Whether you are reading the opinion page of this newspaper or watching MTV, we are consistently told to "get involved" or to "Rock the Vote."

But what about the other side of the coin? No one ever says why you shouldn't care about the Democratic primaries, the 2004 election or politics in general. There are always other things to do instead of following political coverage or taking the 30 minutes to go cast a vote. We should talk about why we really are powerless to change anything and what it means for us as college students.

Of course, candidates for political office don't exactly run around making campaign pledges to snare the votes of the college-age demographic. You won't hear George W. Bush or the Democratic nominee saying that we need to make prescription drugs more affordable for recent college graduates trying to get on their feet financially.

There probably won't be serious discussion of reforming the Social Security system to avoid a crushing tax increase on our generation in a decade or so. Once again, there just isn't much to get interested about if you aren't an avid supporter of either party or a retired voter.

Now you know one reason why we youths are so damn apathetic all the time!

The Democratic presidential primary in Pennsylvania is not until April 27. I guess rushing in and being second in line to sign that Constitution thing didn't have the fringe benefits one might assume. Since we are the 39th state to vote in the primaries, the Democratic nomination likely will have been decided by this point.

Doesn't it just make perfect sense that the three most important states in this campaign season are Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, with a grand total of 19 electoral votes of the 538 total? How ironic that the state that started the mass secession from the Union should be taken as a bellwether of American politics.

For example, instead of going to the polls that day and voting for your idol -- say, Howard Dean -- you'll be getting ready for finals or counting down the days to Senior Week. The mere mention of your old hero three months after New Hampshire may be met with a response of something like, "Howard who? Wasn't that the guy who would get really angry at the mention of Bush's name and had his campaign implode three months ago?"

The fact that Dean's emotional rant to his supporters, which followed his loss in the Iowa caucus, is being sampled into songs easily available on the Internet just shows that we once again value style over substance. If the press never thought Dean could win a general election against Bush, why should the media have ever treated his run with any respect? As educated voters, we are obviously more concerned with the fact that Dean's wife is non-existent as a campaign tool than we are about his stand on the war on terror or tax policy.

Now we're getting somewhere as to why it's just so easy to tune these issues out.

To relay another reason as to why presidential elections might be too damaging to one's psyche, I'll share a personal story. It was fall 2000, my first semester here at Penn State, and the epic contest between Bush and Democratic challenger Al Gore was imminent.

It seemed then that this campus was supportive of Gore on the whole. I, however, was firmly behind the Bush/Cheney ticket and a Republican resurgence. For me, Bush was not perfect, but seemingly sufficient.

The problem, though, was that I did not send my voter registration form in time to be eligible to vote in the election. My state's 23 electoral votes went to Gore, and if not for some controversial stuff down in the old-aged fantasy land (aka Florida), Bush could have used some more electoral votes to obtain the presidency.

You could say that my one vote would not make the difference when Bush lost Pennsylvania by some 200,000 votes.

But, since November 2000, things have changed. If I had successfully cast a ballot for Bush, I'd have to feel guilty now. Since I do not think Bush has done even a marginally competent job as president, I'd be responsible for this downfall. I can now sleep at night knowing that I did my part as an American citizen, by forgoing the right that so many have fought to protect.

What's the point in voting this year if I already know Bush will win, or if I don't like the other guy?

The problem with this whole way of thinking is that it never solves anything. Sure, you might feel OK watching a reality television show and leaving this stuff for the "adults" to decide. But, if they are going to make decisions that our generation will surely have to pay for, shouldn't we want to look at the bill before we agree to it?

Even if you don't like either candidate for president, it's a small price to pay for looking back in retrospect, and knowing that you could have been involved enough to force attention to important issues.

Maybe, just maybe, if we start screaming loud enough, some real reform of Social Security and Medicare could be debated.

So, yes -- your vote does count.

Unfortunately, just not as much as a Democrat's in Iowa, New Hampshire or South Carolina.