There is a magical feeling when you step onto the blue floor of the United States Senate. You are quickly overcome by how small it is. You feel like you are part of history. When the Senate gavels into session and you see Senator Carl Levin argue with Senator John McCain, you have experiences that you will never forget. I know this because last summer, I had the privilege of being a page for Senator Jeff Bingaman. It was an experience I will never forget.
And so it comes with great sadness that I heard the news of the end of the House page program. In my opinion, Congress is making a terrible mistake.
As a Senate page, I saw first-hand how our government works. There is no better way to understand or study the Senate than to live it. We sat on the Senate floor, day in and day out, listening to speeches about healthcare, energy, Wall Street reform, and unemployment benefits, in any random order.
One of my favorites moment from the Page Program came on July 21st of last summer around 7:30 at night when the Senate was in the middle of five procedural motions. I was standing up on the rostrum next to the presiding officer in my navy blue suite, white shirt, and navy blue tie checking off the names of the senators as they came onto the floor and voted. I was next to a telephone with a direct line to Senate staffers outside the chamber who called at least once a minute to figure out which senator had voted and which one had not. Pages were running all across the Capitol trying to get senators on the floor for the vote and assisting the floor staff with operating the Senate.
At the end of my thirteen-and-a-half hour day, I wrote in my journal, "I had a really important role in making the U.S. Senate run." This kind of access and experience for both House and Senate pages is unparalleled and provides a working knowledge of the U.S. government that even the best courses cannot teach.
One of my colleagues on the Do Something Youth Advisory Council, Alex Pommier, was a House page the spring of his junior year and wrote in an e-mail to me this Monday, "The House Page Program allowed me to realize at an early age that most of our nation's leaders are well-intentioned, caring individuals who are working tirelessly to serve and better our country."
He continued, "I had the incredible opportunity to see our nation's leaders at work without the bias of the media. It inspired my peers and I to seek futures in public service."
What also made the program special was the people of different backgrounds who served as Senate pages. This diversity led to intense political debates when we were off the floor. After my fifth day at the page program, I wrote in my journal:
In the spirit of youth we had some awesome debates today on the issues that really matter. Intense discussions about the future of our country and about issues like the war in Afghanistan and American politics and the future of the Democratic and Republican parties. We held more lively debate than those on the floor of the Senate and often had to quiet down. We are all working on making sure to have lots of discussions as we have all found that we rarely find people who can actually talk politics in a coherent manner and make sense.
What I wrote over a year ago is still true -- the Senate Page Program was one of the few experiences in my life where I have found such smart and enthusiastic young people to talk politics with.
There is no way to replace the connections that both House and Senate pages make to each other and to the U.S. government. Yet look at the press release issued this Monday by Speaker Boehner and Leader Pelosi as they cancelled the page program, "Citing advances in technology that have reduced the need for services traditionally provided by congressional pages" and because the program was too expensive.
What Speaker Boehner and Leader Pelosi failed to take into account is the impact the page program has on the pages themselves, the love for government that was fostered in our nation's youth and the debates that were had bridging the partisanship of Washington. I couldn't agree more with Alex Pommier in saying, "That education is worth much more than $5 million dollars a year."
The Washington Times did report that, Speaker Boehner and Leader Pelosi "promised to try to find a way for high school students to get involved with the work of Congress."
I wanted to hear more about what this might look like. I called Leader Pelosi's press office, who said they wouldn't be able to get anything to me by the end of the day. Their response was better than Speaker Boehner's office, who I gave up on after 30 minutes on hold.
If that is going to be their experience for high school students involved in the work of Congress, then I am worried. I can only hope that that the Senate Page Program continues to bring youth inside the halls of Washington and transform their lives much like the House Page Program did.
Follow Alex Wirth on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@amaliowirth
I respect your opinion. I am certainly very happy that you, amongst others, had the chance to experience government first-hand in this way. Yet, I do not see the program's demise as a serious loss. Here is why.
First, the program could only take a limited number of pages. My perception, right or wrong, is that this program was one of privilege in this day and age. As Speaker Boehner's press release noted, "The “per Page” cost per school year is between $69,000 and $80,000." This is certainly not an inclusive program.
Second, there must be a way to involve even more students. Lamenting the demise of a program that in this day and age allows so few to have this access is not precisely the ideals of this country.
Third and finally, I would challenge you to use your experience and access to develop alternatives where high school age kids can get involved in their government. The idea of involvement is critical, but so are the numbers. Do not look at the end of this program as anything other than a transformation opportunity.
1). The jobs that pages do will have to be done by others. Looking at the straight numbers doesn't recognize that Congress is going to have to hire more people at high costs due to the nature of the jobs. These jobs are also highly seasonal (due to the Calendar of House and its breaks) so Pages made sense since they weren't appointed during the long recesses. Speaking of the numbers, this represents less than 1/1000th of the budget of the U.S. Congress. The U.S. Government spends more on iPods each year than Pages.
2). There is no way to involve more students at this intimate of a level. College interns do nothing more than sit in offices answering phones and letters without actually getting to understand the Congress. I see these new programs as nothing more than being the equivalent of internships.
3). The end of the program is the death of an American institution. You can't even begin to understand the program without having experienced it. Anyone who was involved will tell you it is life changing and the best thing they have ever done. It is great to get more high school students involved with politics, but it doesn't have to be at the expense of this program.
Your response is not unexpected, but it highlights the challenges that we face as a nation, namely spending prioritization.
You are correct about the money being small and insignificant in terms of the total U.S. budget. You are correct in the benefits that those who have been involved in the program have gained from it. However, I contend that you are wrong in its priority.
How many medical research programs could be funded with that same money? Even if it is just one, are you willing to compare the potential benefits of saving lives through research? How many elderly or disabled could get assistance with medicine for a year if that money was spent on prescription drug assistance? How many more children could be encouraged to have curiosity about our government if that money was spent for curriculum?
Your reaction is typical of anyone who has benefited from a program, and then seen the end of funding for that program. It was special to you. I fully understand that, and I do not begrudge you, or any other House or Senate page, who went through the program. But, at a cost of $69-$80k per page, this is simply not sustainable in a economy where life-sustaining, life-supporting, or life-giving programs are under budgetary pressures. While I don't doubt that the Page program has changed lives, I can clearly say that it has never saved a life directly.
Thank you so much for reading the article and offering your kind thoughts. I think you and Robert have been having an excellent debate which is what I hoped to foster by sharing the human side of the story rather than just the budget one.
One the budget issue I think Robert is right is saying that this is a small fraction of the federal budget yet you make an equally good point saying what happens if this money was going to something else. I would offer to that that in order for the government to fund good projects we need successful and knowledgeable people in government - something that the Page Program fosters.
In terms of actually saving lives the pages were the first responders in the 1954 shooting on the House floor. More info can be found in this Wikipedia article under "Pages Involved In Rescue" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_Page. Also all pages are trained in emergency management procedures at the Capital to help in the event of an emergency.
Finally, I think you make an excellent point that there have to be other alternatives to get youth involved in government. And I had the same hope that you did. The problem is the Page Program is one of the most authentic ways to get youth really inside the halls of the capitol rather than just answering e-mail an a desk as an intern.
I was a Senate Page in the 1970's between Junior and Senior years in high school. Like you, I made wonderful friends I'm still in touch with all these years later, and got to witness history in the making. There were late nights and early mornings and many hours sitting on the stairs while the Senate was quiet. That's when we all talked and debated amongst ourselves. It was a wonderful time I will always remember, and I am sad that fewer teens will have this opportunity in the future.
Technology has certainly changed since my time in the Senate, but I'm willing to bet that congressional hiding places have not. When someone is required on the floor, a cell phone call can't get them there the way a page can!