Can you name the Vice President of the United States? What about the controlling party of Congress? It seems that some of the most rudimentary questions on the political process of our country stump a distressing number of voting age Americans. Pew Research Center and the Annenberg Public Policy Center polls show that only 60% of Americans can name the Vice President and only 38% know which party controls Congress (Gaughan 2015). Furthermore, in 2012 the American public's Congressional approval rating was 15%, the lowest in history. One may assume that in response to such an astonishing statistic that the voting public would rise up and re take control of their voice in government. And yet, 90.5% of Congressional Incumbents running for re-election won that November (Shea 461). Despite the yearly ability that we have been given to show our true opinion, we as a generation maintain standing passive. I aim to show a solution to the record low voter participation as well as the understated power of incumbency. Publicly enacting term limits on Congressional incumbent re-election will revitalize the current campaign fundraising driven election process, as well as increase young voter participation.

The level that the United States has reached in terms of voter turnout is often understated or unspoken entirely. In 2014 only 42.5% of registered voters cast ballots, the lowest number since 1968 when the government began keeping record. (IDEA 2014). A report from the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University found that just 19.9 percent of 18-29 year olds cast a ballot in the 2014 midterm elections (Rampell). Other developed countries expect a yearly voter turnout of 75-80% (Pew Research Center 2015). The House of Representatives and Senate were created to be the voice of the American public as a whole. Today, voting results are not an equal representation of the public, but a devious sample that gives attention to few key demographics and shuns many others (low socioeconomic status, minority ethnicity). When we look at voter turnout we must not understate that only 65% of voting age Americans are registered to vote. Similar governments, Sweden and the United Kingdom, have 96% and 93% of voting age citizens registered to vote. Year after year the American public stands by as their "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" (Lincoln) serves as a force they have no control over. 

The only way to gather a representative understanding of how this can affect the future of the United States is by looking at the future, the millennial generation (age 18-29). Raised in the age of information and technology millennials are self-expressive, confident, open to change and on pace to be the most educated generation (Pew Research Center 2010). Although millennials are the most liberal and open minded of any generation they have a surprisingly negative view on human nature. Two thirds of those surveyed said "you can not be too careful" when dealing humans. The same Pew Research Center survey found two of the most prevalent character traits within the millennial generation were moral character and skepticism (Pew Research Center 2010). These traits coupled with a general mistrust and dissatisfaction of government due to the abundance of media and information paint a clear picture as to why this generation has the lowest voter turnout within the age group in history.  

The Millenial generation epitomizes what America was founded on, free speech, no censorship, and general distrust in big government. Nearly Four in ten millennials has a tattoo and three of four have a social networking profile. They are by far the least likely to be religious, without harboring persecution of any specific demographic (Pew Research Center). This generation has the potential to change how the U.S. government work, but it needs a spark to get it going. The only way term limits will ever be enacted is if they are presented publicly, and made a movement. Simple awareness of a potential policy enacting term limits would open up the general public to the idea that perhaps the incumbent does not have your best interests at heart. The public does have a voice, and it has a direct hand into the governments pocket, yet year by year the likelihood we can revamp that process dwindles. 

Ideas of corruption within the government have since evolved from the times of fat businessmen smoking cigars in pinstripe suits. That is not to say however that the implication of money from the past conceptions is not founded. 54% of millennial voters stated distrust in government because of corruption linked to money. (Gruyter 2015 pg. 461) For example, Representatives of the House must run for re-election every two years, and the average cost of a winning campaign is over half a million dollars (Strama 1998 pg. 75). This leads political office holders to focus primarily on raising money to keep their job, as opposed to truly doing what is best for the public. How can we expect the people who make the rules to limit themselves by those rules? The political incumbent is now not only focused on raising money but also on avoiding any controversy to not make enemies for the upcoming election. Originally holding a seat in the law making body was seen as service to your country, not paycheck -- now it has evolved into the prevalence of career politicians.

The younger generation has opted to help build and foster local community growth through what Gruyter refers to as 'Service Politics'. Undoubtedly cynical and skeptical of the political process, young Americans are volunteering to make change columnist Jane Eisner states: "[T]he attraction of service for young people is undeniable, and growing. It is propelled by the characteristics of this generation  --  their tendency toward compassion and their nonjudgmental concern for others, and away from what they see as a political system driven by conflict and ego (2004, p. 80)." This reaction to political distrust lends a light on the thought process that your vote does not have any affect in the long run. This generation is looking for a quick reward or sense of satisfaction, but by doing so are ignorant to larger issues and long term solutions. 

The public feels that they are too busy, or even feel as if their vote doesn't matter. Perhaps the most shocking statistic is the incredibly low young voter participation statistic. These young voters often say they don't vote because they simply don't feel as if their vote matters, that they are 'lost in the system'. Prevalence of social media is one of the largest changes when comparing the millennial generation to past generations. Despite an abundance of social media outlets and information spread amongst them, it has not yielded any positive political engagement results. Daniel Shea argues social media gives people a place to speak their mind, but drastically reduces its relevance and validity. Therefore this seeming irony within social media is a contradiction to the argument that the millennial generation will foster change through increased prevalence of social networking.  Younger voters are not necessarily unengaged, they have been raised in the time where public opinion is driven by the war on terror, political and media scandals, and one of the worst economic situations the country has faced.  It is an understandable claim when you realize the further implications of how the U.S. election system works. The only solution to the issue is held completely by the issue itself. The younger generation in specific feels betrayed by the institutions that once claimed to represent their interests. From unprecedented student loan interest rates to a poor economy with even poorer job prospects, the new generation has little to believe in

Even when people are openly dissatisfied with what is happening within the government still continue to elect and re-elect incumbents. In 2012 Congressional approval rating was at 15%, the lowest in history. That same year 90.5% of Congressional incumbents seeking re-election won. There seems to be a population within America simply voting the incumbent to 'keep their way of life', believing in the idea that things could be much worse. This idea only stagnates the political process, allowing no change to occur. In fact, a city in California unanimously passed a bill placing term limits on state legislator positions and then a matter of weeks later re-elected their congress members at an average of 92%. This point is one that orginially was used as contradiction, yet it really shows that the voting public doesn't know what they are voting for. How can you aggressively pass one of the first bills on term limits only to immediately go directly against what it stands for. Essentially, absent minded voters that simply vote in the incumbent are creating a barrier that impedes progression. 

These questions are not completely discussed without attempting a solution. The best way to solve each aspect of this long run issue is to enact Term limits for members of congress. Enacting Term limits of approximately 6 years in congress would drastically change how the country works. A CBS news report cites that in 15 states where congressional term limits have been brought to court over 66 percent of the population gathered in support. By setting a limit on how long congressmen can serve it would increase the amount of elections, and more importantly, engage the young voter. This idea begins to trickle down within the younger generation, not only increasing voter engagement, but also increasing the chance to become a member of congress. A continued supply of fresh political candidates and congressman will increase the flow of ideas, as well as publicity surrounding each election. This new way of electing political officials will transform our government, working at speeds far greater than the traffic jam that is our lawmaking body today. The younger voters, whom have always believed they are simply not important enough to affect the voting process, will now have a much higher say in politics.

 Term limits will expose the true motivation current political incumbents are driven by while in office. It is no longer representative of the people if the person you've decided that best represents your current outlook is only saying what it takes to keep his job. The voting statistics in America are at an all time low because the youngest generation is not involved, as reinforced within one of my latest sources "Social Media Hasn't Boosted Turnout". The article brings to light that even with the explosion of social media as a network for politics it still is not doing enough. However, the countries voting issues don't lie within only the younger generation, every election the majority of adults do not vote Limiting the number of years a congressional seat holder can have will act as a catalyst to a inlflux of new ideas. The general way the government works will no longer be applicable. 

