimore - College, Non-voter). Young people do not really consider democracy to be threatened by youth non-participation; if there were really a threat to democracy because everyone stopped voting, a few said, then they would vote: AIf we=re going to lose all our rights completely, then yes, I=d want to vote....@ (Salt Lake City - Non-college, Non-voter).

Similarly, the idea that people would vote simply out of habit, duty, or guilt makes little sense to the non-voters in the focus groups:

"A lot of people vote just because they feel it's their responsibility.  Not that they want to, just because they feel they have to.  It's one of those things you have to do."  (Salt Lake City -- Non-college, Non-voter)

"[Some people] vote because they think they should and perhaps they would feel a little bit of guilt for not doing their part as a citizen.  Or it was always instilled in them...so they feel like they have to, whether they know who they're voting for or not.  They just go through the motion because they were taught they should."  (Des Moines -- Non-college, Non-voter)

Ultimately, this research suggests that the best tactics for motivating youth will involve elevating youth voices in political debate. Connecting the tangible issues that concern youth with election outcomes in ways that resonate with young people is likely to be a key component of youth engagement. Efforts to create messages that highlight youth-related concerns and make young people feel that they have a stake – and a voice – in politics are likely to be the most effective motivation tactics.

Traditional motivations for political participation and voting are not working well for youth. Except for a small minority of young people, the sense of civic duty is muted. Strategies and messages for engagement must include creative and participatory solutions if any real change is going to occur. Generally, there also needs to be more effective education to provide youth with the information and skills they need to become motivated, enlightened, and active citizens.

Schools

Schools have a profound influence on young people’s lives. Civic and political education should be a high priority in our schools. Our educators should make every effort not only to encourage students, but also to teach them how to be effective citizens.

Schools should consider providing students with educational experiences that connect them to the political process. For example, forty-four percent (44%) of survey respondents say giving high school students extra credit for volunteering in campaigns would make them a lot more likely to get involved in political activities. Although most respondents in the focus groups did not seem as positive about the effects of extra credit, the Des Moines voter focus group thought that it would introduce some young people to the political process. They mentioned that providing such incentives would introduce some students to the political process who might not have otherwise been reached. Volunteering on a campaign would allow some students to test the waters of politics, and at least be exposed to it.

Schools are also a good location for voter registration. Forty-six percent (46%) say having high schools help students register to vote would make young people a lot more likely to get involved in political activities. Moreover, survey respondents chose high school as the highest response (21%) when asked where they had registered to vote. This data suggests that encouraging registration at schools does work, and it should be universally implemented. Many focus group respondents mentioned that they do not know how to utilize a voting machine. They felt that it would help to bring a voting machine into the classrooms to show students how to use it, a small but significant step in removing a barrier to youth voter participation.

The research shows that young people are highly critical of how school government and civics classes are taught. The respondents do not feel that high schools do a very good job of teaching students about current events, the democratic process or voting. Clearly, data from this survey and other statistics on youth knowledge about civics support this criticism. Many of the focus group respondents expressed a desire for the schools to teach more about politics, issues and candidates.

In our survey, thirty-six percent (36%) of the respondents say that making American government classes more participatory would make young people a lot more likely to get involved in the community and in political activities.

Parents

Youth who discussed politics and government with their parents while growing up were more likely to be registered voters. But, with adults also voting in relatively low percentages, there is little wonder why youth have failed to be more politically engaged by their parents. In order for young people to understand fully the importance of political and civic engagement and voting, older adults and parents need to be involved.

Furthermore, parents need to talk to their kids about the importance of voting and the effects voting has on our society. With youth often narrowly focused on their own, private lives, parents need to talk to their kids about how candidates, issues, and voting can and will affect their lives here and now. More than any other source, parents have the ability to bring civic engagement and voting into the world of young people.

In order to portray better the importance of civic engagement and voting, parents should take their children with them to the voting booth - especially when children are young. This would, at the very least, familiarize youth with the mechanics of voting. As we have seen in the study, demonstrating the act of voting is an important part of civic education.

Politicians and the Parties

Candidates and government officials have the potential to play a major role in reconnecting youth to politics and voting. Many of the focus group respondents complained of candidates ignoring young people. To a significant degree this is true. In order to win, most campaigns maximize their limited financial resources. Current voter turnout rates among young people may discourage campaigns from spending very much money targeting the elusive, youth voter. If voting among young people is going to increase, then campaigns need to start targeting youth voters; and based on our research, young people will respond.

Many youth in the study expressed an interest in wanting more information about candidates. Over half (54%) of 15 to 24 year olds are on the Internet at least once per week. Young people find the Internet a useful source of information. Campaigns should do a better job of trying to reach young people through this medium. Moreover, many focus group respondents complained that candidates never come to their campuses to talk to them. They feel as if candidates do not make an attempt to talk to young people on their turf and at their level; but if they did, young people would listen.

The last statement exemplifies the potential enthusiasm that young people could have for politics and candidates. They want information, but they also want the candidate him or herself to be the one to present the information to them.

Our focus group research also suggests that young people are interested in the concept of independent candidates running for office. The rise of Reform Party candidates like Jesse Ventura and other candidates from outside the mainstream could lead to higher levels of youth interest, involvement and voting. Finally, candidates and campaigns should encourage youth-moderated candidate debates, which we also review in the following section.

Media

The media has the potential to be a very powerful and useful tool in getting young people more actively involved in the democratic process. Our research suggests that youth show a sincere interest in wanting to know how to get involved, but they often do not know where to start. The media could play an integral role in helping them obtain the information that they need to make decisions about civic engagement. Yet, young people are unlikely to respond to slogans or political rhetoric. The messages we tested to motivate youth to vote had only limited appeal. Clearly this problem cannot be resolved in thirty-second sound bites or with one pop culture ad. Including youth voices in politics is the most persuasive way to increase participation and the media could have a key role in that task.

Some focus group respondents mentioned that often the media only portrays the negative side of public officials and candidates running for office. The media should play an active role in trying to produce news stories that highlight the relevance of political issues. News stories should cover what public officials are doing to make a difference in young people's lives and the impact that political decisions have on local interests. More positive stories and biographies might be an effective tool in getting youth more interested in candidates and voting.

One other action that the media can take to encourage youth interest in civic engagement is to promote youth-moderated debates between political candidates. The research has shown that young people are attracted to the idea of youth moderated debates. Many in the focus groups and 69% of the survey respondents say televised Presidential debates moderated by young people would make them more likely to be involved in political activities. TV networks, individual stations and other news organizations should aid in this effort by giving a time slot and by having aggressive coverage of youth organized and moderated debates between political candidates. Similar youth-centered programming could also be tested as a way to interest and educate youth on current issues affecting their lives. This would enable youth to bring politics to their own level and to discuss issues that most concern them.