Rock the Vote made a name for itself in 1992. First by defending the voting rights of students during the New Hampshire primary, and then by running a coordinated field and media campaign that helped elect President Bill Clinton and substantially raised youth turnout for the first time since 1972. One year later, the group helped pass the Motor Voter law. That was the peak of Rock the Vote as an organization.

Over the course of the next decade, two things happened. First, Rock the Vote's field apparatus atrophied during the mid 1990s as the organization morphed into a media vehicle. Concurrently, that media vehicle became the biggest brand in youth politics, rivaled only briefly by P. Diddy's "Vote or Die" initiative in 2004.

While RTV held the biggest name brand in youth politics, youth turnout declined in 1996 and 2000, and a lot of political minded folks concluded that Rock the Vote wasn't getting the job done. As described in my book, Youth to Power, the vacuum left in youth organizing by the failures of Rock the Vote in part inspired the boom in youth organizing that occurred between 2003 and 2007.

Since then, Rock the Vote has struggled to revitalize itself but there's been some hype that this year we would finally see a more effective organization. What that would look like, exactly, was always been pretty vague, but it's now starting to come into focus. Here's the latest on what a newly energized Rock the Vote is up to in 2008:

--So far, their online voter registration widget (which we use at Future Majority) has helped 637,859 young people download voter registration materials. If their completion rate from 2004 applies (68%), that would mean Rock the Vote has registered 433,744 new voters under the age of 30. The group's goal for the year is two million.

--Like other organizations this cycle (Huffington Post), Rock the Vote is experimenting with citizen journalism. Just last week the organization announced that they had selected five young journalists to participate in their "Rock the Trail" citizen journalist program. Congratulations are in order for my friend, Sarah Burris, who was selected as one of the five. The program promises to give its participants some exposure via major media partners like the Washington Post. Citizen journalism - particularly as a way to build a youth community - is still an unproven concept, but it's encouraging knowing that folks like Sarah will be out on the trail covering the election and telling the real story of the youth vote, which the mainstream media often confuses with the latest shiny object (P. Diddy! Facebook!).

--The organization recently issued a "Young Voter Platform," in support of a variety of youth issues and value statements including equal opportunity, sustainability, equal representation and tolerance. It's a rather milquetoast list, vague to the point of being inconsequential. Rock the Vote is a non-partisan organization, but that just means they can't endorse candidates. They can take strong stands on particular issues, and in 2004 they did, running a hard-hitting anti-Iraq War campaign focused on the draft that ruffled more than a few GOP feathers. All the issues and values laid out in Rock the Vote's Young Voter Platform are important, but some solutions to these problems are better than others. It would be nice to see Rock the Vote come down in favor of concrete ideas supported by the majority of Millennials. That would be truly meaningful coming from an organization that speaks for young voters in the media. Instead, what they've produced is a list-building tool (sign the petition!) that can be used for GOTV purposes in the fall. That's not at all insignificant, but it's something less than it could be.

--Rock the Vote is starting to reengage field work. Sort of. After years with little more than an ad-hoc crew of volunteers, there are signs that the field program will be far more emphasized this year, if not yet a core component of the organization's work. Rock the Vote intends to put street teams on the ground in major battleground states, and there are rumors they will hire staff field organizers to coordinate a ground strategy. Rock the Vote also recently announced a partnership with Head Count, a nonprofit voter registration group that works at concerts. The groups will partner on this summer's Lollapalooza and Rock the Bells festivals.

--Rock the Vote's mobile program, which will issue text message reminders about when and where to vote has garnered over 40,000 participants thus far. Such reminders are proven to bump youth turnout 4 - 5%.

--As we've come to expect, the organization will also run a large PSA campaign, though such campaigns have always struck me as being more about maintaining the Rock the Vote brand than getting young people to the polls. This recently kicked off with an ad by Christina Aguilera and her son, wrapped in an American flag, echoing the original PSA by Madonna that catapulted the organization into notoriety.

So what is the verdict? Is Rock the Vote rocking the vote in 2008?

Maybe.

The online voter registration widget is kicking ass and taking names considering how early it is in the cycle, and the revitalization of at least some field work on the part of the organization is an encouraging sign, even if we don't yet know how extensive Rock the Vote's GOTV work will be in the fall. As a young voter and a progressive partisan, I find the Young Voter Platform to be a bit of a disappointment. They could take stronger stands on issues while still staying within the limits of their tax designation.

The important thing though is that the groundwork seems to be there for Rock the Vote to be a much more significant and effective presence on the trail this year than in previous cycles, but the bar is higher as well, raised by Senator Obama's campaign and more than a dozen other youth organizations that picked up the ball Rock the Vote dropped in the mid and late 90s. The potential is there for Rock the Vote to surpass its peak during the early 90s. We'll just have to wait and see if they can follow through.

Comments (21)

1. "While RTV held the biggest name brand in youth politics, youth turnout declined in 1996 and 2000, and a lot of political minded folks concluded that Rock the Vote wasn't getting the job done."

   So when Dems win, RTV proves its a success for getting the "youth vote" to vote Democratic.....when Repubs win, RTV is at fault, the "youth vote" is "still there" just not very motivated without RTV?

   Ah........ha.

   No chance there's a more basic, Occam's Razor hypothesis that could explain that, is there?

   (cka arrival in 5...4...3...2...1....)

   Posted by Mask at 06/23/2008 @ 12:58pm

2. "The Civil War was bad but I think the Revolutionary War was worse."

   "Every generation seems to sacrifice one thing for another. With the ability to make people live longer we create weapons to wipe out life more thoroughly."

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008

   You got it backwards. The Civil War was the worst. It was the greatest loss of life in US history. Over 650K Union and Confederate soldiers were killed on the battlefield.

   As for the second statement, I'm gonna disagree with you on the sacrifice part. With the exception of the military, the last 2 generations have sacrificed nothing. If they have made sacrifices, I can't tell.

   Posted by ACook at 06/23/2008 @ 1:54pm

3. Where is Mask to throw a little hate towards young voters?

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008 @ 2:40pm

4. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008

   No, no "hate"...no wild-eyed, pie-in-the-sky adoration either.

   Posted by Mask at 06/23/2008 @ 3:23pm

5. As Shaw stated so clearly:

   "Youth is wasted on the young"

   They accumulate book knowledge and join it with all of the passion and energy that only the young truly have. However, it is mostly wasted as they lack the all important "wisdom".

   Wisdom is the appropriate application of knowledge. To do so, you need life experience as a central element.

   Take C3 for example. He's obviously bright,enthusiastic, and caring. All excellent qualities. But he lacks seasoning to really draw good conclusions. Probably he will grow to make sound conclusions based upon sufficient experience; or maybe he will still be a liberal (just joking).

   For now, the youth vote remains one swayed mostly by emotional responses and not sound judgment.

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/23/2008 @ 4:21pm

6. Posted by frankgrits at 06/23/2008

   It is true the most don't have enough experience. I voted for the candidate I voted for because it was that or Bush. I think the newer generation of voters has a little more experience than most being born in such trying times with such subtleties of propaganda being beat into their heads constantly. It's not as easy to take a stand because if you do you are always betraying someone. If you take a stand against Iraq you are told you are a traitor to your country and that you hate the troops and want the terrorists to succeed. If you take a stand FOR Iraq you are still a traitor to your country but also a mass murderer. Propaganda surrounds us now but I think we have an advantage that other generations didn't. We have new free flow method of disseminating information that we more than any other generation know how to use to our advantage.

   The other problem is people like you Frank. Who tell anyone who disagrees with their point of view that they are stupid or childish. People like you, LVL, Libsuck have always existed. You think YOU are the moral authority. That only your decision matters never realizing that people can disagree with you for a principled reason not just cultism as you like to call it. You are as dangerous to new voters as right wing propaganda machines because you steep your political vitriol in a proposed abundance of knowledge that leads to an unrivaled arrogance. I in fact think that maybe you do have a factual knowledge of history but that does not mean you have an understanding of history and the times. You have shown your lack of subtleties with the use words like "boy" when describing a black man. So I think just as much as young people need to go out and try to UNDERSTAND history you also need to Frank because what good is experience if you don't learn from it. A 60 year old who never learns from their mistakes is more likely to fail than a 25 year old who has learned from all of theirs.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008 @ 5:01pm

7. And that is not a knock Frank. It is a fact that a misunderstanding of history can be more dangerous than a lack of understanding. A misunderstanding can lead to very strong feelings based on facts that were interpreted wrong making the opinion impossible to change. A lack of understanding can lead to an opinion that can be changed simply by presenting the full story.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008 @ 5:06pm

8. "I think the newer generation of voters has a little more experience than most being born in such trying times with such subtleties of propaganda being beat into their heads constantly."

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008

   C3, this is the same feeling that's been going on for decades. Each "generation" after 1960 thought they were born into "trying" times. They weren't. (Although, I think this generation is much better off than mine over 2 decades ago.) I don't think they appreciate nor can grasp what true trying times are. And, believe me when I say "not being able to fill your BMW's gas tank" is not a real hardship.

   You want trying times? How about living though some of these...

   The Civil War, the Stock Market Crash of 1929, the Great Depression, the Dust Bowl, WWI, WWII, the Korean War, Polio, the Influenza Epidemic of 1912(?), scarlett fever, no Penicillin before the 1940's, no vaccines, no food pantries, and a host of others too numerous to mention.

   Posted by ACook at 06/23/2008 @ 6:07pm

9. You preaching to me about history is really funny. I'm a student of history and I have been for as long as I can remember. Btw, I never call anyone names unless they've attacked me first. I always give them enough rope to hang themselves, idiot.

   Posted by frankgrits at 06/23/2008

   I try to never call you names Frank. Yet you insist on doing it to me. How is that enough rope to hang myself with. The reference to 60 was not a reference to you it was a general statement to make a point. Like I said. You may think of yourself as a student of history Frank. But do you truly gain understanding? Or are you just doing what they teach kids to do now-a-days in school which is regurgitate facts without ever trying to understand them?

   See I can make a post without calling you names. You may be older than me but I seem to be the more mature one.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008 @ 6:18pm

10. The Civil War, the Stock Market Crash of 1929, the Great Depression, the Dust Bowl, WWI, WWII, the Korean War, Polio, the Influenza Epidemic of 1912(?), scarlett fever, no Penicillin before the 1940's, no vaccines, no food pantries, and a host of others too numerous to mention.

    Posted by ACook at 06/23/2008 |

    You make a good point. However if you do things on a comparative scale like you say the only people who can complain are cavemen. I think in comparison almost every generation has had it better than the one before it. The Civil War was bad but I think the Revolutionary War was worse. True things have gotten comparatively better but with one advancement comes another to cripple the next generation. With the invention of new medical technology and new computers in a generation so also came the Atom Bomb.

    With the Internet comes a wider dissemination of truth but also comes the falling apart of the press and the loss of privacy rights. Every generation seems to sacrifice one thing for another. With the ability to make people live longer we create weapons to wipe out life more thoroughly. The history of hardship can not be made comparatively because to every generation they have it the worst and if we all take a stance of "it's not that bad" nothing gets achieved.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008 @ 6:25pm

11. Posted by frankgrits at 06/23/2008

    Also Frank the reason I question your true UNDERSTANDING of history is not without reason. Often times I see you write on here in response to someone. And many, many, many times I see you completely miss the point of what the person was writing. You often do it with me. You take a point I am trying to make and then completely run in a different direction with it with no understanding of what I was actually saying. I have decided if you do this on purpose, because you can't make a valid argument to the one presented you, or if you do it because you legitimately do not understand what the person is saying. This is what leads me to believe that you are lacking in UNDERSTANDING of history. In short experience, KNOWLEDGE of the facts does not necessarily translate into UNDERSTANDING of them.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008 @ 6:32pm

12. that's supposed to be "haven't" decide.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/23/2008 @ 6:34pm

13. Posted by frankgrits at 06/23/2008

    I never "mischaracterized" you FRANK...

    I quoted you, as did FROSTY.

    All it takes is Google and the words "FRANKGRITS" and any post before about January 2008 (when Hillary started to lose) to do.

    Posted by Mask at 06/24/2008 @ 12:21am

14. Btw, I never call anyone names unless they've attacked me first.

    Posted by frankgrits at 06/23/2008

    See how that works? You don't attack me and I don't attack you.

    Posted by frankgrits at 06/23/2008

    Maybe you should work on your communication skills. Are you out of high school yet?

    Posted by frankgrits at 06/23/2008

    I guess you don't stick to this very closely. Or maybe you didn't have an intelligent reply so you went with an insult instead. Grow up Frank. I am not attacking you. I am trying to have an intelligent conversation with you and you still can't even stick to your own rules.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/24/2008 @ 03:05am

15. As for the second statement, I'm gonna disagree with you on the sacrifice part. With the exception of the military, the last 2 generations have sacrificed nothing. If they have made sacrifices, I can't tell.

    Posted by ACook at 06/23/2008

    I don't mean themselves. Did you see what I followed it with? I meant technologically. Like I said we GAIN better medicine to make people live longer, our sacrifice is that we make better weapons to kill people more thoroughly.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/24/2008 @ 03:07am

16. "I don't mean themselves. Did you see what I followed it with? I meant technologically. Like I said we GAIN better medicine to make people live longer, our sacrifice is that we make better weapons to kill people more thoroughly."

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/24/2008

    Oh yes, I did. But, the technology you speak of has taken years to perfect. For example, the better medicines you cite came from years of making modifications and utilizing multiple control groups to enhance a drug's efficacy. Did you know the drug Tylenol was introduced in 1955? And that its' active ingredient (acetaminophen) has been around since the late 1800s?

    The same thing applies to tactical weapons as well.

    Although, I must admit, the Gen X and Gen Y wouldn't be so full of comtempt of our elders if we had only taken the time to teach them properly.

    Posted by ACook at 06/24/2008 @ 12:23pm

17. Posted by frankgrits at 06/24/2008

    ((Only question you ever need to ask FRANK to get his REAL agenda...if he'd answer it honestly))

    FRANK, given your respect and support for John McCain, when he runs for re-election in 2012....will you vote for him again?

    Posted by Mask at 06/24/2008 @ 12:25pm

18. Sorry young man/woman but you're questioning my understanding of history was and is taken as an insult which is exactly the way you meant it. I gave you the benefit of the doubt when I said you need to improve your communication skills. I don't know how old you are but you do sound like a high school kid. No offense intended.

    Posted by frankgrits at 06/24/2008

    I am a man which you KNOW. I didn't mean it as an insult, you by now should have learned to infer meaning without actually asking the person. I was not insulting you I was making a simple observation. I am not in highschool. As I have said many times before and which you already know I a college graduate at 21. Again you continue to insult because you can't find a legitimate point.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/24/2008 @ 12:34pm

19. Although, I must admit, the Gen X and Gen Y wouldn't be so full of comtempt of our elders if we had only taken the time to teach them properly.

    Posted by ACook at 06/24/2008

    Teach what properly?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/24/2008 @ 12:35pm

20. Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/24/2008

    I love the assumption you always make Jom. That everyone who wants socialism is either young or a moocher. How about those people who are well off but still want socialism? I don't think they are moochers. I would like to see a study done to find out what is the average income and age of those seeking to try socialism because you make this statement with no actual facts to back you up.

    On top of that. You always assume all socialists are left. I argue that much of the right is socialist as well. Using the nations military to help corporations is socialism. The right is a practitioner of corporate welfare as much as the left is a practitioner of social welfare. The right in this country is seeking just another form of socialism.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/24/2008 @ 12:39pm

21. It may be true that most youth lack the wisdom to vote wisely, but we're talking about a country that thinks creationism should be taught in schools and is one scary news cycle from supporting a genocide of all Arabs - so no age group has a monopoly on naivete. On a functional level, youth turnout in this election would yield the wise outcome (booting the Republicans out), so regardless of young voters' intent, their greater turnout would be unequivocally a good thing.

    Posted by sylphhead at 06/25/2008 @ 6:08pm