“If you’re not a liberal at twenty, you have no heart.”
While this famous saying may unfairly mock a young conservative’s ideology, it reflects a widely-accepted truth: young people, by and large, are liberal. And young, educated people—college students—are the most liberal of all. This raises the question: what happens to local government when you take a hoard of well-educated young people and put them in one place? To what extent does the student population actually affect the college town’s local government, and how much of an effect is it perceived to have?
Since college students are overwhelmingly liberal (60 percent of 18- to 29-year olds supported Obama in 2012, compared to Romney’s 36 percent), it seems logical that their presence in a district would “blue-ify” it, increasing the Democratic tilt of the constituency. However, the case of Cambridge, Massachusetts, suggests that this conclusion is, perhaps surprisingly, false.
While this famous saying may unfairly mock a young conservative’s ideology, it reflects a widely-accepted truth: young people, by and large, are liberal. And young, educated people—college students—are the most liberal of all. This raises the question: what happens to local government when you take a hoard of well-educated young people and put them in one place? To what extent does the student population actually affect the college town’s local government, and how much of an effect is it perceived to have?
Since college students are overwhelmingly liberal (60 percent of 18- to 29-year olds supported Obama in 2012, compared to Romney’s 36 percent), it seems logical that their presence in a district would “blue-ify” it, increasing the Democratic tilt of the constituency. However, the case of Cambridge, Massachusetts, suggests that this conclusion is, perhaps surprisingly, false.
The “Blue-ification” of the District
Cambridge is, by any standard, a college town, with the undergraduate populations of its residential undergraduate colleges—Harvard, MIT, and Lesley University—totaling 12,729 students, over a tenth of the city’s population. Of these 12,729 students, 11,518 are from the United States and presumably eligible to vote. According to voter file analysis conducted by the HPR, 3,588 (31.15 percent) of these eligible student voters are registered to vote in Cambridge.
Cambridge is, by any standard, a college town, with the undergraduate populations of its residential undergraduate colleges—Harvard, MIT, and Lesley University—totaling 12,729 students, over a tenth of the city’s population. Of these 12,729 students, 11,518 are from the United States and presumably eligible to vote. According to voter file analysis conducted by the HPR, 3,588 (31.15 percent) of these eligible student voters are registered to vote in Cambridge.
As a whole, Cambridge’s 65,078 registered voters are overwhelmingly liberal: 56.97 percent are registered Democrats, while only 4.41 percent are registered Republicans. What’s surprising, though, is that when students are removed from the equation, this disparity actually gets slightly greater, with 57.61 percent of non-students being registered Democrats and 4.28 percent being registered Republicans.
Therefore, on paper, students actually make Cambridge an incrementally more Republican district. The perception, however, is very different. Sietse Goffard, former chair of the Harvard Institute of Politics National Campaign committee, a nonpartisan organization that seeks to increase student involvement in politics, told the HPR, “If anything, [the student vote] will ‘blue-ify’ Cambridge because the majority of Harvard College students are Democrats. So statistically, registering more people will increase the number of Democrats.”
Therefore, on paper, students actually make Cambridge an incrementally more Republican district. The perception, however, is very different. Sietse Goffard, former chair of the Harvard Institute of Politics National Campaign committee, a nonpartisan organization that seeks to increase student involvement in politics, told the HPR, “If anything, [the student vote] will ‘blue-ify’ Cambridge because the majority of Harvard College students are Democrats. So statistically, registering more people will increase the number of Democrats.”
There are several reasons for this discrepancy between reality and perception. The most obvious explanation is the trend for young people to register as independents despite having liberal ideologies. In Cambridge, 46.51 percent of students are independents (more than the 45.87 percent who are registered Democrats), compared with 37.37 percent of non-students who are independents. The prevalence of liberal ideologies creates the perception that college students make the electorate more Democratic, and may indeed increase the share of votes for Democratic candidates and causes, but this is not reflected in actual party affiliations.
Another potential explanation for the discrepancy is the ubiquitous and highly visible student activism for liberal causes. On a number of issues—everything from unionization rights to economic progressivism to fossil fuel divestment—the liberal voice is the loudest on campuses around Cambridge. Thus, it is easy to come to the conclusion that college students make Cambridge more liberal.
The final contributor to the gap between the perception and reality of students’ effect on the Democrat-Republican balance is Cambridge itself. Cambridge is overwhelmingly liberal. The students, who are also largely liberal, might make a small town in Texas or Kentucky more Democratic-leaning, but they have less impact on Cambridge’s massive Democratic population. Thus, the students’ liberal leanings only create a perception that they increase the proportion of Democrats. In reality, Cambridge was dark blue before current students arrived on campus. And while it’s possible that the city’s political leanings have historically been swayed by the presence of liberal college students, the most recent data shows non-student Cambridge residents are farther left than their student counterparts.
Rock the Vote
While Cambridge students and other Cambridge residents may be similar in their party affiliation, they certainly still have different priorities. These are especially important when it comes to local government, where party lines are more blurred in favor of specific local needs than at the national level. Therefore, it is also important to explore whether college students have the ability to swing an election.
Of Cambridge’s 3,588 registered college student voters, 334, or 9.31 percent, voted in the 2013 Cambridge City Council elections. Three hundred thirty-four certainly is not many in the context of a town with a six-figure population, but is it enough to sway an election? In last year’s city council election, 334 votes certainly could have made all the difference.
In Cambridge City Council elections, voters rank the candidates, and the election is conducted in a run-off system to elect the nine people who receive the most votes. When electing nine councilors from a pool of twenty-five candidates, votes are so sparse that victory is decided by slim margins. The 9th- and 10th-place finishers in Cambridge’s most recent election, for example, were separated by only 14 votes, and the 7th and 10th by only 30.
With such small margins of victory, it is certainly conceivable that a student bloc could have determined the outcome of the election. Students wouldn’t have had the power to unseat the top finisher (Leland Cheung, who received 2,392 votes), but a candidate who appealed to them could have pulled from 10th place into 9th and made it onto the council.
Another potential explanation for the discrepancy is the ubiquitous and highly visible student activism for liberal causes. On a number of issues—everything from unionization rights to economic progressivism to fossil fuel divestment—the liberal voice is the loudest on campuses around Cambridge. Thus, it is easy to come to the conclusion that college students make Cambridge more liberal.
The final contributor to the gap between the perception and reality of students’ effect on the Democrat-Republican balance is Cambridge itself. Cambridge is overwhelmingly liberal. The students, who are also largely liberal, might make a small town in Texas or Kentucky more Democratic-leaning, but they have less impact on Cambridge’s massive Democratic population. Thus, the students’ liberal leanings only create a perception that they increase the proportion of Democrats. In reality, Cambridge was dark blue before current students arrived on campus. And while it’s possible that the city’s political leanings have historically been swayed by the presence of liberal college students, the most recent data shows non-student Cambridge residents are farther left than their student counterparts.
Rock the Vote
While Cambridge students and other Cambridge residents may be similar in their party affiliation, they certainly still have different priorities. These are especially important when it comes to local government, where party lines are more blurred in favor of specific local needs than at the national level. Therefore, it is also important to explore whether college students have the ability to swing an election.
Of Cambridge’s 3,588 registered college student voters, 334, or 9.31 percent, voted in the 2013 Cambridge City Council elections. Three hundred thirty-four certainly is not many in the context of a town with a six-figure population, but is it enough to sway an election? In last year’s city council election, 334 votes certainly could have made all the difference.
In Cambridge City Council elections, voters rank the candidates, and the election is conducted in a run-off system to elect the nine people who receive the most votes. When electing nine councilors from a pool of twenty-five candidates, votes are so sparse that victory is decided by slim margins. The 9th- and 10th-place finishers in Cambridge’s most recent election, for example, were separated by only 14 votes, and the 7th and 10th by only 30.
With such small margins of victory, it is certainly conceivable that a student bloc could have determined the outcome of the election. Students wouldn’t have had the power to unseat the top finisher (Leland Cheung, who received 2,392 votes), but a candidate who appealed to them could have pulled from 10th place into 9th and made it onto the council.
This is just the beginning of the power of the student bloc. If 27.35 percent of registered students voted—Cambridge’s overall average for the election—those 981 votes would be enough to catapult a candidate who received no non-student first-choice votes into 10th place after the first round of voting. This position would give that candidate a good chance at victory as, under Cambridge’s Single Transferrable Vote system, votes cast for candidates who have already cleared the threshold are reallocated to help other candidates. With just slightly above average turnout, the students could elect a representative to the council all on their own.
In the case of local elections, the reality is well-aligned with the common perception that, while students have the potential to change the outcome, they may not fulfill that potential. Goffard told the HPR, “We only have six thousand people, and Cambridge is a hundred thousand, so in the grand scheme of things, the voters we register don’t have a big impact on the election … but theoretically, they could.” Logan Leslie, a Harvard College sophomore and 2013 candidate for Cambridge City Council, concurred, telling the HPR, “In sheer numbers, they could be a voting bloc if they were on the same page. In practice, it doesn’t necessarily work that way.” Leslie Waxman, the assistant director of the Cambridge Election Commission, confirmed this perception: “Those precincts with the highest percentage of college dorms … have also had the lowest numbers of voters.”
Why Do Perceptions Matter?
It is important to recognize that elected officials operate based on their perception of voters’ preferences, which may not reflect the reality. Sam Novey, director of partnerships at TurboVote, a start-up which aims to use the Internet to “make voting easy,” told the HPR, “Elections are as much about accountability as they are about decision making. … It goes into the calculus of what the officials do in their work and how they get reelected. It’s not about whether [students] sway the election.” Rather, if students are perceived to swing elections, even if they don’t actually do so, elected officials will respond to their needs in hopes of winning their support.
The perceived impact of the student vote can even affect voting rights. Ahead of the 2012 election, Republicans proposed a variety of voting restrictions, such as making students ineligible to vote in their college districts, or requiring an in-state government-issued ID to vote. These were reportedly attempts to limit the college student vote, which Republicans perceived as disproportionately liberal.
College students have the capacity to effect governmental change, especially in those towns in which they make up a significant share of the population. However, their actual impact on elections is limited because they often do not bother showing up to vote at all. By voting in higher numbers and thus building the perception that they have the potential to sway an election, students could bring about desired changes in local government.
In the case of local elections, the reality is well-aligned with the common perception that, while students have the potential to change the outcome, they may not fulfill that potential. Goffard told the HPR, “We only have six thousand people, and Cambridge is a hundred thousand, so in the grand scheme of things, the voters we register don’t have a big impact on the election … but theoretically, they could.” Logan Leslie, a Harvard College sophomore and 2013 candidate for Cambridge City Council, concurred, telling the HPR, “In sheer numbers, they could be a voting bloc if they were on the same page. In practice, it doesn’t necessarily work that way.” Leslie Waxman, the assistant director of the Cambridge Election Commission, confirmed this perception: “Those precincts with the highest percentage of college dorms … have also had the lowest numbers of voters.”
Why Do Perceptions Matter?
It is important to recognize that elected officials operate based on their perception of voters’ preferences, which may not reflect the reality. Sam Novey, director of partnerships at TurboVote, a start-up which aims to use the Internet to “make voting easy,” told the HPR, “Elections are as much about accountability as they are about decision making. … It goes into the calculus of what the officials do in their work and how they get reelected. It’s not about whether [students] sway the election.” Rather, if students are perceived to swing elections, even if they don’t actually do so, elected officials will respond to their needs in hopes of winning their support.
The perceived impact of the student vote can even affect voting rights. Ahead of the 2012 election, Republicans proposed a variety of voting restrictions, such as making students ineligible to vote in their college districts, or requiring an in-state government-issued ID to vote. These were reportedly attempts to limit the college student vote, which Republicans perceived as disproportionately liberal.
College students have the capacity to effect governmental change, especially in those towns in which they make up a significant share of the population. However, their actual impact on elections is limited because they often do not bother showing up to vote at all. By voting in higher numbers and thus building the perception that they have the potential to sway an election, students could bring about desired changes in local government.