Latest news with #youngvoters
Forbes
3 days ago
- Politics
- Forbes
The Good, The Bad, And The Funny: Voting At 16 Years Old
Young voters The United Kingdom announced this week that it would lower the voting age to 16 in time for the next general election. We Americans and others seem somewhere between puzzled and put off by the idea, as this issue generates a wide range of reactions. Voting at 16: A trend already under way Not the first country to do this, the U.K. follows Scotland, Wales and the Channel Islands, where younger voters already cast ballots. Around the globe, Austria became the first European country in 2008 to lower its national voting age to 16, with Malta following suit a decade later. In South and Central America, Brazil, Nicaragua, Ecuador and Argentina have reset voting from age 16 for years. When I cover a story, I decide, among other things, the approach – and go from there. This is a rare one, as it jumped at me from three positions: what's good, what's bad (maybe 'worrisome' is a better word), and what's funny (read: skeptical, cynical, sarcastic). An opportunity to lift all ships Although it is well known that many voters are not the most diligent about being responsible, and well-informed – and that this is not likely to change among teens – if we are interested in securing the future of democracy, this is the time to reconstruct our commitment to teaching civics and critical thinking from the early grades. Grade school education is where we can embed the idea that a rising tide lifts all shifts. 'Trouble ahead, trouble behind. Don't you know that notion just crossed my mind.' Teenagers, despite our best efforts to educate them in open-minded ways, are gullible and therefore vulnerable. There is no limit to how much so, and recent history confirms that. Imagine the naïve mind of a 16-yer old being manipulated by the devious, nefarious, and exceptionally skillful political strategists who are backed by countless billions of bucks. No contest. And think back only to the Cambridge Analytica scandal of the 2016 campaign. Today, the average time spent on social media screens is 4.5 hours per day. Anyone see a problem ahead? Sometimes, ya' just gotta laugh
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
What happens when 16-year-olds get the vote? Other countries are already seeing the benefits
The government has announced it will lower the voting age to 16 for all UK elections in time for the next general election. In 1969, the UK became the first major democracy in the world to lower the voting age from 21 to 18. Few people knew what to expect from this change. Things are different now. In places such as Austria, Argentina and Brazil, as well as parts of Germany and, in the UK, Wales and Scotland, 16- and 17-year-olds are already allowed to vote in some or all elections. We can learn a lot from these places about what happens when 16- and 17-year-olds get the vote. My colleagues and I have spent years researching this, and our main finding is simple: nothing bad happens when the voting age is lowered to 16. Including 16- and 17-year-olds in the electorate does not change election outcomes and it does not make elections less representative. Sixteen- and 17-year-olds are just as qualified to vote as other voters. Research from Germany and Austria shows that they are able to pick a political party or representative that best represents their views to the same extent as other, slightly older voters. But some things may get better for young people and for democracy overall, especially if young people are taken seriously as voters and receive good education on political issues. Here is what to expect when 16- and 17-year-olds get to vote in the UK general election. When 16- and 17-year-olds get to vote at the next UK election, expect them to turn out in about the same numbers as other voters, and slightly more often than other first-time voters (those aged 18 to 20). In Austria, Latin America, Scotland, Wales and German federal states that lowered the voting age to 16, my colleagues and I consistently find that, when allowed to vote, 16- and 17-year-olds turn out at higher rates than young people who were enfranchised at age 18. Younger people who are in full-time education and often still live at home can make for better, more engaged first-time voters compared with 18- to 20-year-olds, who often experience their first election in a highly transitory phase of their lives, while moving out of the parental home, taking up work or further education. A lower voting age is unlikely to change election outcomes. Sixteen- and 17-year-olds make up between 1.5% and less than 5% of the population in constituencies across the UK. They will have a very small impact on vote shares – and only in the most extreme (and improbable) scenario that all 16- and 17-year-olds turned out to vote and decided to vote in the same way. Those who say that lowering the voting age to 16 is Labour's move to secure more votes at the next general election might be mistaken. Young people as a group have diverse political attitudes; they do not all vote for the same political parties. In Brazil, young people voted quite similarly to other age groups in the 2022 presidential election and in Austria, where young people have been enfranchised since 2007, the inclusion of 16- and 17-year-olds in the electorate did not change the political landscape. Even for marginal elections, such as Scotland's 2014 referendum on independence, my colleague Jan Eichhorn from the University of Edinburgh showed that the inclusion of 16- and 17-year-olds did not change the outcome of the referendum as the youngest first-time voters cast their votes in diverse ways. Any political party can win the support of first-time voters. To do so, political parties have to engage with young people and offer attractive policy proposals. We might also see the media show more younger voters in their reporting. In 2014, BBC Scotland raised the visibility of 16- and 17-year-olds by creating a diverse panel of young first-time voters, who provided input into political programmes, appeared on shows and were among the audience in the final referendum TV debate. Young people who are allowed to vote also influence the adults in their lives. If young people are allowed to participate in elections at 16 and 17, when most are still living at home with their parents, they have the potential to shape political discussions within the family or household. In an ageing society, dinner-table conversations about political issues and across generations can be a good outcome. In the longer term, including 16- and 17-year-olds in the electorate might make democracy more resilient. In Austria and Latin America, young people who were enfranchised at 16 or 17 were more satisfied with democracy and democratic institutions – parliament or political parties. The lowering of the voting age also provides an opportunity to address inequalities in who participates in elections. Across all ages we see stark differences in who turns out to vote and who does not. After the lowering of the voting age in Scotland, however, we found 16- and 17-year-olds to be equally engaged with elections, regardless of their social background. Schools and colleges play a crucial role in compensating for the lack of parents or peers to get young people voting. Good and statutory education for all young people makes a big difference for democracy in the long term. Austria has done well in coupling the lowering of the voting age with a big reform of and investment in civic and citizenship education. In Scotland, young adults who remembered taking classes in school in which political issues were discussed were more likely to turn out in elections throughout their 20s. Christine Huebner is a lecturer in quantitative social sciences at the University of Sheffield Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Daily Mail
6 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Labour is accused of bid to rig next election as it is set to announce votes for 16-year-olds... but HALF don't want ballot box rights
Labour has been accused of attempting to rig future elections by giving the vote to 16-year-olds. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government is expected to set out a plan to enfranchise under-18s today. But the move, a manifesto pledge from the party, has been criticised as a cynical ploy since a large proportion of young voters support Labour. In a blow to the party, however, it has emerged that almost half of teenagers do not even want to be given the vote. In a poll, some 49 per cent of those questioned said they disagreed with the move. Only a few more of the 500 youths questioned by Merlin Strategy, 51 per cent, backed Labour's proposal. In addition, only 18 per cent of the 16 and 17-year-olds polled said they would definitely cast a ballot if there was an election tomorrow – with 13 per cent saying they would not take part. A Tory source said tonight: 'This is bare-faced ballot box stuffing. It's a sign of desperation this failing Labour government is resorting to underhand tactics and rigging extra votes to try and cling on to power for longer.' Labour vowed in its manifesto that it would give 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote to 'increase the engagement of young people in our vibrant democracy'. But the required legislation was a surprise omission from the King's Speech for Keir Starmer's first year in power. Tory communities spokesman Kevin Hollinrake told the Mail tonight: 'This poll proves what many of us have long argued – even 16 and 17-year-olds don't think they're ready to vote. 'With only 18 per cent saying they'd definitely take part in an election, it's clear that rushing to lower the voting age risks undermining the democratic process. 'Voting should be a considered, informed responsibility – not a political stunt.' Currently only those who are over 18 can take part in general elections, although 16 and 17-year-olds are allowed to vote for the devolved Scottish and Welsh parliaments. It is estimated another 1.5 million teenagers will be enfranchised for the next election – though Labour has dropped controversial plans to give millions of EU nationals the vote. The survey of young people – commissioned by ITV News – found 33 per cent of teenagers would vote Labour. And while 20 per cent said they would choose Reform, only 10 per cent would vote Conservative. Scarlett Maguire, director of Merlin Strategy, said: 'We would expect Labour to be out ahead with younger generations. I think maybe Labour would like to have a bigger lead among these people, but they still have quite a convincing lead over the challenging party, Reform UK.' Reform leader Nigel Farage said: 'It's an attempt to rig the political system but we intend to give them a nasty surprise.'
Fox News
7 days ago
- Politics
- Fox News
Charlie Kirk names JD Vance as guiding light for young conservatives, but says GOP must deliver on promises
Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk points to Vice President JD Vance as the conservative candidate to beat among young voters in the 2028 presidential election, should he run. During an interview at last weekend's Turning Point Student Action Summit in Tampa, Florida, Kirk said he believes Vance will be the candidate that young Americans look up to as the future leader of the conservative movement once President Donald Trump leaves office. "I think JD Vance fits that mold really well," the political activist said when asked by Fox News Digital who the guiding light for young conservative voters in 2028 will be. Kirk, whose mission with TPUSA is to educate and engage young voters and students on conservative principles, named several qualities which allow the vice president to connect with younger people. "He can operate seamlessly in a podcast environment," he said, remarking that Vance has a "wonderful family." Kirk also mentioned the 40-year-old Vance, the third-youngest VP in the nation's history, relates to younger Americans because of his age, while acknowledging Vance hasn't committed to a presidential bid. "He's the youngest vice president in quite some time, one of the youngest in American history," he said. Beyond Vance, Kirk stressed that any future leader of the conservative movement needs to address the top concerns of young people in America today, namely the high cost of living. "But outside of the candidate, we need to actually be able to deliver and go to the American people and go to the younger voters and say, 'Here's how your life was, and now it's easier for you to own a home. You don't have to rent for the rest of your life. It's easier to get married, easier to have children.'" Elsewhere in the interview, Kirk warned Republicans that the GOP may lose the young voters that helped Trump win the White House in 2024 if they don't deliver on cost-of-living issues. "The biggest threat to the Republican Party in 2028 is if we do not deliver on our promises of [home]ownership for the next generation," Kirk told Fox News Digital. "The youth vote didn't just vote for Donald Trump. Young voters put Donald Trump in the White House." The TPUSA founder also stressed that the future conservative leader would have to deliver on the major issues conservatives of all ages are focused on. "We have to deliver on immigration, on the deportations. We have to deliver, I think, on managing the size and scope of the federal government from cost savings and from cutting spending," he said. Kirk mentioned that he "would love" for Vance to be the man that takes up the conservative mantle, referring to himself as a "big JD guy." However, he noted that it's more important that, whoever the candidate is, they are solid on core conservative issues. "I say, 'Guys, if we don't deliver, it doesn't matter who you run, because then we're going to have big problems,'" he said.
Daily Mail
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
AOC smacked with ultimate insult from fresh-faced young Democrat snapping at her heels
The Gen-Z social media star hoping to run for Congress this year has taken a swipe at Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for being out of touch with young voters. Deja Foxx, 25, has been dubbed 'the next AOC' - but she rejected the comparison on Tuesday, saying she represents 'a generation who has a different kind of urgency'. She spoke with the Daily Beast ahead of the Democratic primary election in Arizona 's 7th district, where five hopefuls are running to represent the party. If selected by Democrat voters on Tuesday and by Arizona residents in the September election, Foxx would become the youngest person elected to Congress. Though her chances are low according to polls, AOC overcame huge odds to defeat Congressman Joe Crowley in 2019 when she was just four years older than Foxx. Foxx hopes to replicate this success, but she did not welcome comparisons with the New York 'Squad' member when quizzed about it ahead of the Democratic primary. 'I remember when she was elected. I was just a teenager,' Foxx told the Daily Beast. 'Now I'm old enough to run for Congress. And we are in a very different place.' 'I represent a generation who has a different kind of urgency and a different skill set, a different way of communicating,' the Filipino-American candidate added. 'And right now, the Democrats, for the very first time in decades, have lost ground with young people. 'If we do not get serious about the ways we are communicating with them, talking to them, we are going to be in a really bad spot in 2026 and 2028, and we can't afford that. 'Families like mine who rely on the social services Donald Trump is trying to cut, things like Medicaid, SNAP benefits, cannot afford another loss.' Foxx's blistering assessment of her party could easily be interpreted as a damning takedown of AOC. Many of the star congresswoman's supporters claim she has deserted her original progressive mission and is now too much of a centrist. Foxx grew up in Tucson, Arizona, where she was raised by a single mother in Section 8 housing. The family relied on food stamps, and Foxx moved out at the age of 15 to sleep on friends' couches while her mother struggled with mental illness and addiction. Foxx was a rising star in high school, where she campaigned to modernize the sex education curriculum and founded a community project to provide reproductive healthcare to young people in Tucson. She overcame the odds to secure a scholarship at Columbia University in New York City in 2018, and she made the dean's list for her academic performance. While at Columbia, Foxx joined Kamala Harris' first run for the presidency in 2020 and went on to lead her campaign influencer strategy at the age of just 19. Now she's running in the Arizona special election after the incumbent Congressman Raúl Grijalva died of lung cancer in March after 12 terms in office. Foxx is running against the late Congressman's daughter, Adelita Grijalva, who has been endorsed by AOC and Bernie Sanders, along with three more candidates. Patrick Harris Sr, Daniel Hernandez Jr and Jose Maldivo Jr are also running in the primary. Voters hit the polls on Tuesday, and the result will be announced in the coming days. Foxx told Teen Vogue she had been hoping to run for Congress in 2026, but she seized the opportunity to make an earlier bid in what she called her 'crashout or Congress' scheme. She said she decided to run because her 'lived experience differentiates me from people in the field' and because 'we need young people with a real sense of urgency at this moment'. After Harris lost the 2024 election in a landslide, Foxx also said she wanted to run for Congress because she 'felt a deep sense of responsibility.' 'It wasn't enough for me to just work the behind the scenes of campaigns or in front of the cameras,' she said, adding: 'I needed to give them someone they could get excited about, or we would stand to lose our generation.' Foxx's policy proposals include investing in the construction of 12 million new social housing units and improving the current stock of social housing, per her website. The page adds that she wants to provide childcare support for low-income families, raise the minimum wage to $17 per hour and eliminate the tipped minimum wage. Foxx has also pledged to sponsor the Social Security Expansion Act to increase Social Security benefits, and 'make the wealthiest Americans chip in their fair share'.
