Days before the first major gubernatorial debate took place here at UMass, a little known survey was circulated in order to measure the political commitment of the average UMB student. This eight-question survey, in addition to collecting political data, also served to inform students about the debate.
Over a ten-day period, nearly 400 students took the survey. It was distributed randomly (at varying times and places) to ensure a fair representative sample. Students were stopped to complete the survey as they crossed the catwalk, or worked out in the Beacon Fitness Center, or rested in the Ryan Lounge, or studied in Healy Library.
Some questions had students identify their gender, college, graduate or undergraduate, and full or part-time status; while others addressed political commitment. Students were first asked if they were registered voters, and if so under what political party. They next had to specify if they would or wouldn’t be interested in going to a gubernatorial debate on May 9th. Those answering yes finally had to state the likelihood of actually going to the debate.
The informal survey didn’t utilize standard scientific methods for analyzing data. Time prevented breaking down data within certain categories such as determining which political party most females tend to belong, or which college had the most un-registered voters. Numbers were rounded to the nearest whole. Despite the survey’s informality, the results may still present a reasonable picture of student’s general political commitment at UMB.
The results of the 394 surveys (186 males, 47% and 208 females, 53%) show high numbers of registered voters with strong identification with political parties, and clear interest in not only attending a gubernatorial debate in theory, but in actuality as well. Upon closer examination of the results, 249 students or 63% claimed to be registered voters, while 142 or 36% were not. One might rationally conclude that apathy, or a disinterest in politics explains why 36% of all those surveyed weren’t registered to vote. Apathy may partly explain why some students were unregistered, yet another more likely reason exists which the survey didn’t consider: international students, making up 9% of UMB are ineligible to vote because they’re not US citizens.
When asked to choose one out of five political categories, (Democrat, Republican, Independent, Green or Other) 284 students responded. Of these, 113 students or 40% chose the Democratic Party. Next came 99 students or 35% who identified with Independents. A small faction of 24 students or 9% were loyal Republicans. Just 16 students, or 6% allied themselves with the Green Party. Over half of all those surveyed, 217 students or 55% were interested in attending the debate, compared to169 students or 43% who weren’t interested. In the final question, students had to state their chances of actually going to the debate. Of the 226 answering this question, 57% or 128 students said they would definitely attend, while 43% or 98 admitted they probably wouldn’t. Students repeatedly raised time constraints as being a main factor when answering this question.
On the night of the debate, it was surprising to see many empty seats in the Lipke Auditorium, which can hold up to 500 people. The Center for Women in Politics & Public Policy, the graduate program that organized and sponsored the debate, had reserved two “overflow rooms” so that if audience members were squeezed out of Lipke they would still be able to watch the event. The debate had been advertised on UMB’s home page, as well as the home pages of the Center for Women in Politics & Public Policy and the Undergraduate Student Senate. Fliers were posted campus-wide and the Mass Media ran full-page ads two weeks prior to the debate. When asked in July to estimate the number of UMB students in attendance, Director Carol Hardy-Fanta replied around 100. Upon requesting an approximate number of students in the overflow rooms, Director Fanta replied that the rooms were not needed after all.