Young People’s Human Rights and The Politics of Voting Age explores the broader societal implications of voting age eligibility requirements and the legislative bar against youth voting in North America and in Commonwealth countries (where ‘youth’ is defined as persons 16 and over but under age 18). The issue is raised as to whether the denial of the youth vote undermines democratic principles and values and ultimately the human dignity of youth. This is the first book to address the topic of the youth vote in-depth as a fundamental human rights concern relating to the entitlement in a democracy to societal participation and inclusion in influencing policy and law which profoundly affects one’s life. Also examined are international perspectives on the issue of voting age eligibility. The book would be extremely valuable for instructional purposes as one of the primary texts in undergraduate or graduate courses on children’s human rights, political psychology, political science , sociology of law or society and as a supplementary text for courses on human rights or constitutional law and would be of interest also to members of the general public concerned with children’s human rights issues.
This book explores the consequences of lowering the voting age to 16 from a global perspective, bringing together empirical research from countries where at least some 16-year-olds are able to vote. With the aim to show what really happens when younger people can take part in elections, the authors engage with the key debates on earlier enfranchisement and examine the lead-up to and impact of changes to the voting age in countries across the globe. The book provides the most comprehensive synthesis on this topic, including detailed case studies and broad comparative analyses. It summarizes what can be said about youth political participation and attitudes, and highlights where further research is needed. The findings will be of great interest to researchers working in youth political socialization and engagement, as well as to policymakers, youth workers and activists.
Learning about politics and life as a citizen is part of the transition to adulthood. During this stage young people in most Western democracies are introduced to political processes and issues, as well as a range of political activities including voting and participation in social movements. But young people make this transition differently. The articles in this Book explore a range of ways that young people participate politically and also discuss those who are not ‘active citizens’.
In 2008, everyone expected young people to turn out to vote in record numbers for the first youthful, hip, new media-savvy, African American presidential candidate in history. They didn’t. When Obama ran for re-election, he targeted young voters and they still didn’t come to the polls in overwhelming numbers. What will happen in 2016, another potential history-making election? Is Voting for Young People? explores the reasons why young people are less likely to follow politics and vote in the United States (as well as in many other established democracies) no matter who the candidates are, whether they tweet or blog, or what the issues may be. This brief, accessible, and provocative book suggests ways of changing that, and now includes a new chapter on young people's role in the 2008, 2012, and 2014 elections, looking ahead to 2016. New to the Fourth Edition: A new introduction placing current youth voting trends in context with recent elections. A new Chapter 8 covering the elections of 2008, 2012, and 2014—looking ahead to 2016. Updated voting data on 2012 and 2014 elections. A new concluding chapter offering recommendations for improving young voter turnout.
A sweeping and innovative study that places young people at the heart of pivotal conflicts, decisions and transformations in American politics. Even though the voting age is 18, children in the United States are both crucial subjects and actors in democratic politics. Young people have been leveraged for important political causes again and again--from the 1963 Birmingham Children's Crusade in which civil rights leaders mobilized thousands of school kids in protest marches to the 2018 "family separation" policy in which Trump officials sacrificed migrant children as bargaining chips in its push for border control. In Democracy's Child, Alison L. Gash and Daniel J. Tichenor focus on the reciprocal relationship between children and politics by placing young people at the heart of pivotal conflicts, decisions, and transformations in American politics. From the March for Our Lives and Black Lives Matter, to Gay Straight Alliances and the Dreamer and Sunrise movements, they show that the prominence of young people as agents of change are unmistakable in contemporary political life. Yet, these movements reflect a long history of youth political mobilization and leadership, including Progressive Era labor organizing and 1960s civil rights and anti-war activism. Gash and Tichenor examine childhood as a potent category that combines with gender/gender identity, race, class, immigration status, or sexual orientation to produce powerful systems of privilege or disadvantage. Further, they argue that children also are crucial subjects of government and adult control, inspiring contention in nearly every realm of public policy, such as education, social welfare, abortion, gun control, immigration, civil rights and liberties, and criminal justice. A sweeping and innovative study, Democracy's Child reveals why the control, leveraging, and agency of young people shapes and defines our political landscape.
At a time when American political institutions are under intense criticism and facing internal and external pressures, Americans must identify opportunities for changing the status quo. Rather than reject the system as fatally flawed, Niall Guy Michelsen argues that lowering the voting age to 16 will decrease the voting gap between the college and non-college citizens. Increasing voter turnout will make the American electorate more representative of the country and add needed voices to political debates. Dr. Michelsen analyzes the nature of voting habits and concludes that too many citizens start their adult lives as non-voters and become habitual non-voters as a result. Using voter turnout data and demographics, Dr. Michelsen shows that lowering the voting age to 16 would help both college-attending and non-college-attending young adults develop voting habits and raise voter turnout.
This edited volume offers a critical, thorough, and interdisciplinary examination of arguments for eliminating the minimum democratic voting age. As children and youth increasingly assert their political voices on issues such as climate change, gun legislation, Black Lives Matter, and education reform, calls for youth enfranchisement merit further academic conversation. Leading scholars in childhood studies, political science, philosophy, history, law, medicine, and economics come together in this collection to explore the diverse assumptions behind excluding children from voting rights and why these are open to question. While arriving at different and sometimes competing conclusions, each chapter deconstructs the idea of voting as necessarily tied to age while reconstructing a more democratic imagination able to enfranchise the third of humanity made up by children and youth. Thus, this book defines and establishes a new field of academic study and public debate around children's suffrage. Chapter “The Reform that never happened: a history of children's suffrage restrictions” is available open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License via link.springer.com.
This thesis contains an introduction and four essays that together address the issues of turnout and habitual voting. Although voting is less unequal than other forms of political participation, it is still biased in favour of more socially affluent citizens. One way to achieve more equal participation is to increase the general turnout. This is the implication of the `law of dispersion', formulated by Tingsten in 1937, which states that as turnout increases, participatory equality also increases. In Essay I, co-written with Mikael Persson and Maria Solevid, we revisit Tingsten's law and find new empirical support for it. One possible path to improving general turnout is the formation of voting habits. It is argued by some scholars that voting is a habit formed early on in life, when young people encounter their first elections after coming of age. It is, however, still a matter of debate as to whether voting is an act of habit. Three of the four essays in this thesis tackle this question in various ways. In Essay II, I study voting among young people who encounter their first election in different social contexts depending on their age, and how these differing contexts affect their propensity to vote in their first and second election. In Essay III, I examine whether experiencing a European Parliament election with a low turnout as a first election affects the likelihood of casting a vote in a subsequent national parliamentary election. In Essay IV, co-written with Sven Oskarsson, we study student mock elections, which constitute the first, albeit hypothetical, election experience for many young people. The main result is that the first election a young person faces is not as important as has been claimed in previous research. Regardless of whether the initial experience takes place in a context that encourages turnout or the first election encountered is a low-stimulus election that fails to draw crowds to the polls, there is no substantial impact on turnout in subsequent elections. One implication of this finding is that lowering the voting age is not likely to increase voting rates, not even in the longer term. Den här avhandlingen innefattar ett introduktionskapitel och fyra artiklar som tillsammans behandlar valdeltagande och röstning som en vana. Även om röstning i allmänna val är den mest jämlika formen av politiskt deltagande finns ändå tydliga skillnader i deltagande mellan befolkningsgrupper med olika socioekonomisk bakgrund. Ett sätt att nå ett mer jämlikt deltagande är genom ett högre valdeltagande. Det är innebörden av det lagbundna samband som Tingsten fann år 1937 och som förutsäger att skillnaden i deltagande mellan olika grupper är mindre ju högre valdeltagandet är. I avhandlingens första artikel, samförfattad med Mikael Persson och Maria Solevid, undersöker vi om detta samband fortfarande har empiriskt stöd och finner att så är fallet. En tänkbar väg till ett högre valdeltagande går via ett främjande av vanemässig röstning. En del forskare hävdar nämligen att röstning är en vana och att den vanan formas redan i de första val där en ung person har möjlighet rösta. Huruvida röstning är en vana är dock omdebatterat. Tre av avhandlingens artiklar tar på olika sätt upp den frågan. I avhandlingens andra artikel studerar jag unga personer som beroende på när de är födda får rösta för första gången vid olika åldrar och därmed i skilda social kontexter. Frågan jag ställer är hur dessa skillnader påverkar deras benägenhet att rösta i det valet och i det därpå följande. Vissa unga personer får rösta för första gången efter att ha nått rösträttsåldern i ett Europaparlamentsval där valdeltagandet är lågt. I den tredje artikeln undersöker jag ifall den erfarenheten har någon inverkan på deltagandet i ett därpå följande riksdagsval. I den fjärde artikeln, samförfattad med Sven Oskarsson, studerar vi om de skolval som arrangeras i många skolor har någon inverkan på studenters senare deltagande i riktiga val. Avhandlingens huvudresultat är att deltagande i det första valet en ung person får rösta i saknar den betydelse för framtida valdeltagande som hävdats i tidigare forskning. Oavsett om det första valet äger rum i en kontext som främjar röstning eller om det är ett val som väcker lite intresse, får det ingen substantiell effekt på benägenheten att rösta i följande val. En implikation av detta resultat är att en sänkt rösträttsålder troligen inte skulle ge ett högre valdeltagande, inte ens på längre sikt.
During the 1960s, the new and sometimes violent political activism of the alienated young led a great many observers to make extravagant claims for a "new" youth politics which, we were told, was going to completely revolutionize the system. Since then, the voting age has been lowered to 18, and changed residence requirements have made it easier for the young to vote. But, while the portion of eligible voters under 26 is today higher than it has been for almost 70 years, do we really know enough about the political behavior of the young to make confident predictions? How much power do they, in fact, possess? How have they used this power - either directly through their vote or inderectly through their canvassing for favored candidates? Have they been effective?
