U.S. Representative Artur Davis did not win the Alabama Democratic primary for governor last Tuesday. Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks crushed him by 24 percentage points. The hopes and dreams of Davis’s followers were also crushed by an immeasurable amount.
I and countless others lost employment and a channel for a passion that night.
But ,the pain was necessary; vital for the struggle we subjected ourselves to. Reforming the perennial last place state of Alabama takes more than one campaign or election cycle. It would have taken more than the improbable election of Davis as governor. His role was to serve as the spearhead of a historically futile movement.
Davis’ campaign manager said it best. Davis picked up the ball and carried it as far as he could. Now, it is up to someone else to pick it back up, and eventually, it will cross the goal line.
It would be too easy to walk away from that night cynical. Patience marks the divide between cynics and optimists. The hyper-speed society that we live in commands that change must come almost instantly.
If some grieve over a slow Internet connection, that traffic light that never changes, or the time necessary for a quality meal, then how can it be expected that they will withstand the tediousness of any worthwhile endeavor?
I use Davis’ run as an example of a disheartening political defeat because of its recency and, obviously, my bias. I know there are many other suitable examples and they all can apply here.
Naming apathy as the culprit that limits political participation in younger generations is a cop-out. Apathy does not occur naturally, it develops out of personal experience and environmental factors.
Commentators such as Heather Smith, president of Rock the Vote, label this generation as optimistic. Yes, we do tend to expect favorable outcomes, but what happens when the result is not what we wanted? So far, just superficial objections raised in the social media realm.
A recent New York Times column by Timothy Egan called for Millennials to stand up and voice their outrage. However dulcet Egan’s piece may be, it is simply that and no more. He does point out the obvious explanations for why the youth of this country should be voicing their anger.
Then, resembling every other pundit before him, Egan presents the one way that our generation can be heard in this volatile time: voting in the 2010 midterm elections.
Wow, thanks. Reminding us that we are simply the “youth vote” and nothing more is a surefire way to ignite our political participation. We have no representation for us to unite behind and facilitate our supposed outrage.
U.S. Representative Aaron Shock, 29, constitutes the one member of Congress under the age of 30. A recent NBC article reported that Congress is “the grayest it’s ever been” and to not “expect this to change much after the November midterms. The average age of a senator is 60 (the oldest ever) and the average age of a member of the House is 55 (the oldest in more than a century).”
Additionally, we have no powerbroker such as the AARP to defend us. In the 2008 election, the 18-29 age group outvoted the 65+ cohort, but in terms of a lobbying force in Washington, D.C., we are literally years behind.
A few days after his defeat, Representative Davis announced he would not seek public office again. I was not as much shocked as I was disappointed. He has a wonderful vision for this state, but that diminishes with his supposed political departure.
I hope he decides to further address his decision, unlike what he did with his (arguably) career-ending vote on health care, so that those who followed him will not fall victim to cynicism.
To all the politicians who care about the younger generation, remember that we cannot take up a torch that you do not keep lit.
Wesley Vaughn is a junior majoring in public relations and political science.
