Why Are Youth Organizations Providing Cover for Conservatives on Social Security?
It's common knowledge that Social Security is "the third rail" of politics, but this year it is doubly true for youth organizations. We're in the middle of what may be the most important election in our lifetime and Democrats stand a damn good chance of not only winning the Presidency, but of capturing sizable majorities in both chambers of congress that could virtually guarantee a progressive policy reformation not seen since the New Deal or the Great Society.
In election after election, young voters are choosing Democratic candidates over Republicans by large margins. On issue after issue, young voters hold progressive stands on how to solve the problems that affect our nation. Except on the issue of Social Security.
A recent report by the Center for American Progress and Demos found that 74% of Millennials are supportive of plans to privatize social security compared to 41% of adults over 60. That's the bad news. The good news is that this is less about their ideology than their particular stage of life. It's common for younger voters to feel less secure about social security (and their prospects for receiving it when they retire), and thus be open to more ideas as to how best we can "fix" the perceived problem.
Here's some more good news: according to that same report, compared with previous generations, Millennials are more open to the government spending money to stabilize social security. It's not that Millennials aren't progressive on Social Security - at this point they aren't anything except looking for an answer, and not even very hard at that. According to a February Rock the Vote poll (pdf), only 4% of Millennials rank Social Security as the most important issue that will determine how they cast their ballot.
Nevertheless, it is the one sole chink in the armor that conservatives can exploit if they want to make inroads among youth. John McCain is already out on the stump exploiting this, speaking out of both sides of his mouth on the issue of privatizing Social Security. You can bet that there will be even more attempts by Republicans to scare young voters about the program's long-term fiscal stability as we get closer to the election.
That's why it's really disheartening to see youth organizations like Mobilize.org, Rock the Vote, and the Roosevelt Institution engaging conservatives on the issue and providing ideological cover to conservative groups who want to privatize the social safety net that has served us so well for so long.
On Monday, June 16th, these and other youth organizers, along with a number of conservative and "nonpartisan" policy types, will convene in Washington for the Youth Entitlement Summit. The name alone - entitlement - should ring alarm bells as a conservative frame, as should the leading sponsor organization, Americans for Generational Equality (AGE) - a conservative outfit that has promotes "intergenerational strife" and argues for the privatization of social security. Founded in 1986, it closed up shop in 1990 only to reopen it's doors - and PR machine - in 2006.
The conference claims "non partisanship," and a spirited discussion of the issues, but if that is really true, why are there no progressive economic luminaries like Jared Bernstein addressing the attendees? Why is the Center for American Progress and the Economic Policy Institute nowhere to be seen in the list of partners? Instead, the agenda boasts scholars from the Brookings, Heritage and Hoover foundations and the panels all take on the frame of "X program in crisis." Hardly a fair and balanced representation of the issues.
We're on the verge of the first progressive majority in decades. Social Security's problems - to the extent that it has any - are minor at best and decades in the future. There is no rush to fix this "problem," and if we can all wait another 6 months, the solution we find is likely to be much better or all Americans. Collaborating with conservative idealogues, even sitting at the table with them at this point is pointless at best and damaging at worst -- to the coming electoral wave and Democratic support among young voters, and to setting the agenda when we have a Democratic government in 2009.
Youth organizers beware! Stay off the third rail of politics and don't play the conservative's game. We have nothing to gain by engaging them on this issue until AFTER the November election.
Breaking News
First Read:
Oprah: 'Never experienced anything like that'From NBC's Chris DonovanBefore exiting Invesco Field Thursday night, Oprah Winfrey stopped and answered a few questions from reporters. She said the night was extraordinary and explained, "I ...TPM Election Central:
GOP Senator Runs Anti-War Ad After Obama's SpeechGOP Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon has found yet another way to tie himself to Barack Obama as he seeks re-election in this blue state, the Oregonian reports. Smith has been running this ad for a ...Think Progress:
Larry King mocks conservatives for claiming 9/11 was Clinton’s fault.Larry King — CNN’s usually mild-mannered and non-confrontational host — took umbrage last night when his guest, conservative radio talker Larry Elder, tried to blame Bill Clinton ...Think Progress:
On Third Anniversary Of Katrina, Officials Aren’t Confident New Orleans’ Levees Can ‘Handle’ GustavThree years ago today, Hurricane Katrina made landfall upon New Orleans. The storm was tragically followed by an abysmal disaster response from the Bush administration and ultimately took the lives ...WireTap:
DNC: Last Night I Waved An American FlagI was one of the 80,000 people who packed into Invesco Field to see Barack Obama claim the Democratic Presidential Nomination last night.Â
Recent Blog Posts
-
It has been an amazing and historic week. Our nominee, Barack Obama, has led the country in a giant step forward. Change is surely coming to America. But I stand before you tonight because all across ...by: Democrats Work | 0 comments
-
I'm headed to the airport. Will try to upload video before and a recap before my flight takes off. Here are pictures from Wednesday and Thursday at the DNC. Oh, and what do folks think about Palin ...by: Michael Connery | 0 comments
-
I have three awesome videos of about youth participation at the convention from Howard Dean, Alexandra Acker of YDA, and another women whose name I missed talking about the delegate count. ...by: Michael Connery | 0 comments
-
What's more fun than watching an inspirational speaker deliver soaring oratory as he historically accepts his party's nomination? Doing so with drink in hand, of course. So sip if he says "hope" -- ...by: Justin Krebs | 0 comments
-
If you ever wanted to know what we all looked like here we are. Michael Connery, Sarah Burris, and Kevin Bondelli Bookmark/Search this post with:by: Sarah Burris | 2 comments
Featured Video
Progressive Training Calendar
Blogroll
- Ablogistan
- Apophenia
- Bad Subjects
- Burnt Orange Report
- Campus Progress
- College Democrats
- Culture Blog
- The Daily Background
- The Daily Taylor
- Ezra Klein
- Everyday Citizen
- Generation Next
- Got Democracy
- It’s Getting Hot in Here
- Kid Oakland
- Kossacks Under 35
- Left in the West
- Liberal College Kid
- The Low Post
- Matt Ortega
- Michigan Liberal
- Michigan Youth Political Alliance
- Open Left
- Penn Progress
- Planting Liberally
- Policy Farm Team
- Political Teen Tidbits
- Prose Before Hos
- Pullman Progressive
- Pushback Network
- The Raw Story
- Rethinking Youth
- Rock the Vote
- Tapped
- Think Youth
- Young Democrats
- Young MO Politico
- Young People For
- Young Philly Politics
- Young-Politics
- YouthinkLeft
- WireTap
- Wonkette
If you have a blog written by or for young progressives, and you would like to be listed, contact Mike.
Young Progressives
- 21st Century Dems
- Black Youth Vote
- The Bus Federation
- Campus Climate Challenge
- Campus Progress
- Campus Wellstone
- Center for Progressive Leadership
- College Democrats
- DNC Youth Council
- DMI Scholars
- Forward Montana
- Future 5000
- Generation Change
- Generational Alliance
- The League
- Kossacks Under 35
- Lose the Label
- Minnesota Youth Caucus
- New Era Colorado
- Oregon Bus Project
- Progressive U
- Roosevelt Institution
- Run For Office
- Students for a New American Politics
- Swing Semester
- USSA
- Washington Bus
- Young Democrats of America
- Young Elected Officials Network
- Young People For
- Young Voter PAC
Cultural Capitalizers
- All Ages Movement Project
- Billionaires for Bush
- Drinking Liberally
- Free Culture
- Head Count
- Hip Hop Summit Action Network
- Ironweed Films
- Justice Through Music
- Laughing Liberally
- Lokahi Outreach
- National Hip Hop Political Convention
- ONE Campaign
- Progressive Book Club
- Rock the Vote
- Screening Liberally
- Vera Project
- Youth Movement Records


























With all due respect...
...I find this post, and the "controversy" over the Summit a bit troubling. How is it that it is not okay for nonprofit organizations trying to build dialogue to actually *have* dialogue? Aren't progressives working toward a world in which party lines no longer prevent us from getting good stuff done? Aren't progressives working toward a world in which folks who differ from one another can sit across the table from one another in civility? Call me naive (as I'm sure many will), but I -- a self-identified progressive -- want to live in a world where young people (and youth-serving organizations) are driven by dialogue, not the same old, tired rhetoric of divisiveness that we've grown accustomed to.
Maybe there was a flaw in the framework or the framing question of the Summit. Maybe there was a flaw in how supporting organizations explained the Summit to their supporters and to the progressive world. Maybe there was a flaw in the structure or the speakers or the agenda for the Summit. I can see all of that as quite possible. What I don't get is why there's a flaw in sitting down and talking to (and listening to) those with whom you might differ.
Props to Mobilize.org and others for trying to break out of the box of conventional politics that says liberals and conservatives shouldn't talk to one another. It's too bad that Rock the Vote just pulled out of the Summit, rather than using their involvement as a forum for further dialogue.
Dialogue requires good faith participation
Heather,
There's nothing wrong with sitting down and talking with the other side about policy provided that both sides are talking in good faith. Granted, I did not attend the conference, but nothing about the participants or agenda leads me to believe that this actually was such a good-faith dialogue with both sides of the table adequately represented.
Real dialogue on this requires that both sides of the issue be adequately and equally represented. So I ask again, where is the Center for American Progress? The Economic Policy Institute? The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities? I see lots of conservative to moderate groups, and I see that the keynote and one of the major partners are all committed conservative activists to privatization and ending "entitlements." What I don't see is anyone representing the economic policies of the left.
How is that a good faith dialogue?
I can also appreciate what Mobilize.org is trying to do and I've got lots of respect for Maya, David and the rest of their staff. I just don't think that this event at all represents what it claims. Admittedly, I am a partisan. I think that the Democratic Party has better solutions to these policy issues than do conservatives. Yet I don't see my own views reflected anywhere in this "dialogue." As someone who this event claims to speak on behalf of (young voters), I find that troubling.
Good faith participation requires good faith engagement
Thanks for fleshing this out a bit more, Mike. I *completely* agree that dialogue requires good faith participation -- and I fully understand the critique that the organizations most deeply involved with the planning of the summit could have (and probably should have) been more intentional about ensuring that the voices at the table represent a balanced picture of a complex debate. Having one side dominate another, either in presence or in "air time," is certainly not a true dialogue in my mind.
That being said, giving constructive criticism also involves doing the hard work of having conversations with the organizers, getting a good sense of their thinking, and then providing feedback and criticism as needed. Lambasting organizations that, for all intents and purposes, are trying to do the right thing and invent a new kind of politics is less than what the conversation (and the slate of organizers) deserves.
My frustration in all of this is not that there was criticism issued -- I think that's a moral imperative if we're to have a healthy democracy. My frustration is that criticism was issued (on this blog and in other forums) without engaging with the organizers, attending the summit, and -- as a result -- without providing an opportunity for a learning moment.
I hope Mobilize, Roosevelt, Rock the Vote, and others will weigh in on this conversation -- I'd love to hear their perspectives and learn from their experiences.
*In the interest of full disclosure, I'm in the midst of conversations with Mobilize about joining their board. I am not on the board at this time, and these views in no way reflect the perspective of the organization.*
Engagement and Partisanship
That's fair. For what it is worth, I did bring this up briefly with Mobilize before writing what I did, and received a reply that promoted the summit - and its primarily conservative sponsors - as bipartisan. I didn't believe that to be the case. Now, that conversation could have been a more in depth and probably should have been, but my concern was made known to the organizers before I wrote this piece.
Part of the problem here is that, as a partisan, I have very different views about what we should or should not do in pursuit of better policy than does a nonpartisan group like Mobilize.org. They have an obligation to work with both sides of the aisle on an equal footing. And while I agree that we will need to work with conservatives to move policy, engaging with the most conservative activists on this topic at this particular political moment - in the name of a somewhat false bipartisanship - does not strike me as the proper course.
For what it is worth, I've let Mobilize.org know that they are welcome to post a response to what I wrote here at Future Majority. I'm happy to keep having this discussion because I think it is an important one, and I agree that Mobilize and any other youth org that attended the summit should feel free to weigh in.