The Voting Teen
By: Odin Halvorson
Tags: Politics, Children, Teens, Democracy, Activism

One of the modern arguments for lowering the voting age to sixteen is reminiscent of those early arguments against being drafted without voting rights. “Why can we be at risk of being killed in our classrooms by armed shooters,” say teenage supporters of a lower voting age, “and yet not have the right to vote for those people willing to protect us?” The question is powerful, but it only touches upon one important facet of the conversation.

There is an unfortunately prevalent notion in the minds of the older generations which questions the responsibility of teenagers to make rational choices regarding their own life, let alone wider policy. Some dissenters of lowering the voting age bring in an argument regarding protectionism: “we defend under-eighteens with laws protecting them from alcohol, pornography, drugs, and much more,” cite such voices, “doesn’t that clearly show that under-eighteens require a watchful eye due to their natural lack of maturity?”

And yet there have been numerous studies conducted which show little to no difference in the how the brain of a sixteen-year-old operates compared to that of an adult. As Laurence Steinberg, a professor of psychology at Temple University wrote in an L.A. Times article in 2014, “Adolescents can gather evidence, consult with others and take time before making a decision. Adolescents may make bad choices, but statistically speaking, they won’t make them any more often than adults.” Therefore what we have in front of us is the potential of increasing the total average voting pool by lowering the age to sixteen: some will vote poorly, or not at all (just as many adults do) but still more are likely to be active and critical members of the voting population.

But what about the criticism that suggests that, because voter turnout among the 18–21 age range is already quite low in many cases, lowering the voting age even farther is pointless? To this, we can apply the recent issue of Scotland’s referendum for Independence where the voting age was set to sixteen and record numbers of young people (80 percent of the total under-eighteen voting population) turned out to vote. Thus the counter-argument is that there may be other mechanisms preventing or dissuading current 18–21s from voting. This could be due to a lack of civic exposure and responsibility at a younger age, for instance; perhaps by being provided with the option to vote — and the trust that comes with that — younger people will feel empowered to continue their active political life into adulthood.

Indeed, it could also be said that if you are old enough to work and pay taxes to your government (we can talk about whether or not taxation is legal and moral later) you should be old enough to have a say in how your taxes are spent. It is possible for sixteen-year-olds to enter the workforce with the same number of working hours as an adult. I do not condone the flagrant commodification of our youth through the capitalist system but, if the system creates the circumstances where people who are sixteen can work full time, it must needs provide them with the ability to take political action at the same time.

But here is another incredibly important point regarding teenage voting: the parents of teenage voters are more likely to vote as well. This study shows a significant statistical increase in the voting activity of parents whose child or children have recently become enfranchised voters. The important point to note here is that the increase is only visible if the teenagers are still living at home — it becomes marginal once they have left home. Clearly, increasing the voting population of teenagers has the potential to increase the number of overall voters as well. This, in an era of historically low voter turnouts, can only be a good thing.