News & Updates

CPP recognizes political savvy of high school students

McDowell High School won the Best Overall Campaign at the CPP's Model Campaign USA competition May 4.

MEADVILLE, PA—The Center for Political Participation at Allegheny College hosted its largest ever Model Campaign USA program this year, with 180 area high school students and teachers gathering on campus for a mock campaign on May 4.

     Several high school teams won awards recognizing their achievements in conducting exemplary political campaigns. The award for Best Overall Campaign went to McDowell High School, Erie.

     “These students from our high schools, and from Allegheny, are the future leaders of the United States, and are now better equipped to conduct themselves and treat others with dignity and civility,” said Suzanne Sitzler, director of the McDowell Honors College of Leadership and Service.

     Model Campaign USA is a semester-long program, held every other year, to teach high school students the art and ethics of political campaigning. Allegheny political science students have been visiting participating high schools since the end of January, teaching such things as demographics, polling, press relations, direct voter contact and fundraising. The program culminates with the final competition day, when judges decide which high school conducted the best campaign and which ones excelled in such areas as targeting, ethics, and best use of social media.

     CPP Director Daniel M. Shea, Ph.D., said this year’s event marked the sixth time the center has sponsored the campaign program.

     “It’s always a success and it’s great to see these young people develop a real interest in politics. They find out that it’s not just for older people, and that they can have an impact in the political arena,” Shea added.    

     Allegheny President James Mullen delivered a rousing speech to the seven regional high schools that participated in this year’s competition, challenging students to get involved in the political process.

     “I hope you take the conversations and lessons you learned today and think about running for office yourself someday,” Mullen said, adding, “And when you do, demand civility. In too many cases, politics is about negativity and mean-spiritedness. It’s not going to change unless your generation steps up.”

     Students were given tasks throughout the day and created their own video commercials and press releases. Using Facebook and Twitter, many students explored the benefits of social media in furthering their campaign platforms.

     Julianna Twigg of Wilmington Area High School in New Wilmington, Pa., said she wasn’t sure what to think of Model Campaign until everything came together on competition day.

     “I had a lot of fun with Model Campaign,” Twigg said. “When I first signed up, I wasn’t sure how I would like it, but now that I’m here, I’ve definitely learned a lot about politics that I didn’t know before.”

     Besides Wilmington and McDowell, other high schools that participated this year were: Cambridge Springs, Fort LeBoeuf, Grove City, Meadville, and Rocky Grove.

     Here were the 2011 award recipients:

  • Cambridge Spring High School, Team A—Best Press Relations
  • Fort LeBoeuf High School, Team C—Best Electronic Media, Best Direct Voter Contact       
  • Fort LeBoeuf High School, Team D—Best Polling
  • Grove City High School—Best Targeting
  • McDowell High School—Best Overall Campaign, Best Ethical Standards, Best Fundraising
  • Meadville High School—Best Use of Social Media
  • Rocky Grove High School—Best General Strategy
  • Wilmington Area High School—Best Public Relations

Here are links to the YouTube campaign commercials generated by the high schools this year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wO_vjCj053k
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deM1FKnqPgU
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fck3Xws4Xi0
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xvl3vA5TvDg&feature=youtube_gdata_player
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyU6C5pLUp0
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwi5_fBRRaU&feature=player_embedded
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h55Xpay04E&feature=youtu.be
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_u4Fd0c5vrc&feature=related
 
https://www.youtube.com/user/MrJamiereynolds11?feature=mhum#p/a/u/1/A5P6SSmdvJg
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx1xmDvQi5E
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bk—XQvK1A&feature=email

CPP’s work on civility & politics leads to Allegheny College Civility Award

Students from throughout the country gathered at Allegheny to join in the discussion of how to improve civility in our politics.

The Center for Political Participation has been at the forefront of a nationwide effort to stem the growing problem of nasty politics.

Since last April, the CPP has conducted three national surveys to determine just what Americans think of this declining political discourse. (You can click the links to the right to access all of the surveys/data.) And last May, the CPP hosted Pathway to Civility: A National Conference of College Leaders. Students from throughout the country came together and hammered out a 10-point guideline toward more civil dialogue.

Allegheny College has taken another significant step by establishing the Allegheny College Civility Award (which also can be accessed in links to the right). This is an award to recognize a national political figure who has shown authentic courageous civility in an important moment and/or those who have demonstrated steadfast civility throughout their career.

Stay tuned for the naming of the Civility Award recipient.

Help Haiti Heal–A CPP service project

    If you want to do something to abate the suffering of the people of Haiti during the most recent cholera epidemic, then donate to the Center for Political Participation’s “Help Haiti Heal” project.  The CPP is honoring the legacy of President John F. Kennedy, who proposed 50 years ago to start a war on poverty.

     Beginning Sunday, Nov. 21, and continuing through Dec. 16, the CPP will collect items that will go directly to Bernard Mevs Hospital in Port-au-Prince, Haiti.  Bernard Mevs is one of the last hospitals left standing after the devastating earthquake there last Jan. 12.

     Allegheny College graduates Elizabeth Lemley Stanley ’05 and Briana Rusiski Kelly ’01 were at the hospital  last June with Project Medishare. The organization was founded in 1994 by doctors from the University of Miami  School of Medicine, a non-profit dedicated to sharing its human and technical resources with its Haitian partners.  Stanley and  Kelly are asking that students, faculty and staff, as well as the entire Meadville community, donate any basic-need items, including:

  • toothbrushes, toothpaste, sanitary wipes, shampoo, soap, bandages, Q-tips, sheets, blankets, even old slings and crutches
  • clothes (t-shirts, new packaged undergarments)  that are clean and in good shape
  • flashlights
  • hygiene and personal items.

     The goods collected in the next month by the CPP will be sent to Project Medishare for Haiti at the University of Miami, which will then forward everything directly to the hospital.

     Donations can be dropped off at the lobby of the Campus Center, beginning Sunday, Nov. 21, or at the CPP office at Brooks Hall during the week. Call Mary Solberg at 814-332-6202 for more information, or e-mail msolberg@allegheny.edu

     Allegheny College is a member of Harvard University’s National Campaign for Political and Civic Engagement. The CPP and other schools that belong to the consortium are undertaking several projects to mark the JFK 50th: National Campaign Service Day on Nov. 21.

CPP fellow Matt Lacombe published in “Inside Higher Ed”

Editor’s Note: Here is Matt Lacombe’s column in its entirety:

Young Voters and the ‘Rally for Sanity’

November 5, 2010 By Matthew Lacombe

Last week Inside Higher Ed published a column by Scott McLemee entitled “Rude Democracy,” which discussed Jon Stewart’s Rally to Restore Sanity and apparent trends indicating a lack of political engagement among young people. McLemee’s argument was both intelligent and important, but I believe there’s another side to the story of Stewart’s rally, political civility, and turnout among college students and young voters in the 2010 midterm election.

Unsurprisingly, Republicans were very successful in the midterm election, gaining control of the House of Representatives and cutting into the Democrats’ majority in the Senate. While the politically active on campuses across the country will surely devote much discussion to the results of the election and their implications over the proceeding days and weeks, it’s less likely they’ll discuss the execrable turnout among 18- to 29-year-olds.

Early exit polling done by CBS News indicates that young people made up roughly 9 percent of all voters in the midterm election. In 2008, young people made up 18 percent of the electorate. Why?
Political scientists and campaign consultants offer several theories. Americans are more likely to vote when enthusiasm abounds for the candidates they support and young people tend to support Democrats. Young people historically don’t turn out for midterms. Barack Obama’s candidacy in 2008 was uniquely galvanizing for young voters. The agenda of Congress and the president has not adequately addressed energy policy — a very important issue to college students – and media coverage of the health care reform bill (which did quietly include benefits for young people) focused mostly on the concerns of older voters. Thus, young people seem to have concluded that voting isn’t worth their time right now.

I, however, believe that something deeper may explain young people’s disengagement in 2010. Scott McLemee, in his “Rude Democracy” piece, discusses Jon Stewart’s Rally to Restore Sanity in light of a book written by the Georgia Tech political scientist Susan Herbst (which is also titled Rude Democracy).

Herbst studied the views of young people and found that “72 percent of students agreed that it was very important for them to always feel comfortable in class.” Herbst argues that “Contrary to the image of college being a place to ‘find oneself’ and learn from others, a number of students saw the campus as just the opposite – a place where already formed citizens clash, stay with like-minded others, or avoid politics altogether.”

Based on Herbst’s study, McLemee, writing prior to the sanity rally, argued that, while Stewart’s rally was likely to draw lots of young people and provide them with a fun weekend, “the anti-ideological spirit of the event is a dead end. The attitude that it’s better to stay cool and amused than to risk making arguments or expressing too much ardor — this is not civility. It’s timidity.” Clearly, McLemee believes that the unwillingness of young people to engage in political debate – argument – is not a political virtue, but rather a democratically harmful form of indifference.

Before accepting McLemee’s assertion, though, I think several important questions need to be answered. Why do the students in Herbst’s survey feel that it isn’t possible to persuade others? Could it be that such a belief is the product of an uncivil political culture? If students had political role models who successfully persuaded others in civil and respectful ways, would they be more inclined to view the political arena – and the classroom – as a space in which the clash of ideas can occur and yield positive results?

Personally, I can think of two positive things Stewart does; first, he encourages young people to refuse to subscribe to the currently pervasive ultra-partisan view of politics that fosters incivility and acts as a barrier to progress; and second, and more basically, he brings some level of political awareness through humor to people who might otherwise be totally apathetic and ignorant. Stewart’s influence, in my view, doesn’t breed timidity (as McLemee asserts), but rather increased youth engagement of the type that rejects a toxic political culture.

It also seems possible that the “Obama Effect” I mentioned earlier, holding that young voters turned out in 2008 because of their admiration of the current president, is at play. I’m worried that young people, perhaps naively, viewed Candidate Obama as a post-partisan role model and that President Obama’s lack of success thus far may further discourage engagement among young people who believed he had the ability to catalyze change without acting like every other “scumbag politician” they’ve come to dislike.

Moving forward, two things are clear. First, the perspective of young people has the power to change the nature of partisanship; if we, as a generation, continue to subscribe to the ideals of the Rally to Restore Sanity, we have the potential to improve the tone of politics.

Second, however, the burden most certainly falls on us; politicians are not going to pander to a portion of the electorate they don’t believe will turn out to vote, so if we want to transform Stewart’s rally from a sunny Saturday on the Mall into a new political reality, we’ve got to make our voices heard.

Matthew Lacombe is a senior at Allegheny College, in Meadville, Pa., and a student fellow at Allegheny’s Center for Political Participation.

Poll: Americans Opposed to “Outside Money” In Elections

A survey of 1,000 Americans nationwide suggests a wide majority believe it is unacceptable for groups to spend heavily on political advertising in districts where they are not located, a phenomenon dubbed “outside money.”

Two-thirds of those polled say they oppose this practice, while 26 percent support it.

Recent published reports in The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and other major media outlets have noted that television spending by outside groups has more than doubled from what was spent at the same time in the 2006 midterm elections.   

An analysis published earlier this week in Politico.com reported that, “Never in modern political history has there been so much secret money gushing into an American election.  By Election Day, independent groups will have aired more than $200 million worth of campaign ads using cash that can’t be traced back to its original source.”

“While it might be true that outside groups have the legal right to flood these races with ads, many Americans are concerned that it distorts the democratic process,” said Daniel M. Shea, director of the Center for Political Participation at Allegheny College, which developed and commissioned a poll, “Nastiness, Name-calling & Negativity: The Allegheny College Survey of Civility and Compromise in American Politics,” in spring 2010.

Shea expressed concern with the volume of money being spent by outside pressure groups in local races.  In Pennsylvania’s 3rd Congressional District, where Allegheny is located, numerous outside groups have hammered the airwaves with ads for and against both the Democratic and Republican candidates.

“On one level, outside money is not entirely new.  We’ve seen this before.  But the amount of money that is being spent by national groups is unprecedented.  As the head of an organization designed to promote grassroots campaigning, I worry that outside money will lead all citizens, but especially young citizens, to question the value of their own engagement,” said Shea

Much of Allegheny’s spring poll centered on issues related to the tone of politics, and its results have been widely circulated in the news media.  But the poll also queried about the outside money issue.  “We knew it would be a big issue this fall, and, sure enough, it is one of the most important issues of this campaign season,” said Shea.

Group spending has become the focus of attention since a January U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The High Court lifted restrictions on corporate spending in elections. Corporations, including nonprofit ones like labor unions, are no longer restricted when it comes to financing radio and television commercials that focus on voters and identify a political candidate.

The New York Times reported that in the weeks leading to this November’s hotly contested House and Senate races, many nonprofit advocacy organizations have begun to be more aggressive, explicitly asking voters to cast their ballots for or against candidates. “The vast majority of these political commercials are billed as ‘issue advocacy,’ said Shea, “but they are more easily recognized as attack ads.”

According to Shea, this latest twist on campaign financing laws speaks to the incivility permeating politics today.  An overwhelming majority of Americans polled last spring said they perceived an increasing rancor and hostility in politics. A second survey, conducted two weeks ago by the CPP, indicates that the majority of Americans believe civility has gotten worse, in large part due to the nature of campaigning.

“It’s no wonder,” Shea noted, “that four times as many Americans see the tone of campaigning as much more negative this year, than those who see the election as more positive. The floodgates are open, and we’re a torrent of nastiness and negativity.”

Self-described independents expressed the most opposition to outside election spending, at about 72 percent. Self-described Democrats and Republicans both oppose the practice, at about 65 percent, respectively.

Self-described conservatives, liberals and moderates oppose outside spending by about 65 percent, while a full 75 percent of Americans aged 50 and older oppose it, too. About 63 percent of Americans who earn more than $100,000 and 69 percent of those making less than $25,000 oppose outside spending.

View the reports:

New CPP Poll: Civility declining even more

Check out this chart, one of several from the CPP's latest civility poll.

solid majority of Americans, 58 percent, believe the tone of political discourse has become worse since Barack Obama was elected president, according to a survey by the Center for Political Participation at Allegheny College.  This figure has increased by 10 percent since the center’s previous survey on civility and politics, completed in April 2010.

“Many of us assumed that the tone of politics would improve after the drama over the health care debate died down.  But most Americans don’t see it that way,” noted Daniel M. Shea, director of the Center for Political Participation and co-author of the new study. “We’re still waiting for the thaw.  It’s still awfully nasty out there.”

Along similar lines, the survey found that 41 percent of Americans believe the tone of campaigns this year is worse than in previous elections.  Just 9 percent believe that campaigns are more positive than in the past, and 49 percent said things are about the same. 

Survey participants were asked if nasty campaigning is unavoidable or if it is possible for candidates to run for office in aggressive but respectful ways. Some 85 percent said respectful campaigns are possible, and only 10 percent said being nasty was unavoidable. 

A full 61 percent of respondents said the tone of campaigning this year “hurts our democracy,” while 19 percent suggested it was “healthy for our democracy.”

“Here again, Americans are anxious for greater civility in politics,” said Shea.

The survey, commissioned by Allegheny College in partnership with Indiana University – Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW), was conducted by SurveyUSA, Sept. 13–16.  In all, 1,242 randomly selected registered voters were interviewed. The findings yield a margin of error of ± 3 percent.

“Resolving this issue is complicated because the only thing Republicans, Democrats and independents seemed to agree on is their general dislike of political incivility and the feeling that campaigns are hurting democracy,” noted Michael Wolf, associate professor of political science at IPFW and co-author of the study.  “When we asked who is responsible for incivility, partisans point at the other sides’ commentators and independents blame political parties.  It’s an endless loop.” 

As to why things have become worse since April, the authors speculate that the tone of campaigning might be part of it.  “Americans have grown accustomed to hard-hitting campaigning,” said Shea.  “They know this is not beanbag toss.  But a big chunk of Americans think campaigns have gotten uglier and that campaigners are coloring perceptions of the overall tone of politics.  And, let’s remember, it’s only September.”

As with the April study, the poll took a look at voter willingness to compromise.  Paralleling findings in April, some 44 percent of Americans believe it is more important for elected officials to find compromise positions, and 52 percent said standing firm on principles is more important.  Seven of 10 respondents who identify as Republicans or lean toward the Republican Party said it is more important that politicians are willing to stand firm in support of principles rather than to compromise. 

Only 27 percent of Republicans surveyed believe willingness to compromise is important for politicians.  In contrast, 63 percent of Democratic identifiers and leaners said the ability to compromise to get things done is more important for politicians than standing firm in support of principles.  Only 32 percent of Democrats said standing firm in support of principles trumps willingness to compromise as a more important trait for politicians.

“Whether this discrepancy stems from the parties’ fortunes or policy values cannot be fully determined,” said Wolf.  “Maybe rank-and-file Republicans wanted compromise and Democrats dug in their heels more when the Republicans held Congress and the White House during most of the Bush years.  Whatever the case, the results signal that the Republican base wants leaders who will not broker deals and likely explains why some Tea Party candidates have toppled establishment Republicans.  If Republicans win control in Congress, compromising with President Obama will surely not be part of their mandate.”    

The survey highlighted a different view of the “enthusiasm gap.”  Asked if the tone of the current campaign made the respondent more or less interested in getting involved, some 83 percent of Republicans said it made them more interested. Among Democrats it was 65 percent.

Republicans who view the tone as more negative compared to past campaigns are far more likely to get involved than Democrats who view the campaigns the same way – 48 percent to 33 percent.   Conversely, some 46 percent of Democrats that see the campaigns as negative said it turned them off, while just 34 percent of Republican identifiers said the same.

Noted Shea: “We’re not sure whether Republicans are mobilized across the board no matter what the tone of the campaign, or whether the negative tone may actually be mobilizing Republicans.  But the general perception of this campaign being negative may lead to big gains for the GOP. This is but another bit of bad news for Democrats.”

This survey is part of an ongoing effort at Allegheny College to develop programs and tools to help citizens assess the tone and rhetoric being used by candidates for public office. In May, the Center for Political Participation hosted a national conference of college Democrats, Republicans and independents to enhance communication, examine civility in politics and establish a high bar for the respectful exchange of ideas.

The survey findings, along with pie charts and cross tabulations, can be accessed at: www.allegheny.edu/septemberpoll.  The April 2010 survey, “Nastiness, Name-calling & Negativity,” is available at www.allegheny.edu/civility.

 

Ben Franklin visits Allegheny

Ben Franklin (portrayed by Paul Stillman) had a tussle with the gator outside the Campus Center Sept. 14.

“He’s alive!” one Allegheny student yelled across campus when he saw Benjamin Franklin walking toward the Campus Center Sept. 14. Another yelled, “Thanks for the electricity, Ben!”

This Ben Franklin, of course, was much more spry than the real Ben Franklin, who signed the United States Constitution 223 years ago this month. Portrayed by Paul Stillman of Historically Speaking, Cameron Mills, N.Y., “Franklin” charmed his way through McKinley’s dining room and then took center stage in the Campus Center lobby for a noontime event sponsored by the Center for Political Participation.

Stillman, who stayed in character during the hour-long presentation, told the crowd gathered in the lobby, “Putting this Constitution together was the most important thing this country could do.” He called himself “the babysitter of the Constitution,” referring to the frequent disagreements that erupted during its drafting.

The audience–consisting of residents from the surrounding community as well as Allegheny faculty and students–asked questions on everything from slavery to women’s rights to Native American history. Associate Professor of Political Science Brian Harward asked Franklin if he thought the Constitution would be different if it hadn’t been debated behind closed doors.

“Yes, it would have been different,” Franklin answered. “I wanted it to be more open.”

Another student asked Franklin why he opposed the Bill of Rights. “I was against it,” Franklin said, “because there were too many loopholes in it.”

Franklin also defended his anti-slavery stance, and commented that he would have wanted Congressional term limits. “I thought there should be limits of 10 to 12 years,” he explained.

Near the end, Katie Janocscko, a CPP fellow, asked Franklin what he thought his greatest invention was. He quickly responded, with a wink, “The hot tub.”

Freshman Lauryn Reiff was happy that the CPP sponsored the re-enactment event. She explained, “I’m mildly obsessed with the American Revolution, so I’ve been looking forward to this since the posters went up.” And Gary Young of nearby Guys Mills, Pa., enjoyed the repartee with Stillman before and after the presentation.

“I wanted to see the students and how they reacted,” Young said. “If they come to understand what he has to say, that’s great. If you don’t understand history, you’re doomed.”

College leaders craft “10 Tips to Improve Civility”

MEADVILLE, Pa. – May 25, 2010 – Student leaders representing 14 colleges and universities from throughout the country released a joint statement this month to guide the public discourse of elected officials and their constituents.

“Ten Tips to Improve Civility” was issued during Pathway to Civility, a national conference of college Democrats, Republicans and independents. Here are their recommendations:

“Ten Tips to Improve Civility”

  1. Listen to opposing views.
  2. Seek shared values.
  3. Acknowledge the legitimacy of opposing positions.
  4. Identify the problem at-hand, focusing on it rather than on larger conflicts.
  5. Avoid political caricatures, labels and generalizations that may not truly represent the views of your adversaries.
  6. Accept that disagreement will exist without giving up your own convictions.
  7. Clarify what is being said before attacking and/or responding.
  8. Recognize the value of solutions beyond those offered by traditional party platforms.
  9. Consider the consequences of what you say and do.
  10. Hold yourself personally accountable for your own political actions.

The students developed the list during one of the culminating activities of Pathway to Civility hosted May 18-19 by the Center for Political Participation and the Civic Engagement Council at Allegheny College.

“The conference was very interesting,” said Amanda McCann, a political science major at Indiana University-Purdue University and vice president of the College Republicans on her campus.  “It changed my perception of civility, really deepened my understanding of the concept.”

The conference was a pilot program of the Center for Political Participation, which has been at the forefront of national efforts to examine civility and politics and to enhance communication between young Democrats, Republicans and independents, according to Daniel M. Shea, political science professor and director of the Center for Political Participation.

“Our idea was to encourage students from both sides of the aisle to work together to examine the serious issue of civility in politics, establish a high bar for the respectful exchange of ideas, and, in the process, perhaps begin to develop some lasting friendships,” Shea explained. “We were quite impressed both with the students’ passion for issues and with their determination to work together to create opportunities to reach consensus where possible. Civility, it seems, may be one of those areas for agreement.”

U.S. Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa. – 3rd District) was the keynote speaker. She acknowledged that the 111th Congress has faced unprecedented incivility, particularly in the throes of the national health care debate. “It’s been eye-opening for me to see,” Dahlkemper told the students, adding that she herself had been the object of threats following her “yes” vote for health reform. “The good news I have to offer is that there really is civility in Congress except that it does not make the nightly news cut,” Dahlkemper added.

According to Shea, the need for a conference on civility emerged as the American health care debate turned ugly this past year. The robust political activity that surged among youth in the 2008 election already has substantially declined, Shea said, and many young Americans have turned away from active political engagement.

Matt Lacombe, an Allegheny senior pursuing a double-major in economics and political science, added, “I hope our conversation will continue on Facebook, maintaining both its passionate yet civil tone and allowing students to participate from different parts of the country.”

Conference participants included students from Allegheny College, Louisiana State University, Catholic University, Central Michigan University, Macalester University, Chatham University, Hiram College, Indiana University – Purdue University, Slippery Rock University, SUNY Fredonia, Thiel College, California University of Pennsylvania, Winthrop University and the University of Florida.

Late last month, the Center for Political Participation released results of a study on civility and compromise in American politics, “Nastiness, Name-Calling, and Negativity,” which revealed widespread concern over the deterioration of the tone of political discourse. (See the icon for the Allegheny civility survey on this page.)

National Conference of College Leaders: Pathway to Civility

      Allegheny College will continue its examination of civility and politics May 18-19 at the National Conference of College Leaders: Pathway to Civility.

     About 60 students and administrators representing 14 colleges/universities will converge on the Allegheny campus to enhance communication between young Democrats and Republicans and to establish a high bar for the respectful exchange of ideas.

     “After what we’ve seen in Washington recently on the health care issue, conferences such as this are important. If colleges and universities don’t step up to address incivility, who will?” said Daniel M. Shea, director of the Center for Political Participation (CPP) at Allegheny College.

     The Allegheny conference will feature an exciting lineup of activities, including a keynote speech by U.S. Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, 3rd Legislative District, Pennsylvania. She will speak at the Tippie Alumni Center May 18 at noon.

     Professor Shea will examine the results of the Center for Political Participation’s latest national poll on civility and politics, beginning at 1:45 p.m. May 18 at Campus Center 301-302. Immediately following in the same room will be an intensive afternoon workshop led by Peter Hwosch of the Transpartisan Alliance. Hwosch owns Hwosch Productions, Oregon, and was the lead documentarian of the 2007 Reuniting America film featuring former Vice President Al Gore.

     Sessions also will include a critique of a relevant film and the drafting of a template that will guide future mediation between the political parties.

     According to Shea, the need for a conference on civility emerged as the American health care debate turned ugly in the past year. The robust political activity that surged among youth in the 2008 election already has substantially declined, he said, and many young Americans have turned away from active political engagement.

     The conference is co-sponsored by the Center for Political Participation and Allegheny’s Civic Engagement Council. It is one of a series of events the Center for Political Participation is planning in the coming year on civility.

     For more details on the conference, please call the Center for Political Participation at 814-332-6202, or e-mail CPP Program Coordinator Mary Solberg at msolberg@allegheny.edu.

CPP helps raise $500 for the arts

Meadville Council on the Arts President Ed Miller, far right, accepts a check from Allegheny students who spearheaded the Rock for Change 2010 fundraiser in April. Pictured, from left, are Brett Bacon, music director at WARC; Richard Shafranek, student fellow at the CPP; and Rebecca Schneider, WARC general manager. (Photo by Steve Jones)

MEADVILLE—Allegheny College students took political activism to a new, creative level recently when they raised $500 for the Meadville Council on the Arts.

     “It’s fantastic. This benefits a community organization, a non-profit service to the whole community,” said Ed Miller, president of the Meadville Council on the Arts.

      The Center for Political Participation, Allegheny’s WARC radio, College Democrats, and Allegheny Student Government sponsored the first annual “Rock for Change Battle of the Bands” on April 16, netting $500. Money was raised from band registration fees, t-shirt sales and a raffle of an IPod Touch.

      The idea for the fundraiser began with Richard Shafranek, a senior student fellow of the Center for Political Participation. Participating bands were asked to perform music with a political or social activism message.

      “While the Center for Political Participation’s primary focus is on political awareness and engagement in terms of voting and elections, there are many ways to get involved…writing letters to the editor, attending local school board meetings, and signing petitions,” Shafranek said. “These are all equally valid activities, but perhaps the most basic, and important, way to get involved is through the exercise of our First Amendment right to free speech. We wanted to recognize the legitimacy of music as a means of political involvement.”

      Ed Miller of the Council on the Arts agreed. His organization, located on the second floor of 910 Market St., Meadville, offers myriad artistic venues, including a gallery, a theater, and piano and art lessons. But like so many businesses and organizations, the Council on the Arts was hit hard by the recession in the past 18 months. It still has not received any state funding this past year.

      The arts are always the first to get hit,” Miller added, “so this gift from Allegheny students will go directly to the people to expose them to the arts.”

      The “Rock for Change Battle of the Bands” event attracted eight bands or solo acts. The winner was Andrew Grossman of College Park, Md., who was awarded $500. Second place went to Allegheny’s own Ben Bussewitz, who won $100. The third-place finisher was Gnome Hut, an Allegheny band that won $50.