Every four years, the MICDS History and Social Sciences team offers a timely Upper School elective: Presidential Politics. This year, many students registered to learn more about the office of the presidency of the United States of America, with an emphasis on its structure and powers. They are learning how a presidential candidate is nominated and, eventually, elected. Students examine the role of campaign organizations, parties, campaign finance, and the Electoral College. They also explore traditional and digital media. As part of the course, students are researching the 2024 election and will predict the likely outcome, as well as explore specific examples of consequential elections and presidencies in American history. Following the election, students will conduct post-election analysis, examine the transition process, discuss the election’s impact on policymaking, and study the legacy of American presidents.
Upper School History Teachers Kristin Roberts and Dr. Tanya Roth are leading the classes this fall. They are challenging their students to think critically about what makes a winning presidential campaign, what role « we the people » play in the presidential political process, and what makes a good president of the United States. The classes also review the candidates, the issues, citizen engagement, and the legacy and impact of presidents.
At each Upper School assembly this year, small teams of Presidential Politics students share information with their peers about various topics related to the election in a series of brief presentations called « We the People. »
This week, students discussed voting, contemplating whether the U.S. needs voting reforms, why or why not, and if so, where and in what ways. The students themselves determined discussion parameters, such as include everyone, ask questions, mention sources, and show respect, before launching into vibrant discussions. Roberts and Roth posted questions for them to consider answering as they talk about what they’ve learned and how they came to their conclusions:
- Who decides on voting laws? What is outlined in the Constitution? What is controlled by states?
- Should Americans be concerned about lower voter turnout compared to other nations? If so, how do you increase turnout?
- What voting reforms should happen? Should it be logistical changes? Or access changes?
- Logistical: rank-choice voting/online voting/main-in voting (convenience-voting), making voting mandatory, Election Day as a national holiday, lowering the voting age, etc.
- Access: voter ID laws, felon enfranchisement, equally accessible polling centers, etc.
- Should reforms happen at the local, state, and/or federal levels? What would each look like?
The discussions kicked off quickly and easily, and students batted around ideas. One noted that he looked for the right to vote in the Constitution. « It’s not there except in the two congressional amendments allowing Blacks and women to vote, then in 1961 outlawing poll taxes. Voting is so important to the fundamentals of our democracy and it’s not outlined. That’s interesting to me, » he said. Another student noted that because each state is allowed to determine its own election laws, it’s not consistent. « It’s not regulated nationally across the country, » she said, « For instance, there are different mail-in ballot policies state by state. »
They discussed whether all tax-paying citizens should be able to vote, which would lower the voting age to include working high school students (« taxation without representation » was thrown about!). Impassioned discussion followed, with students wondering whether parents might interfere with how their working teen children vote. Others questioned whether the level of maturity that comes with age and experience is required to vote. « You have to draw the line somewhere, » one student pointed out. « They’re all people! But 18 is a good age. » Another agreed. « At 18, you are charged as an adult if you commit a crime, so that seems appropriate for voting. »
One conversation moved on to how we vote. Would ranked choice or a simple majority work better than the Electoral College? « I think the current system favors political polarization, » one student posited. Another said, « We need to make it so there are not two dominant parties. They at least need a voice in the system. There is no way two parties can encompass the diverse political beliefs this country has. If you have only two parties, there’s a good portion of the population whose beliefs aren’t represented. »
Another student shared information about Mexico’s system of proportional representation. « Half the congress is voted in direct election; the other half is divided according to the percentage of votes each party received. So, the Green party and the Libertarians would at least have representation. This would encourage people to vote more and eliminate direct majority, which would force parties to work together on legislation. It’s a hybridization. »
All the students agreed that forcing people to vote is a bad idea. One said, « Voting is a right, but that doesn’t mean it has to be exercised by everyone. You have to choose to exercise those freedoms. To incite people to vote, you have to reduce the political polarization. »
They discussed adding more polling booths to encourage voting through easier access, and conducting nationwide automatic voter registration, « like for the draft. » One student quoted a founding father: « Thomas Jefferson said after they wrote the Constitution, when they were trying to fix the Articles of Confederation: ‘That worked so well, we should do this every 30 years.’ Government is meant to work for the people. »
Students also noted that many people not voting is a symptom of disinterest in the process. « We need people to feel like they have a voice, » one said. By and large, they thought that election day should be a national holiday. « Small changes, like making it easier on the day, automatic voter registration, and increased polling places for shorter lines would encourage more people to vote. »
Many ideas were offered and debated, all respectfully and with evidence-based data to support assertions. Every student was encouraged to share their opinions and was treated with respect. One thing they all agreed on: voting is a civic responsibility, and Americans should care enough about their country to vote.
At the Upper School assembly that week, a small team of students offered a brief presentation on « How to Get Involved with Politics. » They encouraged their peers to use social media as an appropriate research tool, checking the bios of pages and engaging with news outlets. They shared that research shows 60% of young people get their news on social media. At school, students can join political clubs (MICDS has both a Young Republicans club and a Campus Democrats club). In their community, even students too young to vote can help conduct polling, participate in online surveys, and make phone calls. Finally, they encouraged students to join the Debate Club.
Many thanks to the MICDS History and Social Sciences team for creating this timely course that encourages students to research and explore their role in shaping the future of their country, and to the students for sharing what they’ve discovered at Upper School assemblies.