Should the Voting Age be lowered to 16 Years - Essay Example

Should the Voting Age be lowered to 16 Years? Introduction In many nations, the matter concerning what the age of maturation should be has always been contentious. In the majority of countries in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa, 21 years is considered as the age at which an individual is considered as an adult. In most Western nations, however, a person is considered as being mature enough to make certain decisions upon attaining the ages of 18 years, or 16 years. Even though most nations do not allow 16 years olds to vote, this age group is still allowed to acquire driving licenses at 16. Many governments in the West today are being pressurised by their own populations to make it possible for the voting age to be established as 16 years. In the United Kingdom, this pressure has been exerted by organisations like the Electoral Reform Society, the Electoral Commission, the Liberal Democrat Party, the Votes at 16 Coalition, and the Power Inquiry. In many parts of the world, the youth are perceived as being apathetic, selfish, and uninformed about the most important aspects of politics. However, this cannot be considered as being descriptive of youths everywhere. While Britain has its fair share of lethargic youth who do not wish to be saddled with additional responsibilities, there are many teenagers who are deeply interested in politics, and wish to be identified as well-informed members of society who can make wise choices about the choice of leaders in different capacities (Massicotte, Blais, and Yoshinaka 2004). 16year old teenagers in nations such as Britain are far more informed about political issues in their countries than youths in developing nations. Not only do British teenagers have access to information through various types of mass media, they also live in a democratic culture that nurtures their independence from childhood, and encourages them to develop their own thoughts and opinions about political matters. Such freedom contributes towards increased reflection about different political issues that may be affecting cities as well as the nation. Voting ages in Nations around the World In Britain, the journey to the perception of 16 year olds as possible voters began in earnest in the 1960s. Many Western democracies lowered the accepted voting age to 21 years, from 18 years in the 60s. However, there are considerably few governments that have since taken the additional step of further lowering the voting age to 16 years. This was probably because of the other, more life-changing responsibilities that young men and women were expected to make between the 1940s and 1960s. Strangely, there are developing nations that have made considerable allowances in as far as voting ages are concerned. According to Arzheimer (2006) 15 year olds in Iran have the right to vote. Also, nations like Bosnia, Cuba, Brazil, and Nicaragua have ratified the law that the officially recognized voting age is 16 years. According to Banaji (2008) there are nations that have conducted trials that show that 16 year olds, if allowed to vote, with do so with greater enthusiasm than the older age groups. According to Banaji (2008) a study conducted in Germany involving the participation of 16 year olds in voting responsibilities in Hanover demonstrated that their levels of involvement were considerably greater than those of 18 to 35 year old adult participants. This resulted in 7 out of 16 German constituent states establishing 16 as the voting age. In nations like Austria, 16 year olds were first allowed to vote in 2008 (Phelps 2012). In the region of Slovenia, 16 year olds may vote if they are employed. In Britain, the Isle of Man, Jersey, and Guernsey have begun to allow 16 year olds to vote. This is considerably more liberal than is the case in the United States where 17 year olds may be allowed to vote in Primary elections. Why the Voting Age should be lowered to 16 years of age There are different arguments that have been used to support the notion that the voting age in various nations, including Britain, should be lowered to 16 (Wattenberg 2008). These arguments tend to be related to political participation, equity, and the level of maturation in the present age group. The argument centred on equity contends that the minimum voting age ought to be made to reflect the progress being witnessed in the advancement of other government regulations (Dalton 2006). The premise centred on political participation, on the other hand, contends that lowering the voting age will essentially allow other participants to be involved in the process of choosing the nation’s leaders (Electoral Commission 2004). This will boost civic participation across different cities, while also increasing the number of voters in subsequent elections. The argument centred on maturation holds that today’s teenagers have access to much more information, from younger ages, than their peers did in past years. This means that children begin to reflect on different matters, and process complex information from far younger ages than was the case in the past. By the time they reach 16, many teenagers will have definite thinking patterns and ideas about how they wish their nation or state to be governed (Sloam 2007). In the United Kingdom, there are approximately 2 to 2.5 million teenagers who are sixteen. Their contribution to the voting process would make considerable changes to participation in the political process. One of the reasons that is often mentioned by British supporters of lowering the voting age has to do with consistency. According to Butt (2004) various British politicians have pointed out that 16 year olds are permitted to pay taxes, leave school without the threat of having to deal with repercussions from the state, marry, bear children, and work on a regular basis. These are all considerably bigger responsibilities than choosing national and state leaders. According to Dalton (2008) 16 year old teenagers in Britain can even enrol in the armed forces to defend their nation from external aggression. The fact that when they work 16 year olds are actually taxed means that their rights are, to some extent, infringed upon. Essentially, 16 year old workers are taxed without being allowed to participate in the governments that they are supporting. Making it possible for 16 year olds to be able to vote will also make them feel more involved, and, therefore, concerned about their political leaders. According to Benhabib (2004) young adults can feel politically alienated when they are not encouraged to express themselves or their opinions through political process. There are people who have even claimed that 16 year olds’ perceptions on matters concerning political processes are not well-developed. This increases the chances of this age-group disengaging from the formal democratic procedures in their nations. According to Clarke, Sanders, Stewart, and Whiteley (2009) the longer that informed, and politically aware teenagers are denied the chance to become involved in election processes, the more the chances increases of their becoming completely disenchanted and apathetic to the whole subject pf politics. The factor of maturation has to do with the fact that many teenagers today are politically informed about all the contentious aspects of the political process. Even those who may not be deeply interested in politics are drawn into having an opinion because of the constant exposure that is given even to the minutest details in politics. According to Folkes (2004) 16 year old British citizens today are in the best position to make informed political decisions about various issues. There are also changes that have been made to the school curriculum that allow for students in various classes to be able to understand the political processes of the country. According to Franklin (2004) the subject of ‘Citizenship’ was made compulsory in the national curriculum in 2002. This means that children and teenagers are instructed about the voting process, and the electoral system while still at school. They also learn about parliament, local government institutions, and different voting patterns. Teenagers also explore electoral as well as democratic processes that are used to affect decisions nationally, locally, and internationally (Thomas 2007). There are actually older adults who did not benefit from such in-depth information when they were at school. Young people, though furnished with this knowledge, cannot put it to practical use for virtual years after it is first given. It has also been claimed that lowering the voting age will result in more voters having the opportunity to make their preferences known. Increase turnout- According to Blais (2006) when citizens make a practice of voting regularly from a young age, they are more likely to continue doing so until their older ages. When a teenager is in school, he or she is in the best environment in as far as political involvement is concerned. This is because it is in schools that students get the opportunity to debate with others and share regularly about various political aspects. This develops their interest in political aspects of the nation (Oesch 2008). Once they leave school, or enter the working world, they will likely be overtaken by other responsibilities which push the significance of participating in political processes to the back bender. According to Henn, Weinstein, and Forrest (2005) after graduating from high school, many young adults do not vote for at least the next four years. This is mainly because they have different responsibilities, and they are fully involved in trying to establish themselves in the working world. If they have the opportunity to start voting from a young age, they are more likely to continue voting on a regular basis because they have already internalised the habit of regularly voting. The issue of rights is also considered as being significant in the support of lowering the voting age. According to Franklin, Marsh, and Lyons (2004), voting is the only way through which national citizens can communicate their feelings about government policies. As a section of the individuals who are impacted by key government decisions, teenagers also have a right to express their views through the ballot box. According to Green, Palmquist, and Schickler (2004) politicians only meet the incentives of people in the presence of positive incentives such as additional votes. This means that the needs of those under 18 or 21 years of age are not likely to be met unless there are definite benefits for the law makers. Today, many teenagers fully understand how they are affected by politically generated rules and regulations. They are thus best placed to make decision regarding their own lives. According to Lutz and Marsh (2007) establishing the voting age as 16 is something that would make it possible for schools to be places where teenagers and children would be able to learn about the processes of democracy. Schools could also function as places where new voters would have the opportunity to be registered, thus capturing the interest in politics and civic duties at an early age. According to Fieldhouse, Tranmer, and Russell (2007) low voter turnout, along with the aging of a huge part of the population, reduces politicians’ interest in engaging the youthful population during elections. Essentially, the youthful demographic is not viewed as having any serious effect on a politician’s chances of attaining his or her position, or objectives. This is because the youth are perceived to be apathetic dependents. According to Dermody, Hanmer-Lloyd, and Scullion (2010) in Britain alone, there exists a 23% difference in the rates of voter turnout between the top earners and the low income earners. This is indicative of the fact that the opinions of those who are financially challenged and young are more likely not to have their opinions or views considered with the seriousness that they deserve. There are different reasons why some sections of the population do not participate often in voting exercises. Some reasons, particularly those which have to do with family habits, are self-perpetuating. In almost all cases, the habits of children are shaped by parental habits. It is only much later that a teenager’s peers start to influence his or her choice. This means that if the teenager is from a family in which the parents’ voting habits are non-existent, there is a greater chance that the teenager will be apathetic. Even in cases where the teenager’s peers are not interested in voting practices, or view political participation as being a time-wasting activity, the teenager is more likely to develop identical views. It is only in schools where such cycles of detachment can be broken. According to a study documented by Fieldhouse and Cutts (2012) a research conducted by the University of Copenhagen has demonstrated the significance of even short-term processes of socialization on voter turnout. This study proved that social elements connected to a particular election such as political discussions are more influential than previously claimed in establishing whether a person will vote. This is particularly true where young voters are concerned, because they are the ones most likely to not have formed actual voting habits. It is an established fact that the home is a teenager’s main influence (Schrag 2004). However, negative practices in regards to voting can be combated through provisional processes of socialisation. If the voting age were to be lowered to 16 in Britain, it would not be necessary, or even advisable, to accomplish this feat with a single law. According to Chan and Clayton (2006) in nations such as Austria, the lowering of the voting age to 16, was achieved through a series of gradual steps that included discussions with different law makers, and the conducting of mock elections in various schools in order to determine what the reactions of students would be (Lister 2007). The results of voting habits have shown that such initiatives have been very beneficial, because there has been increased turnout among the 16-17 year olds. It is apparent that schools have a very important role in making an individual’s first election an extremely positive experience. Once this is accomplished, regular voting then becomes normality for the individual in question. According to Clayton (2006) voting in national as well as local elections is something that should be perceived as a normal extension of ordinary democratic practices such as voting for presidents and other officials in school councils. In Britain, at present, there are many people who are in support of the concept of establishing the age of 16 as the official voting age. In political circles, the Labournparty, along with the Liberal Democrats, support the idea of allowing 16 year olds to make choices about who they wish to lead political processes in their cities. The Innovation Fund is an example of an organisation that seeks to improve interactions with democratic procedures among under-represented sections of the population (Henn, Weinstein, and Forrest 2005). Such initiatives would be greatly reinforced if the messages that teenagers receive through them have direct relevance to the capacity to be able to vote. Generating support for lowering the Voting Age In Britain, the Electoral Reform Society has been at the forefront of supporting the lowering of the voting age. It has tried to accomplish this by generating a large community of support among charities, as well as business organisations. Some of these organisations include the National Union of Students, YMCA, Children’s Society, Barnardos, Children’s Rights Alliance for England, and Young People’s Rights Network (Gallego 2007). There are also many organisations that have offered future support to the initiative. In order for 16 year olds to be allowed to start voting, parliamentarians have to be persuaded that they should have the opportunity to exercise their political rights. Apart from the independent electoral commission, there are other bodies that have to be convinced of the importance of allowing 16 year olds to be able to vote. Prospects for Change As the British Electoral Reform Society discusses the issue with more elected parliamentarians, it is likely that there will be changes considered on the subject. With the present day curriculum for schools, it would not be impractical to allow 16 year olds to be able to vote (Aarts and Wessels 2005). This could easily be achieved by supplying high schools all over the nation with voter registration chits. Students could also be made more familiar with political processes by visiting various polling stations across the nation. Schools provide the perfect environment for students to be able to read about the electoral process (O’Toole, Lister, Marsh, Jones, and McDonagh 2010). To help the process, the teacher in charge of social studies could distribute registration forms, and encourage the students to function as informed citizens. What steps can democracies (or are taking) to encourage voter engagement? There are many Western nations today that have to deal with low voter turnout due to various reasons; one of which is widespread apathy. This has been experienced to some extent in Britain. This is one of the reasons why there are politicians who are eager to make it possible for 16 year olds to vote, because they will likely inject new enthusiasm to the entire process. However, the fact is that, even where the youth are concerned, the government might have to be more proactive in order to engage them in processes of civic participation. In some nations, including Britain, the disinterest in voting has been so acute that it has been suggested that the voting process should be made compulsory; with the people who choose to abstain for one reason or another being fined for not taking part in this civic duty. This, however, is not the answer to voter apathy. Voting is meant to be a personal freedom, and should even be perceived to be a special privilege. If the British government opts to make voting compulsory, it will essentially be taking away the personal freedoms of its citizens. If voting is made compulsory in Britain, the citizens will essentially be compelled to support systems of government, or even policies that they may not agree with. Something that is rarely pointed out is that the personal decision not to vote is not necessarily always due to apathy. For some citizens, particularly those from low income communities, voting can represent more dealings with a system that they dread. Some citizens have negative memories of all their dealings with government. For instance, migrants who may have sought British citizenship may have had to go through difficult processes and numerous rejections which left them feeling disenchanted with the system in general. It is even likely that they may have been rejected for citizenship numerous times before they finally succeeded. Once such people get their citizenship, it is unlikely that they will want to expose themselves again to the prospect of dealing with the systems of government again. For them, voting would give them unnecessary exposure which could re-ignite interest in them from government authorities. Civic representatives have to appeal to such citizens in ways that reassure them that the process will not be tedious, aggravating, or even threaten their citizenship status. There are other citizens who refuse to vote because none of the candidates who are applying for positions of leadership have impressed them. For such individuals, the refusal to participate in the voting process ought to be protected. The only fair way for the government to force such citizens to vote is by including an option in the ballot paper that states ‘none of the above’. The right not to vote actually empowers the person who chooses to exercise it, in this case. The individual, who is disillusioned with the existing parties and their manifestos, may feel powerless to alter the political system until the time of the next election. By then, the policies that the voter disagrees with will already have caused damage in terms of stealth taxes, or bad regulations concerning education. In such circumstances, the right not to vote becomes an actual choice, and the voter’s silence becomes a powerful instrument. Instead, national governments that are concerned with voter apathy, as the British government is, should find ways of engaging the voting population. For instance, they have to renew the voter’s faith in the government’s democratic process. Many voters, and, in particular the youth, feel alienated from political processes in their own nations due to the scandals involving corrupt ministers that are often revealed. Such controversies make citizens feel that their participation will not guarantee any change in the systems of government. Even if there are only a few politicians who have been exposed as being corrupt, youthful voters tend to lump all politicians in the same camp. If voters are to participate in voting, they have to be convinced that their participation will bring the changes they yearn for. Politicians also have to come up with fresh ideas. Many voters would like politicians to concentrate on how they are going to improve the lives of citizens, and not what happens to be wrong about their opponents. For the youth to take a real interest in political participation, they also have to be shown how the government works for the betterment of its citizens. For instance, it would be beneficial for civic representatives to show the youth how government processes impact their lives on a personal level. The youth could learn how aspects such as what the cost of constructing and maintaining public roads is. They could also learn about what it costs the government to maintain troops that are positioned abroad, in terms of food, medicine, and other supplies. At present, Britain is involved in assorted peace-keeping missions in nations abroad. The government is also fighting terrorists in different nations. There are many youths who like their government’s involvement in such important matters; and so this could serve as the perfect base from which to introduce the importance of the voting exercise. The youth could also be taught about the way the public healthcare system is maintained by the government. The government could even seek to engage the youth in terms of the funds they think are necessary in maintaining these systems. The British government has already shown considerable innovation in this by engaging the youth through the internet. Even though it has not yet made it possible for citizens to be able to vote through the internet, the government has launched e-petitions. This allows citizens to be able to register petitions through the internet. The concerns of citizens, as expressed through e-petitions, can then have signatories from public members. Once the number of signatories reaches 100, 000, the issue will then be debated by law makers in the House of Commons. Since the youth re particularly engaged with the internet, this process makes it easier for them to learn about their government, and subsequently develop interest in the process of voting. Conclusion The debate regarding lowering the voting age also concerns certain issues concerning the established threshold of adulthood, proof of citizenship, and the quality of the franchise. Lowering the voting age is something ethical because it would encourage young people to engage in civic participation, while also assisting to alter their perceptions about political structures. The British Electoral Reform Society has asserted that this is an objective that is quite achievable. What remains is to persuade parliamentarians about the different ways in which such a proposition would benefit the nation. References Aarts, K. & Wessels, B. (2005) Electoral turnout- The European Voter, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Arzheimer, K. (2006) ‘Dead men walking? party identification in Germany, 1977–2002’, Electoral Studies, vol. 25, pp. 791–807. Banaji, S. (2008) ‘The trouble with civic: a snapshot of young people’s civic and political engagements in twenty-first century democracies’, Journal of Youth Studies, vol.11, pp. 543–561. Benhabib, S. (2004) The rights of others: aliens, residents, and citizens, Cambridge University Press, New York. Blais, A. (2006) ‘What affects voter turnout?’ Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 9, pp. 111–25. Butt, S. (2004) ‘Political knowledge and routes to party choice in the British general election of 2001’, British Elections and Parties Review, vol. 14, pp.3–17. Chan, T.W. & Clayton, M. (2006) ‘Should the voting age be lowered to sixteen- normative and empirical consideration’, Political Studies, vol. 54, pp.533-558. Clarke, H., Sanders, D., Stewart, M. & Whiteley, P. (2009) Performance politics and the British voter, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Clayton, M. (2006) Justice and legitimacy in upbringing, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Dalton, R.J. (2006) Citizen politics: public opinion and political parties in advanced industrial democracies, CQ Press, Washington D. C. Dalton, R.J. (2008) ‘Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation’, Political Studies, vol. 56, pp.76-98. Dermody, J., Hanmer-Lloyd, S. & Scullion, R. (2010) ‘Young people and voting behavior: alienated youth and (or) an interested and critical citizenry?’ European Journal of Marketing, vol. 44, pp. 421–435. Electoral Commission. (2004) Age of electoral majority, Electoral Commission, London. Fieldhouse, E. & Cutts, D. (2012) ‘The companion effect: household and local context and the turnout of young people’, Journal of Politics, vol. 74, no 3, pp. 856-869. Fieldhouse, E., Tranmer, M. & Russell, A. (2007) ‘Something about young people or something about elections? Electoral participation of young people in Europe: evidence from a multilevel analysis of the European social survey’, European Journal of Political Research, vol. 46, no.6, pp. 797– 822. Folkes, A. (2004) ‘The case for votes at 16’, Representation, vol.41, no. 1, pp. 52–56. Franklin, M. (2004) Voter turnout and the dynamics of electoral competition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Franklin, M., Marsh, M. & Lyons, P. (2004) ‘The generational basis of turnout decline in established democracies’, Acta Politica, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 115–151. Gallego, A. (2007) ‘Unequal political participation in Europe’, International Journal of Sociology, vol. 37, no.4, pp.10-25. Green, D.P., Palmquist, B. & Schickler, E. (2004) Partisan hearts and minds: political parties and the social identities of voters, Yale University Press, New Haven. Henn, M., Weinstein, M. & Forrest, S. (2005) ‘Uninterested youth? young people’s attitudes towards party politics in Britain’, Political Studies, vol. 53, pp. 556–578. Lister, R. (2007) ‘Why citizenship: where, when and how children?’ Theoretical Inquiries in Law, vol. 8, no.2, pp. 693–718. Lutz, G. & Marsh, M. (2007) ‘Introduction: consequences of low turnout’, Electoral Studies, vol. 26, no.3, pp. 539–547. Massicotte, L., Blais, A. & Yoshinaka, A. (2004) Establishing the rules of the game- election laws in democracies, University of Toronto Press, London. Oesch, D. (2008) The changing shape of class voting - an individual-level analysis of party support in Britain, Germany and Switzerland’, European Societies, vol. 10, no. 3, pp.329-355. O’Toole, T., Lister, M., Marsh, D., Jones, S. & McDonagh, A. (2010) ‘Tuning out or left out? participation and non-participation among young people’, Contemporary Politics, vol. 9, pp. 45–61. Phelps, E. (2012) ‘Understanding electoral turnout among British young people: a review of the literature’, Parliamentary Affairs, vol. 65, pp. 281–299. Schrag, F. (2004) ‘Children and democracy: theory and policy’, Politics, Philosophy and Economics, vol. 3, no.3, pp. 365–379. Sloam, J. (2007) ‘Rebooting democracy: youth participation in politics in the UK’, Parliamentary Affairs, vol.60, no. 548–567. Thomas, N. (2007) ‘Towards a theory of children’s participation’, International Journal of Children’s Rights, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 199–218. Wattenberg, M.P. (2008) Is voting for young people? Pearson Longman, New York. Read More