Libertarian Party

An open invitation from Champaign County Libertarian Party Chair Dianna Visek:

Would you like to see more participation in the
political process? Greater voter turnout? A wider
range of views? More informed voters?

Then please join us at 7 pm on Thursday May 8 in the
auditorium of the Urbana Free Library to discuss:
"Enhancing Democracy in Champaign County: Where Do We
Go from Here?"

We will have a brief overview of issues affecting
democracy in Champaign County and brainstorm about
ways we might enhance it. We will then select the
issues we find most important and form working groups
to address them. Refreshments will be served.

Although this meeting is sponsored by the Champaign
Co. Libertarian Party, it will have no official
involvement after the working groups are formed. The
Urbana Free Library is not sponsoring this event.

Our goal: A coalition of diverse individuals and
viewpoints united to increase public participation in
the democratic process. No matter what your political
affiliation, we'd like your help. Please join us.

After the breakdown of another thread, I asked myself, what's the best way for political parties, of all stripes, to encourage more young people to vote, get involved, to get interested in the overall political process?  I have a few ideas, but I know that the wider IP community would have more, and probably better, ideas.  First, a couple of set-up questions...

1.  What's the best definition of a "young voter"?  Is it a certain age range (18-25 or maybe 18-27)?  Is it educational status (high school vs community college vs university, or some combination)?  Is it employment status (full-time vs part-time vs part-time while in school)?  Is it some combination of everything I've listed above, or maybe something completely different, something outside the little box I just described?

2.  What's the best way to get a young voter to connect with a party, a candidate, a political philosophy, whatever?  What's the best way to get a young voter to connect, and then get them to act on their connection, by voting, by organizing for a party or candidate, by maybe even running for office themselves?

3.  What's the best way to keep a young voter connected, to keep them involved, so that they continue that connection into "non-young voter" status?  Not necessarily keep them chained to a specific party or candidate per se, but more how do we maintain their interest in the process and continue to keep it relevant for the voter?

4.  What am I forgetting, or missing?

I'm not writing this to mock anyone, or to throw gasoline on the floor and wait for the trolls to come by with matches, but I want to ask this seriously, as a "non-young voter":  How do we get young people to get connected and stay connected?  I'm not as interested in hearing about how a specific political party or candidate can connect with young voters, so much as I'm interested in hearing how we can get young voters connected and interested in the first place.

HG

Where there’s smoke . . .

The Minot Daily News, Minot, North Dakota -

Once again, smoking is a hot topic at the North Dakota Legislature.

Senate Bill 2164, which was defeated 30-15 by the Senate on Thursday, would have banned smoking in bars and truck stops. The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Ralph Kilzer, R-Bismarck, came two years after the Legislature approved a smoking ban in most buildings to which the public has access. Bars were exempt, as were separate, walled-off areas in truck stops where children were not allowed.

We were in favor of the smoking ban in all restaurants, and we still support that ban. But supporters of this bill had a tougher fight on their hands. They couldn’t use the health of children as one argument for banning smoking, since bars are a controlled atmosphere, with no one under the age of 21 allowed.

We do agree with the supporters of the ban on at least one point: There’s clear evidence that smoking and secondhand smoke contribute to or cause a wide array of health problems.

But we also agree with opponents of this bill on this point: If smoking would have been banned in bars, what’s next? Some states are considering whether to ban smoking in outdoor public places and whether to prohibit adults from smoking in a vehicle when children are present. Where will the fight against smoking end? It likely won’t end until smoking is banned everywhere – indoors and outdoors.

Just because something is bad for your health doesn’t necessarily mean the government should ban its use. Candy, donuts and soda all have proven health risks, but are still available. There should still be some personal responsibility in life.

Certainly smoking rises to a slightly different level, because of the health risks of secondhand smoke. But if the smoking ban supporters were truly concerned about public health issues, why weren’t they proposing a state ban on the sale of alcohol, which would eliminate the need for bars altogether?`

Jim Eykyn, Publisher; Bryan L. Obenchain, Editor