Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Voting age, reduction of
Section B. Constitutional/governance

Most countries, including the UK, have a minimum voting age of 18, but many countries, including Brazil, Austria and Nicaragua, have a voting age of 16. There is a lobby in the UK to lower the voting age to 16 and so this article deals with changing the voting age from 18 to 16. The arguments could be adapted to support a lower voting age; e.g. the start of high school or the age of criminal responsibility.

Pros

[1] In society today, young people reach social and intellectual maturity at a younger age than ever before. By the age of 16 (and possibly 14), young people are well-informed and mature enough to vote.

[2] In the UK, at the age of 16, young people can have a job, have sex legally and get married. It is absurd for a married person with a job and children not to be recognised as an adult who can vote. Voting is an important decision, but so is getting married. Such a person is a full adult member of society and should be treated as such. In some countries, the age of consent and/or the school leaving age are even younger, making the discrepancies greater still.

[3] Because of the advances in information technology over recent decades, teenagers are now more aware of political issues than ever before. The broadcast media and the Internet in particular ensure that everyone, including 16 year olds, is familiar with the issues of the day. There is no need to wait for young people to be 18 in order for them to have a fuller understanding of politics.

[4] Even if one takes a pessimistic view of the ability of some 16-year-old schoolleavers to make a well-informed and wellthought-out democratic decision, it is not clear that the passage of two years will make any real difference to such people. Many people are politically unsophisticated or uninterested in politics, but there is not a significant difference between the ages of 16 and 18. The same proportion of 16 year olds as of 18 year olds will be apathetic, uninterested or ill-informed. The extra two years without a vote is a case of arbitrary discrimination.

[5] In any case, voters are not required to be fully informed or highly intellectual — such a requirement would be elitist and anti-democratic. People aged 16 are, in many other respects, adult members of society.

[6] Many voters will have to wait two, three or even four years for their first national election after they turn 18, so may actually be as old as 22 when they have the opportunity to vote for the first time. In the same way, if the voting age were lowered to 16, half of voters would still have to wait until they were 18. Evidence shows that those who vote when young are more likely to continue voting through their life and so we should set the habit early.

Cons

[1] It is not true that young people are more mature than ever in today’s society. They masquerade as adults by mimicking traditionally adult behaviour (drinking, smoking, using drugs, having sex, swearing, fighting) at younger and younger ages, but that does not make them mature. If anything, the voting age should be raised to give these immature would-be adults a longer time actually to grow up and mature intellectually.

[2] It is perfectly acceptable for different ’rites of passage’ to occur at different ages. In the UK, for example, the ages for leaving school, being allowed to have sex legally, smoke, drive, drink and vote are staggered over three years (16, 17, 18). In many countries, the school-leaving age and the age of consent are also 18 and so the voting age is more in line. In the USA, you have to be 21 to buy alcohol which shows that there is debate even about whether 18 year olds can make mature decisions. Voting is a responsible act that requires more than a year or two of adult experience of life and politics. The age for voting should stay at 18 or be raised to 21 — as indeed should the age for marriage, another momentously important decision that should not be made by adolescents.

[3] The rise of broadcast media and information technology has led to a ridiculously simplistic and superficial political world emerging — a world in which real political argumentation has been replaced by the ’sound bite’. This is a reason to demand that the voter be older and be wiser to the tricks of the media spin-doctor. A 16-year-old voter would be putty in the hands of media managers.

[4] There is a significant difference between the levels of analysis of which a 16 year old and an 18 year old are capable. At 16, people are still children mentally. The voting age could be raised to 21, to allow for fuller mental development.

[5] While some people think there should be a test for a voting ’licence’, as long as that does not exist, we need to put an age limit on voting. Teenagers are less likely to follow the news and care about politics as the issues do not directly affect them. Where laws do affect them directly, they are represented through their parents’ votes.

[6] Young people are one of the demographic groups with the lowest turnouts in elections. Most will not vote in their first available election, and so bad habits will be set. If they are older when the right is granted, they will value it more and be more likely to use it.

Possible motions

This House would reduce the voting age to 16.

This House believes that the voting age should be the same as the age of criminal responsibility.

Related topics

Political candidacy, age of

Voting, compulsory