For the past two months, I have had the distinct honor of working with a wonderful classroom of undergraduate students at The College of Mount Saint Vincent in Riverdale, New York City (my alma mater).  Instructed by Dr. Joseph Skelly and Dr. Jacqueline Guzda, these students are studying the intersection of politics and communications.

Over the span of three in-person visits, I spoke with the students about lobbying, earmarks and the importance of the open government movement.  Here at VoterWatch, we are increasingly interested in how young people in the American educational system understand and interpret these important issues.  Furthermore, with the assistance of Dr. Skelly and Dr. Guzda, we were able to test the VoterWatch media player as a collaborative annotation tool in the classroom.

The students at The College of Mount Saint Vincent were, in fact, the first students in the nation to use the tool in this regard and the results are absolutely astounding.  We divided the class into nine groups.  In these groups, the students were assigned specific portions of the final presidential debate.  Then, each group was responsible for inserting commentary — fact checks, corroborations, thoughts and perspective.

The final outcome of the students’ work showcases our tool’s educational value.  We want to thank Dr. Skelly and Dr. Guzda for the honor of working with their students.  Please click the image below to launch the commentary from the students at The College of Mount Saint Vincent.  Send any questions or comments along to info@voterwatch.org:

As our 2008 Presidential Debates Project comes to a close, we are releasing commentary on the final presidential debate.  So far we’ve released commentary from Dick Morris and The Heritage Foundation.  Today, we’re happy to note that Reason Magazine published commentary in our player over at Reason.tv.  They also published a piece about VoterWatch’s technology.  Once again, I’d also like to mention that Rob Bluey published a piece on K Street Cafe about VoterWatch and the Presidential Debates Project.

And last but not least, the Bob Barr for President team provided their commentary this weekend as well.  Be sure to check it out!

While the first two presidential debates were completely inadequate in terms of providing valuable information about candidate stances, the final debate was more open in terms of scope and communication.  While still not subscribing to the recommendations that The Open Debate Coalition laid out, the final debate did provide a more informative forum.

While we are happy to have Dick Morris and our “regulars” on board for this final debate, we are even more excited to announce that The Heritage Foundation and Reason Magazine have decided to participate in our final installment of the 2008 Presidential Debates Project.

Rob Bluey of The Heritage Foundation did an amazing job inserting commentary using the VoterWatch media player.  Bluey brings a robust presentation of thought and perspective to the best debate of the bunch.  I’m sure you’ll find the resulting product intriguing.  Also, be sure to see the annotation posted on the Heritage site as well as Bluey’s piece about VoterWatch and the player on K Street Cafe.  Or, to simply view the commentary, click the image below:

While anchors and pundits concentrate on how to spin the candidates’ performances in the upcoming debates, Free Press and the Tyndall Report want you to rate the media themselves. We have created a “Citizens Media Scorecard” so viewers can respond in real-time to the performance of the debate moderators.

Also, we are privileged to be a part of The Open Debate Coalition — a group of influentials who have come together to encourage the McCain and Obama campaigns and the Presidential Debates Commission to make the debates more democratic.  Be sure to check it out.

And one last announcement…VoterWatch launched TransparencyMatters.org (yesterday was the soft launch) for journalists, open government members and others who have a stake in the transparency movement.  E-mail us at info@voterwatch.org for more information.

In a funeral oration delivered by Pericles – a distinguished political leader and general of ancient Greece – for the men fallen in the first year of battle of the Peloponnesian War, Pericles asserted that “Our form of government does not enter into rivalry with the institutions of others. We do not copy our neighbors, but are an example to them.” Pericles believed Athenian democracy to just be intrinsically better than any other political system. In the Athenian government system, a man who did not take interest in the political sphere was not deemed harmless but rather useless. At that point in Athenian history, very few people possessed the ability to vote; in deeming a man who did not fulfill his duty to vote as inadequate and useless, Pericles portrayed and intensified the significance of using that power provided to a private citizen by the government.

Not too long ago, the fifteenth amendment prevented someone from being denied the right to vote because of race and the nineteenth amendment prohibited someone from being deprived of the right to vote on the account of sex. That was no easy feat to accomplish and required the commitment of countless men and women from across the country. However, the dedication and steadfastness of these people has seemed to dissipate into the fading text of yesteryear.

I continue to struggle to understand how people could have the ability to participate in the political process but do not. At the same time, I recognize that some remain indifferent to the whole ordeal and do not want to become involved. I would rather those people that remain apathetic or uninformed do not vote. However, by forfeiting that opportunity during election time, that individual should also surrender the right to complain and criticize the state of the political system. I cannot stand whining and crying about the political sphere when that individual has done nothing but give up his/her chance to be heard. Since when did disappointment + frustration = the right to complain – the action of voting.

While I may not agree with the proposed politician in each main party, I know that I must ultimately come to a decision as participating member of society. I also recognize that as a young, knowledgeable, urbane American citizen now capable to vote in a presidential election for the first time that I have the duty and the obligation to contribute to the political process. Remember that every vote does count.

William E. Simon, businessman and former Secretary of Treasury under Nixon and then Ford, asserted, “Bad politicians are sent to Washington by good people who don’t vote.”

As usual, VoteGopher released an intriguing non-partisan look at last week’s debate.  We’ve embedded the commentary below for your viewing, but be sure to also check out the page VoteGopher setup at VoteGopher.org.  Here is the commentary:

Also, consider the Bob Barr for President team (the team has once again provided some excellent third-party analysis).  Check it out and be sure to post comments: