White youths are more pessimistic about their economic future than young minorities, though black and Hispanic youth are more likely to be in a worse financial position right now.
As President Obama dusts off his 2008 theme of “hope” in anticipation of his reelection campaign, he has a problem to get around: Among young voters, one of his most crucial constituencies, hope is, like, so yesterday.
I wrote last month about how the economy could shift the youth vote more toward a GOP candidate. A report out today by Young Invincibles and Demos, called "The State of Young America," finds that even though young people are still optimistic about their future, they are the first generation to be worse off than their parents in many respects.
More than a third of young adults have delayed going to college because of difficult economic conditions in the United States, says a report released on Wednesday by the progressive nonprofit organization Demos and the advocacy group Young Invincibles. Exactly half of 18-to-24-year-olds reported less than $5,000 in total debt; 8 percent owed more than $25,000, according to the report, “The State of Young America,” which also collects data on college-completion rates, tuition and student loans, and employment and health insurance.
The report’s first chapter, Jobs and the Economy, explores how long-term trends and the current tumultuous economic environment has taken a toll on young Americans’ employment prospects, paychecks, and ultimately their earnings for years to come. Unemployment and underemployment rates for young Americans remain dangerously high, and almost 60 percent of employed young people say they would like to work more hours. At the same time, there is also a clear wage pay gap, gender pay gap, and education pay gap.
A new report from Demos looking at The Economic State of Young America shows that “average [higher education] tuition is three times higher today than in 1980.” “Average tuition at public 4-year colleges was $7,600 in the 2010 academic year, up from $2,100 in 1980,” the report notes, while “average tuition at private 4-year colleges nearly tripled in a generation, increasing from $9,500 in the 1980 academic year to $27,300 in 2010.” At the same time, the federal Pell Grant is covering an ever smaller percentage of th
The Montana Supreme Court in Helena stands just off the main drag, dramatically called Last Chance Gulch Street. The picturesque setting is fitting for an institution that has just challenged the U.S. Supreme Court to a legal showdown on the enormously important question of whether corporations should have an unfettered right to dominate elections or whether citizens have the right to adopt commonsense protections to defend democratic government from corruption. Get the kids off the streets, because this could be an epic confrontation.
The difference is obvious, Potter replied. Because 527 groups were legally shady, they attracted far less money from fewer donors. True, the FEC didn’t enforce the law, but donors couldn’t be sure that would be the case, and some were unwilling to take the risk.
The U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United decision unleashed the specter of unlimited corporate political donations in U.S. elections. So far, however, it's mostly rich individuals doing the donating.
One of the effects of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision is that it allowed corporations to give unlimited amounts to independent expenditure political action committees capable of supporting or opposing political candidates.
But a new report from the non-profit group Demos shows that the majority, 55.6 percent, of donations to super PACs in 2010 and 2011 still came from individuals rather than for-profit entities.
A joint analysis by Demos and US PIRG released today takes a detailed look at the increasing (and deleterious) impact that so-called Super PACs are having on elections in the United States. Super PACs are independent political action committees that can accept unlimited and often undisclosed financial contributions from donors to campaign for or against candidates or issues during an election.
A new report from two public-interest groups confirms fears "that the cash for big-ticket campaign spending like TV advertising is increasingly controlled by an elite class of super-rich patrons not afraid to plunk down a million bucks or more for favored candidates and causes."
Six out of the top 10 fundraising super PACs have received untraceable donations. In total, 20 percent of super PACs received untraceable donations in 2011.
A study entitled "Auctioning Democracy" also found that the super rich give a large amount of the funding received by super PACs. This skews American politics, it concluded, because wealthy donors have different life experiences and political preferences than other citizens.
