Lower the voting age to sixteen was the surprising proposal of a symposium I participated in at Oxford University — with no dissent among the representatives of Emerging Market nations.
This included Brazil, Russia, India and China — a large chunk of the world comprising fifty percent of the world’s population and forty percent of the world’s economy.
Last year the group studied the impact of the aging population; this year, the surging youth bulge.
The rapid growth of the youth population may have positive results. It may yield a youth dividend — more workers means more productivity.
Or it may be negative, leading to high unemployment and political upheaval. We saw youth violence played out on our television screens, as unemployed, uneducated young people topple governments and provide recruits for terrorism.
The fifty symposium participants were considering ways to engage this new wave of young people.
I expected we would recommend more education, better health care, and job creation. I didn’t expect that lowering the voting age to 16 would receive unanimous approval.
The idea was that young people from 16 to 18 must be taken seriously if they’re to be integrated into society. If they had the power of the vote at 16, they would have more control over their own future. They might not take to the streets if they could enter the voting booth. But only two countries have a 16-year-old voting age today, Brazil and Indonesia, so it’s hard to know the impact.
The proposal made me wonder what would happen if we lowered the voting age to 16 here.
"Young people today are more mature and knowledgeable than we were and more impatient about demanding change." — Madeleine Kunin
Certainly, preparation for citizenship would have to be well taught in high school. And instead of feeling shut out of government, young people would be voters of equal standing with their parents and grandparents.
When the habit of voting is inculcated early it can last a lifetime. Issues like opiate addiction and drunk driving would receive greater attention. Candidates would speak at schools as often as they do at senior citizen centers.
The counter argument is that young people may not be mature enough, nor educated enough to cast a ballot. And they might be more easily swayed by passionate rhetoric.
So I’m not yet ready to sign on to a 16-year-old voting age, but I do think it’s time to debate it. Young people today are more mature and knowledgeable than we were and more impatient about demanding change. It’s time to discuss whether to invite them into the democratic process earlier rather than later.
