Voter turnout fell across all constituencies by 7.6 percent in the last general election in the United Kingdom (UK). Soon after, England and Northern Ireland announced that they will join Scotland and Wales in lowering their legal voting age to 16 years old by the next general election, taking place by 2029, according to northeastern.edu. The main reason for lowering the voting age is to encourage more voter turnout and represent a younger generation of citizens. However, this change may have additional unaccounted for side effects that may affect election results on a large scale. For example, younger voters’ tend to vote against the status quo, according to blogs.lse.ac.uk. This means that far-right and far-left parties can potentially gain a meaningful amount of votes. Although there are many politicians in the UK who are opposed to the lowered voting age, it is imperative for there to be a youth presence in politics to ensure that the government can address the issues that are most important to young people.
Lowering the voting age is essential to reaching an equitable societal culture of active participation in government affairs amongst all citizens. Lowering the voting age to 16, an age at which many adolescents are still pursuing education, would allow voting to develop into a routine from a young age. However, this movement is receiving backlash and concern about the maturity level of the adolescent population and the ways in which many young people access news. Due to the younger generation’s heavy reliance on social media to access news, there is major concern surrounding misinformation, according to theconversation.com. Additionally, teenagers often follow the guidance of their peers and those surrounding them. This causes politicians to question the reasoning behind including minors in elections when it is possible their votes may become redundant, according to theguardian.com.
The most popular argument against lowering the electoral voting age is the perceived lack of intellectual maturity in teenagers and their susceptibility to be influenced by those around them and social media. Studies show that when 16 and 17 year olds have enough time, they can make the same quality of decisions as an 18 year old, according to pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Ms. Lynette Thompson, an associate professor of psychology at Northeastern University in London, shared her opinion on the capabilities of minors to participate effectively in elections, according to northeastern.edu.
“If you ask a 16-year-old to make a decision on who they are going to vote for, giving them time to make that decision, they could make the same decision as an 18- or 19-year-old,” Ms. Thompson said, according to northeastern.edu. “[But] schools will have to make sure pupils are getting information from the right platforms and sources, because if you’re going to leave it up to TikTok and Instagram as the platforms where they educate themselves, they’re going to be wholly misinformed.”
Across Europe, the impact of younger voters has caused a broadening of the political conversation rather than drastically shifting election results, according to brookings.edu. In Scotland, after Scottish Parliament changed the legal voting age to 16, political parties began tailoring parts of their campaigns to issues that align with the priorities of younger generations, such as education funding, climate change, and youth employment, according to sps.edu.ac.uk. Similarly, in Austria, younger voters’ participation encouraged schools to strengthen their civics education, creating a stronger link between school and democratic engagement, according to national-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu. Thus, younger voter participation proves to reshape political agendas by forcing politicians to address the concerns of younger citizens.
Lowering the voting age to 16 has many possible positive and negative affects. The most concerning is that the influx of new voters would target a specific political orientation, according to blogs.lse.ac.uk. This could completely skew the current political landscape, putting parties with opposing views at a large disadvantage. However, this is also the most unlikely scenario of all due to the current inconsistency of young voters registering to vote, according to theconversation.com. Most likely, the overall election results would not be dramatically affected by the younger voters, but the youth presence would be more visible in specific constituencies. This forces leaders to acknowledge the concerns of the youth on a grassroots level, according to bbc.com. Mr. Joseph Valentine, Upper School History Teacher, discussed the potential effects of lowering the voting age in the UK.
“Lowering the UK voting age[,] commonly discussed in terms of extending the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds[,] could influence election outcomes, such as having a larger turnout of modest but meaningful new segment of voters, a new focus on which issues become priorities, especially for the youth, and an advantage for the party that is able to attract the youth.” Mr. Valentine said. “[Because of this], teachers should also engage in nonpartisan discussions to facilitate civic education and informed discussions of public issues, without endorsing specific parties or political ideologies. Structured debate, mock elections, and role-playing parliamentary procedures can build confidence and democratic competence.”
Featured Image by Catherine Ononye ’27
