Letters to the Editor: 11.13.97
Missing First Vote
East Hampton
November 10, 1997
To The Editor,
It is rather ironic that your article "Youngest Don't Vote" was apparently reported and written on the same day that my advanced placement United States government and politics class was discussing the problems inherent in political participation? Among the topics that we discussed that day were electoral and nonelectoral forms of participation, and how voting rates are often an inaccurate predictor of political participation in our system of government.
We compared American participation rates to those of other industrialized democracies and found that our participation rate in nonelectoral forms exceeds our voting rates. The entire process of electing officials in the United States is a voluntary activity in which the burden of eligibility falls entirely upon the individual and not the government (the "motor-voter bill" notwithstanding). Yet my students pointed out the fact that, compared to other industrialized democracies, citizens in the United States participate in politics at a far higher rate than our European counterparts.
My students were dismayed by the fact that your article implied East Hampton High School students were not being taught the virtues of our civic obligations. They felt that nothing could be further from the truth. Although all but one of my 23 students in this advanced placement course are 17 years old, most participate in nonelectoral forms of political activity, from community service to working on campaigns. The one eligible student was accepted to a leadership conference in Washington, D.C., after the deadline for absentee ballots applications had passed. He felt very bad about missing his first vote.
The primary focus of my advanced placement course is to examine national political processes and policy implications. To partially quote my statement that my course deals with local politics "only tangentially" is narrowly accurate but broadly disingenuous. Although my class deals with the policy implications of national legislation upon local conditions, unfortunately we cannot delve deeper into the intricacies of local politics, because the terminal examination for the course is one taken by 50,000 students nationally.
I believe that you invited a false inference when you stated that my colleagues and I made "registration forms available" to the students. In fact, I said to your reporter that we make very certain that our students are indeed registered to vote by the time that they leave our high school. My colleagues and I mail them ourselves. It is unfortunate that my words were distorted in that manner.
In an election year in which a record low 32 percent of registered (not voting-age population) voters turned up at Suffolk County polls, it is not shocking that the "young don't vote," especially considering that the lowest turnout rate is in the 18 to 24-year-old age group. Their parents do not vote, nor do far too many of our fellow citizens. But to let stand the implication that the curriculum and instruction at our high school are responsible for this poor showing is to surrender to the "nattering nabobs of negativism," who too often portray too little of our high school's true accomplishments. Perhaps you could report more in depth on our students' achievements that are numerous yet often unreported in our local paper of record.
Sincerely,
TIMOTHY M. ROOD
History Department
East Hampton High School
Student's Choice
Amagansett
November 10, 1997
Dear Helen:
The article "Youngest Don't Vote" in the last issue of The Star seems to imply that the social studies teachers at East Hampton High School (with one exception) were somehow responsible for the level of voter apathy among the 18-year-olds at the school who were eligible to vote in the past local election. This implication should be corrected. With regard to some facts:
1) We provide registration materials and encouragement, including instruction in how to register, in our social studies classes. Part of that instruction involves using an actual voting machine. This is done at the end of the year, aiming at those who will turn 18 by the next election. However, whether or not the students actually register is the student's choice, not the school's responsibility. (This is in fact the reason why the League of Women Voters does not set up a voter registration booth at the high school, as the article points out.)
2) With regard to "following the curriculum," the 11th-grade curriculum focuses on national government and history, while the 12th-grade curriculum focuses on citizenship at every level of government for one semester and economics for the other. Local issues are discussed in these senior courses, but generally the first part of the course aims to teach the fundamentals - difference between liberals and conservatives, party labels, social class and its impact on politics, party policy stances, etc., - to give students the basic vocabulary and concepts necessary to discuss local issues intelligently and dispassionately.
3) The seniors enrolled in the advanced placement government and politics course are tested nationally (to earn college credit while they are still in high school) and so for that reason local politics is not part of that course. Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that local issues "come up only tangentially" in that class.
4) Current events are an integral part of our instruction in every one of our social studies classes - not just in Mr. Beudert's classes. Generally, these current events are international (for those courses aiming toward the global studies Regents examination and the advanced placement European history examination) or national (for those aiming toward the American history and government Regents examination and the advanced placement examinations in American history and government).
5) With regard to the numbers, I find it hard to believe that 57 students in our school are 18 years old. That would mean that one-third of the senior class (of a total of 170 seniors) turned 18 in the month which has passed since the October cutoff for school entrance registration, rather than the one-12th or so, which would seem statistically reasonable. (Students who turned 18 before October would have begun school in the year previous to this year's senior class and so been in the class which graduated last June.)
It is revealing that the only 18-year-old you praise by implication as an interested and active voter in your article, Christina Bernard, graduated last year, is now a college freshman, and voted by absentee ballot before leaving to go to college. Last year's graduates are the students you might have interviewed for your article, if you want to get a clear picture of how high school instruction impacts participation in the electoral process.
6) Indeed, Ms. Bernard's case raises an interesting point. Her "independence of spirit" which is featured so prominently in the article might be partially a product of her participation in advanced placement history and government courses at the high school. Why wasn't this mentioned, as a counterbalance to the generally negative attitudes of the other students you interviewed in the article? If by implication we get the "blame" for the apathetic students, shouldn't we get the credit for the good ones?
7) On the other hand, the fact that Christina's father is an active and intelligent member of the local political community was mentioned in the article; reading between the lines, one might with justice assume that her interest in politics was due to the guidance and nurturing which she had enjoyed at home, and thus had little or nothing to do with the instruction she had received at East Hampton High School. (The old "apple does not fall far from the tree" idea.) If that is the case, then apathy and suspicion about politics is something which also begins at home and by inference the problem cannot be solved by a few hours in school.
8) By ending the article with the statement that a senior class watched "a romantic comedy about a President and his social life" rather than discussing local issues on Election Day, your writer, Ms. Mead, left readers with the idea that instruction in that class is shallow and trivial. That was a cheap shot. I suggest that teacher is trying to engage students through their interests and their popular culture. As for the film, among other things, it is a compelling contemporary document on how lobbying works in Washington. And in its climactic moments, its President stands up for all the right things - freedom of speech, controlling automatic weapons, the sanctity of human life, and protection of the environment. That's a pretty good lesson.
Sincerely,
DAVID SWICKARD
Chair, Social Studies
East Hampton High School
Dirty Game
East Hampton
November 6, 1997
Dear Mrs. Rattray,
I was taught that you should not always believe what you hear. I now know that that is true. I was listening to all of those monotonous radio advertisements regarding the election of 1997, and I heard one that was completely bogus.
It said that Robert J. Savage spent more time in his private law practice than at his post as the East Hampton town attorney. I personally find that a bit hard to believe because I was his secretary. There were many days when I saw him for only a few minutes because he was off doing his job as East Hampton town attorney. He narrowed down his law practice because of his position as East Hampton town attorney. I think that it's sad that the Democratic Party, namely his opponent, Cathy Cahill, had to stoop to this in order to win.
I am aware that politics is a dirty game, but if you are going to sling mud, make sure you have at least some of the facts.
Sincerely,
MICHELLE M. DIGILIO
Charge Per Bag
East Hampton
November 9, 1997
To The Editor,
When I go to our "recycling" center I usually observe someone using it as a "dump." Last week, the driver of a Jeep Wrangler unloaded six bags of "garbage." I could see milk cartons, mail, and glass bottles in his see-through bags. When I pointed out that he "forgot" to recycle, he became angry and vulgar. This happens all too often.
We need to change the system. Let's abandon the annual fee and charge per bag of garbage dumped. We'd purchase stickers from the recycling office (say $1 for a small bag and $3 for a large) and place them on our garbage bags. The individual I referred to, for example, would have paid $18; had he recycled, he very likely would have paid $1. Perhaps this sticker tactic would convince others that recycling has value. It's very easy to spot those who really recycle. They have only a small bag of garbage.
Sure the logistics have to be worked out. But there are excellent programs to emulate. One is the very successful recycling center in the Town of Granville in Washington County, N.Y. Our town executives should take a trip and see this program in action. The resources exist to improve our very primitive system.
Sincerely,
SUSAN RAKOWSKI
Please address correspondence to [email protected]
Please include your full name, address and daytime telephone number for purposes of verification.