Warding Off Student Influence
“Whereas in Berkeley two City Council districts contain the majority of the student population, in Ann Arbor students are distributed centrally throughout the city, said Ann Arbor Councilmember Joan Lowenstein,” reports the Daily Californian in a story comparing students’ involvement in local government in the two cities. Isn’t it actually the districts that are distributed throughout the city in order to dilute student influence?
My favorite comment is the brilliant insight that “the local Democratic Party…has a number of party members on the city council…”
posted by cmadler on April 30th, 2008 at 1:17 pmIsn’t it actually the districts that are distributed throughout the city in order to dilute student influence?
I don’t think so — students here are distributed in pretty much every direction from the central campus, and there’s also the student housing in and around North campus. Graduate students, who are more likely to vote here are more dispersed than students as a whole.
Student influence on local politics was diluted not by any local decision but by the state-level decision to require voters registrations and drivers license addresses to match.
posted by mw on April 30th, 2008 at 2:01 pmBut why is it assumed that living slightly north of central campus should put you in a different ward from someone living slightly south of central campus, but not in a different ward from someone living very far north of central campus?
I noticed the “number of party members” thing too. I guess a number = 100 percent.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on April 30th, 2008 at 2:05 pmProbably because the wards are not separated by straight lines.
http://www.a2gov.org/government/city_administration/City_Clerk/Elections/Pages/WardBoundariesMap.aspx
posted by Me on April 30th, 2008 at 3:32 pmI think Larry Kestenbaum will attest to a deal between the HRP and Republicans in the mid 70s to redraw the ward boundaries specifically to split the student vote. The HRP wanted to move some of its base into other wards and the Republicans benefited from the HRP splitting votes from the Democrats. You’ll note in the linked map of 1972 that the 2nd ward includes most of the near-campus area, while the boundaries today, when compared, clearly evidence the gerrymandering.
posted by Dale on April 30th, 2008 at 8:10 pmRight, the old 2nd ward was largely student, and elected students, until that 1974 deal. Ward boundaries have barely changed since then.
The HRP wanted to have a ward where it could compete with Democrats (the current 1st ward), and the Republicans wanted to win all of the other wards by concentrating the HRP and Dems in that same 1st ward.
Thanks to this gerrymander, Republicans remained the majority on the Ann Arbor city council from the 1970s until the early 1990s. Local Democrats became convinced that it was pointless to campaign to students, and UM student voter participation plummeted. The presence of students has been pretty much irrelevant to city politics since the mid-1970s.
Meanwhile, up in East Lansing, there were thorough door-to-door voter registration drives and absentee ballot drives at MSU every year. Campaigns in East Lansing focused on MSU students because they were (and are) a big factor in city and county elections.
I remember going to state Democratic conventions among a huge contingent of MSU students in the 1970s, and being stunned to discover that UM had literally zero student delegates.
I remember how we tried to convince Ann Arbor folks to organize student voters, and being airily told that “it would never work at UM” and that we “East Lansing hillbillies” just didn’t understand Ann Arbor. Or that UM students (unlike MSU students?) were totally uninterested in politics. And so on.
The drivers license voter registration thing has not been a significant barrier to students voting in East Lansing. Yet in Ann Arbor, it’s widely used as an excuse to give up on students having any voice or vote.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on May 1st, 2008 at 2:07 am“The drivers license voter registration thing has not been a significant barrier to students voting in East Lansing. Yet in Ann Arbor, it’s widely used as an excuse to give up on students having any voice or vote.”
But the ratio of students to other residents is much, much higher in E Lansing than in Ann Arbor, that the situations really aren’t comparable at all. The population of E Lansing is 46,000 including students:
http://www.idcide.com/citydata/mi/east-lansing.htm
Which means students are a huge majority of the population — no wonder their impact is much greater. And because students have the numbers to run things if they bother to switch their drivers license registration and vote in local elections, it makes more sense for them to bother.
posted by mw on May 1st, 2008 at 11:13 amMW, I’d like to hear more on your analysis, in spite of your last two assertions being totally wrong and quickly refuted.
posted by Dale on May 1st, 2008 at 11:19 amWhen I was there, MSU students were about three-quarters of the adults in the city of East Lansing. It’s probably a little less now.
But is that really the bright line that separates Ann Arbor and East Lansing?
In any case, students don’t directly “run things” in East Lansing. MSU student voter turnout is less than non-student voter turnout. All five city council members are elected at-large, on the nonpartisan ballot. Hence, it’s not possible for a student candidate to be elected without garnering substantial support (like 1/3) among homeowners.
In 37 years since the 18-year-old vote, I think only two MSU students have been elected to the East Lansing city council: Alan Fox in 1977 (he came from a townie family), and Sam Singh in 1995.
Caveat: I haven’t been following East Lansing city politics in recent years, so everything I know is probably out of date.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on May 1st, 2008 at 11:56 amDale: MW, I’d like to hear more on your analysis, in spite of your last two assertions being totally wrong and quickly refuted.
You think that students *aren’t* a much greater percentage of the population in E Lansing than in Ann Arbor? Your source to refute that would be … what?
What percentage of undergrads (who are the majority of students) have transferred their drivers license addresses to Ann Arbor and are registered to vote here?
Most grad students are here year round and have changed their addresses and registrations. But their numbers are even smaller compared to the city as a whole and they’re much less concentrated in particular central-campus areas than undergrads. And some commute in from cheaper apartments outside the city limits entirely (as we did from Ypsi as grad students in the 80’s).
Back in the day, the Ann Arbor pot law was a big deal for students. But with the U having its own police force, the students living in university housing (thousands of undergrads on central and north campus and family housing) can no longer effectively vote on that issue (or other local law enforcement issues) which is yet another reason to ignore city council. And it goes without saying that undergrads are unaffected by Ann Arbor school board politics.
Larry Kestenbaum: But is that really the bright line that separates Ann Arbor and East Lansing?
I would say, yes.
In any case, students don’t directly “run things” in East Lansing. MSU student voter turnout is less than non-student voter turnout.
So apparently there’s rather a lot of student apathy in E Lansing as well? If they make up 3/4 of the adult population but still are a minority of voters, we can conclude participation percentage is still very low, no? In fact, given the overall low levels of participation in local elections, student participation must be truly minuscule.
Do we have any data at all to show current student voting rates are higher in E Lansing than Ann Arbor. Or are the only differences the fractions of the adult populations?
All five city council members are elected at-large, on the nonpartisan ballot. Hence, it’s not possible for a student candidate to be elected without garnering substantial support (like 1/3) among homeowners.
But based on the sheer numbers, it would certainly be *possible* for students to elect several or even all five council members if they bothered to register and vote in any kind of numbers. But apparently they don’t.
posted by mw on May 1st, 2008 at 12:16 pmEast Lansing homeowners tend to be older, highly educated, geographically stable, married people. Studies of voter turnout have shown that years of education, years living at current address, numerical age, and being married, are all VERY highly correlated with voter participation.
Tenured MSU faculty are tops in all the relevant demographics, and no group of transient young people, no matter how motivated to participate in a city election, is ever going to match their percentage turnout.
When you consider that no more than half of MSU students choose to register to vote in East Lansing (a mathematical reality since 1971, not some new development), the turnout among the students who are registered is pretty comparable to local election voter turnout in most places.
By contrast, Ann Arbor’s April city elections had approximately zero student turnout most years.
Now that’s a bright line.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on May 1st, 2008 at 12:48 pmWhen you consider that no more than half of MSU students choose to register to vote in East Lansing (a mathematical reality since 1971, not some new development), the turnout among the students who are registered is pretty comparable to local election voter turnout in most places.
By contrast, Ann Arbor’s April city elections had approximately zero student turnout most years.
Is there data showing this? What fraction of students are registered locally in E Lansing vs Ann Arbor, and what fraction actually vote?
Bottom line — I would say that low-participation by students is overdetermined. The most numerous and geographically concentrated students (undergraduates in university housing) are also the most transient and least familiar with and affected by local issues. The drivers license registration requirement adds a further obstacle to voting at school. The existence of campus police forces that do not enforce local ordinances on campus is another reason not to bother. Where students are small minority (as in Ann Arbor) that is yet another reason.
And then, let’s look at Ann Arbor — why would anybody with the power to do it be interested in gerrymandering to create a student-dominated ward? The students obviously don’t have the votes to get that done. And now that Ann Arbor is a one-party system (and looks likely to remain that way), there’s not even the possibility of party horse-trading that might result in redrawn ward boundaries.
posted by mw on May 1st, 2008 at 3:46 pmIt goes without saying that millages have no effect on non-school age residents in the city, doesn’t it, mw?
posted by Dale on May 1st, 2008 at 5:08 pmYes, I’ll post data demonstrating these points. Maybe this weekend.
The difference between East Lansing (MSU student body is disproportionately undergraduates) versus Ann Arbor (UM student body is disproportionately grad students) runs counter to your thesis.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on May 1st, 2008 at 5:33 pmLarry, you may have to define how you are using disproportionate in this case because according to the numbers I’ve seen, undergrads at UM were 63.6% vs 36.4% for Grad students as of Fall 07. I am not an expert by any means (and I know nothing of MSU’s enrollment), but that seems fairly normal to me. I do not know if these numbers represent past enrollment numbers so I am assuming the ratio is similar.
I may not be understanding your point though.
http://www.umich.edu/news/Releases/2007/Nov07/enroll.html
posted by Me on May 2nd, 2008 at 8:41 amhttp://newsroom.msu.edu/snav/184/page.htm#People
puts msu at 78% undergrad, 22% grad, for what it’s worth.
posted by Bruce Fields on May 2nd, 2008 at 9:56 amUndergrads at MSU are roughly 80% of the student population there, and grad students 20%. (I thought it was closer to 90/10.) By that standard, 36% is a very high number for grad students.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on May 2nd, 2008 at 9:57 amBruce beat me to it!
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on May 2nd, 2008 at 9:58 amFrom an outside perspective, let me make sure I’ve got this right: the debate here is really over whether or not politicians will do ugly things to protect their careers.
Um.
posted by Man Invents Ego on May 3rd, 2008 at 12:24 pmEgo is right. It is all about what will one do to get elected. Ypsi got rid of their own student ward when they rewrote the charter. Before that we had a student vote. Apathy took over and it was said that the students no longer needed their voice. What we need to do is hook in 16 year olds to vote. Most of them are more clued into issues than college kids. Make it a habit early.
posted by maryd on May 4th, 2008 at 7:08 amAnd just for the record, I was a parent with a child at Angell School and heard repeatedly about how students “didn’t pay taxes!” and so weren’t as legitimate a constituency as the rich folk in AA Hills.
posted by Living Large on May 4th, 2008 at 5:57 pmLiving Large: the “students don’t pay taxes” argument is one of my favorites! as if taxes were the voter fee or something.
posted by fgc on May 5th, 2008 at 4:17 pmOr as if tenants are tax-free because landlords pay it all, and charge them nothing.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on May 5th, 2008 at 5:37 pm“state-level decision to require voters registrations and drivers license addresses to match”
Hmm… I was registered to vote - and actually voted - as a student in Ann Arbor, but never got a Michigan driver’s license. Either nobody was checking or there’s a way around this requirement.
posted by Claire on May 16th, 2008 at 1:39 am