Thirty ideas from people under 30: The Politicians

They are explorers and activists, artists and educators, farmers and faith leaders – even mayors. And they have trenchant suggestions on how to improve the world.

Aaron Schock: Millennial in Congress

Susan Walsh/AP/File
Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Ill., stands on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 17, 2008, following the freshman class photo of the House of Representatives for the 111th Congress.

Congress needs long-term vision – and it's young people who are key to building it.

So says Rep. Aaron Schock (R) of Illinois, who, in theory, should know: He was the first member of Congress born in the 1980s and is in his second term on Capitol Hill, where the average age is 57.

Because so much of its decisionmaking occurs under pressure-cooker circumstances, Congress "tends to make decisions based on the here and now, not based on the future," he says.

The problem for young people, according to Mr. Schock, is that government decisions on education, health care, and welfare are going to impact today's 20- and 30-somethings far more than their parents, yet "those who are making the decisions are all the 60- and 70-year-olds."

And, perhaps contrary to popular perception, he doesn't think members of the Millennial Generation are as focused on the ephemeral now.

"What you find is young people who are engaged in the political process are engaged because they are concerned about the future," says Schock. "They are saying, 'I want our country to be better at education. I want our country to be better at feeding the poor. I want our country to have a better business climate.' It's more aspirational than it is self-centered."

Schock says he is trying to do his part by bringing people together when he can. He's pushing a bipartisan transportation bill, for instance, that would dole out funding over six years instead of the usual two, which backers think will create more jobs.

If passed, the bill would be "something that we can go home and say, 'We're not getting everything we want done … but if we end up winning, it could be huge,' " says Schock.

David Grant, Washington

Next in the series: The Educators

3 of 3

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.