My Experience as a First Time Voter

The American electorate is now one person stronger. Consider me part of the “youth-quake”, rocking the 2008 Campaign. I am a first time voter. There, I said it. But getting to this point required introspection. I had to ask questions and research in order to choose which party I wanted to register as.

Where can I pick up a registration form? How do I know which Party to be in? Which candidate am I most likely to vote for? These are just a few of the many questions I asked myself when deciding to register to vote for the first time. I felt overwhelmed with all the questions I had in my head about the registering process.

I decided to vote this year because it is the first time in my life I am following the presidential campaign. I am attending a Controlling Spin class which focuses on politics and the media. This sparked my interest in our nation’s government and the president’s role in all of it. I became more aware of my country in less than two months than I have in the past nineteen years.

As a first time voter, I am expecting to face a few challenges of my own. I have to catch up on the key issues of our country’s concern and create my own opinions about them. After creating my own opinions, which I’m still in the process of doing, I will then explore the candidates’ opinions and their plans of action to enhance our nation.

Another challenge I had to face when registering to vote for the first time was deciding on which Party to choose. I consider myself an Independent, but I really want to vote in the Pennsylvania Primary, so I had to select a Party. I called my Dad because I was having trouble deciding. He is a registered Republican and my Mom is a registered Independent. I never considered myself a hardcore liberal or a hardcore conservative, so I chose the one I felt I best fit under.

As a first time voter, I am excited to be a part of something much larger than I am used to. I feel that I can make a difference in the world by being able to follow politics and voice my opinions about issues. Furthermore, I can influence who will be the next president, which can change America. Although it is a small difference, it will mean something for future generations.

Amy Fusco '10
Wilkes University
Communications Studies

Do We Need a 24 Month Presidential Campaign? YES!

Imagine enduring only six weeks of campaigns before voting for the President of the United States. The idea appeals to many Americans as we sit here in February 2007 with over 20 candidates already announced for the 2008 race. But I believe it would be a horrible idea to rush a race for U.S. President.

Let’s say the Presidential campaign begins March 1 and ends April 15. Short campaigns are sufficient for governments such as the British Parliament because on the surface elections are less expensive, less likely to breed negative campaigning, and less likely to lose the public’s interest. But it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the right idea for America. It may seem appealing at first glance, but this is not the right direction. Lesser known candidates’ stand little chance when trying to compete and the public has little time to fully evaluate each candidate’s issues. We need sufficient time to pick our leader and to understand their issues extensively. It takes time for leadership to emerge, especially on the national scene.

We know the popular presidential candidates and the persuasive ones, but what about the lesser known candidates? Having shorter campaigns allows those popular and persuasive candidates to hold their voters’ attention a lot easier without as much effort that would be required in a longer campaign, that is a negative effect. A longer campaign gives lesser known candidates a fighting chance, and makes our country more democratic. Herbert G. Klein, writing for the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, supports my argument when he provides an important fact that Jimmy Carter was “a little-known governor and peanut-farmer who went on a two-year, nonstop campaign and upset all odds in winning his party’s nomination and eventually the presidency.”

If we compare picking the President based on persuasive ability within a six week time frame with the idea of picking a spouse based on beauty, then you can better understand my argument. The beautiful suitors would be the popular choice, but we all know that for a long term marriage to work, you need to understand what that person is about more than how beautiful they may look. That is what the result would be if we elected our next President within six weeks. We would select a person with the best image on first impression and have a vague idea of their issues. In a traditional race we begin to see flaws in their arguments over a lengthier period of time.

Although American attention spans are getting smaller, maybe it’s because the candidates are not exciting enough. There will be more people focused on who our next President will be for at least two reasons: our current situation with the War in Iraq and because a woman and African-American have legitimate shots at winning. This race could be historic and fun.

We need sufficient time to pick our leader, to understand their issues extensively, regardless of their attention span. Many people continuously swing their vote from one moment to the next which allows better candidates to emerge due to the competitive field. Randolph T. Stevenson and Lynn Vavreck, researcher for the British Journal of Political Science, tested 113 elections in thirteen democracies, and concluded that campaign length does matter for voter learning. They specifically state that “in campaigns of sufficient length voters may have more time to be exposed to competing campaign messages and to learn about the true state of the economy and the true policy positions of candidates”. We cannot sacrifice knowing each candidates issues extensively. It would be too risky for our country, and especially when we put the elction in context our current situation.

Referring back to my idea on marital relationships, when you meet someone for the first time, do you really believe you know them well within six weeks? It takes more than six weeks to be considered credible. Electing our next President within six weeks would direct our decision making towards the candidate who persuades us now. We could find out later that they have flaws that we just can’t stand, and does the current President ring a bell?

You wouldn’t choose your spouse within six weeks (unless it’s a reality television show, and we know how successful they are!). Therefore, why settle for electing the President of the United States in that short period of time? That can have catastrophic effects! Six weeks is too risky. If time lets us know that a certain person might be the one for us in loving terms, then lengthier elections will allow Americans a chance to vote for the candidate they truly feel is the right person.

Jamie Gwynn '09
Wilkes University
Communications Studies Major

Presidential Candidate: Bill Richardson

Well folks, it’s almost that time again! I’m sure that you’ve been hearing the buzz, noticing the headlines, and maybe even checking in to see what new events may have transpired in our nation’s capital. If you’re anything like me, you’ve been unable to escape the frenzy and anticipation that’s been accumulating around the 2008 Presidential election. When it reaches its peak, it’s going to be a hurricane of controversy and political dispute. Although the election has moved to the forefront of our media agendas, at this point lightning has barely started to hit the ground for younger voters.

With Democratic nominees Barack OBama and Hillary Clinton capturing everyone’s attention, the nation has been speculating whether or not this next term will re-define history in regards to the race or sex of our future President. But alas, there is another, less-noted nominee who would also mark an equally important, historical moment if he were to take the Presidency.

On January 21^st, 2007, Governor Bill Richardson from New Mexico announced that he would be running for the 2008 Presidential election. If he were to take the Oval Office, Richardson would be the first Hispanic American President in the history of our nation. Richardson has an extensive and impressive resume of political experience. From his time as a Congressman to his role as the United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Richardson has been all across the board. He served as the U.S. Secretary of Energy in the Clinton Administration, the chairman of the Democratic National Convention, the chairman of the Democratic Governor’s Association, and he’s currently the Governor of the State of New Mexico. Even during his undergraduate time at Tufts University, he was President of the Delta Tau Delta fraternity. Perhaps he is a natural born leader.

Although Richardson doesn’t have the budget to launch a campaign as ferocious as some of his adversaries most definitely will (he is in favor of limiting the budget for Presidential campaigning), he has some interesting perspectives on politics. For one, he strongly supports Native American causes. Having served on the House on the Natural Resources Subcommittee to Native American Affairs, he strongly pushed important bills for the culture. After being signed by President Bill Clinton, these bills are considered to be some of the most valued in all of Native American history. The list of bills is quite extensive.

Richardson has seen much of the world. Having a wide history of diplomatic travels, Bill has bravely ventured into such places as North Korea, Nigeria, and Cuba. Richardson has acquired a belief in peaceful negotiation. He doesn’t find much value in the use of hostile force although ironically, he’s still in favor of more spending on our military. Years back, Richardson traveled to Baghdad to negotiate the release of two captured American aerospace workers who were being held captive. After face to face negotiations with Saddam Hussein himself, the terms were secured and the prisoners released. Richardson is also responsible for bravely negotiating the release of prisoners in the Sudan and in North Korea.

Personally, I wouldn’t be at all opposed to the idea of Richardson for President of the United States. Although we disagree on certain issues, he seems like an overall good man who stands for his own beliefs and has the best interest of the American people. In regards to the hot topic of immigration, Richardson believes that there should be a path to legalization through the payment of taxes and education of the English language. I must agree.

To me, Richardson seems like the kind of guy that you could easily have a good chat and a cup of coffee with. Keep an open eye for Richardson’s advancement throughout the political race/storm that we’re about to witness. Like I mentioned, this is only the beginning. Hopefully with time, Richardson’s name and reputation will come to the forefront of the upcoming Presidential election.

Jim Feeney '07
Wilkes University
Communications Studies Major