Comm2_MHD2_Somozo

Argumentative Research Paper

1

WOULD LOWERING THE VOTING AGE BENEFIT THE NATION?

Somozo, Beah Davee Marie Hortelano

2014-35733
May 28, 2015
University of the Philippines, Manila

Prof. Hope Bayani Quijano

Comm2_MHD2_Somozo
Argumentative Research Paper
2
ABSTRACT

At present the voting age is at 18. However, this age poses many problem with regards to voter
turnout, perspectives, and involvement in current issues. Lowering the voting age to 16 is seen to be the
probable solution beneficial to these problem. The study shows that young people are as interested in
politics as adults. Young people engage with politics in conversations and through voting when actual issues
are concerned. Parents do not strongly influence young peoples political perceptions and confidence. Apart
from normative views on the importance to vote. Political perceptions of young people are not substantially
related to parental educational background. Discussing political issues in schools increases students
political confidence and closeness to political parties in ways nothing else does. Teaching classes dealing
with political structures itself is not sufficient to enhance political understanding and engagement. Schools
need to allow for informed political discussions in the classroom. Studies also show that while voter turnout
of young people aged below 18 are relatively lower than the norm, in some cases it is still higher than those
aged 18. Voting quality is also seen to be on par with older voters showing that the youth do cast votes that
represent their ideals well. Studies also show that 16 and 17 year olds are neurologically and socially mature
enough to vote responsibly. The engagement of the youth also affects those of their peers and family,
especially that of their parents. In this study, it shows that lowering the voting age to 16 would be beneficial
to the nation. Studies also further illustrate that those aged 16 and 17 are ready and capable of voting
properly. Lowering the voting age would also increase political awareness for all involved.

Comm2_MHD2_Somozo
Argumentative Research Paper
3
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Democracy. A government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by
them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free
elections (Democracy, n.d.). In simpler terms, A form of government in which people choose leaders by
voting (Democracy, n.d.). It is a form of government made by the people for the people.
Having the right to vote is both an access to real influence and an important symbol of being a part
of a democracy (Srivastava, Seth, & Niekerk, 2013). It is a symbol of ones connection to the government.
With the right to vote, one has the ability to put people into positions of power. People who can change
society for better. People can have a say as to how a government should be run. Their voices and opinions
will be better heard by people in position. People in position are more inclined to help or be considerate of
the people who put them in position.
In the Philippines, the age to vote is currently at 18. At this age, they are considered legal in the
eyes of the law. But the current voting age faces many problems. First would be the lessening of voter
turnout. The level of turnout at elections is often seen as an indicator of the health of a democracy (as cited
in Wagner, Johann, & Kritzinger, 2012). But at this age, the youth has already graduated high school and
has most likely left home to pursue college. Leaving home at this age, the youth has relocated to a
completely new environment where they will have to readjust. This adjustment period would cost them
precious voting years. According of a study, the average first time voter would be 20 years old (Srivastava,
Seth, & Niekerk, 2013). The much needed local votes of these people lost. Another is that this age group
has different opinions and ideas compared to those of a different age group. At 18, some may have joined
the workforce. No longer directly involved in the local service of education, the opinions of these
individuals would surely be different. Another is that the youth below the voting age has no voice in
problems directly involving them. The opinion and ideas of these minority unheard by the people in charge.
How can progress happen when those directly involved have no voices? The solution is to lower the voting
age to 16. At the age of 16, the youth is at a transitional period between adolescence and adulthood. The
youth are allowed to drive. To pay taxes. Even independent living from parents are observed. With the K
to 12 Bill passed, the average age the youth will finish high school would be 18 or 19 years old. At the age
of 16, the youth has already experienced or are very involved in much of the local services, especially that
of education and health services.
This paper studies if lowering the voting age to 16 would be beneficial for the nation. The youth of
ages 16 and 17 would still be safely entrenched in their locality inducing higher turnout rates. Politicians
would also be forced to take into account the needs involving this group (Srivastava, Seth, & Niekerk,
2013).

Comm2_MHD2_Somozo
Argumentative Research Paper
4
This study is important for it spreads awareness and relays information on the topic. According to
the census of the National Statistics Office of the Philippines (2014), approximately 2% of the whole
population of the Philippines are between the ages of 15 17. This study affects a relatively significant
portion of the population. In the words of our National Hero, Dr. Jose Rizal, Ang kabataan ang pag-asa
ng bayan translated The Youth is the hope of our Nation. This topic affects each and every one of the
spoken Hopes of our Nation. This topic also spreads awareness to the youth to be more politically active.
Political activism will help improve the nation. Being politically active and informed allows one to vote for
the right people for the right positions. If not vote, inform and discuss this topic with others who have the
power to vote. Once in position, these right people in the right positions would, in turn, do the jobs assigned
to them properly. If the jobs are performed well, the Nation will function like a well-tuned machine. A welloiled nation is a progressing nation. Once the nation progresses, everybody progresses. A win-win situation
for all involved.
The focus of this study is only on the benefits of lowering the voting age. Furthermore, the studies
collected in this paper was not based on the local population but on international studies based on
international localities. Errors due to demographics may be observed. This paper is meant purely for
informational purposes and not as propaganda material.

Comm2_MHD2_Somozo
Argumentative Research Paper
5
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1
2.1.1

Studies for the Lowering of Voting Age

How lowering the voting age to 16 can be an opportunity to improve youth political
engagement
There is a range of common concerns about why the voting age should not be lowered to 16. This

briefing engages with some of the most dominant concerns in public debate empirically. It uses data from
two representative surveys of under 18-year olds in Scotland conducted in 2013 and 2014 in the context of
the independence referendum and updates previous re-search on this matter based on the first survey only.
The findings provide an optimistic conclusion: Not only do we find little evidence to support arguments
against lowering the voting on the basis that this may have ad-verse effects. In addition we find that
lowering the voting age may have positive impacts on political engagement, if certain structural provisions,
mainly through schools, can be established (Eichhorn, 2014).
According to a study done by a team of the University of Edinburghs School of Social and Political
Science led by Dr. Jan Eichhorn (2014), lowering the voting age to 16 can be an opportunity to improve
youth political engagement. The research has disproved 4 concerns against lowering the voting age. The
first was that the youth are simply not interested with politics. According to their data, the levels of political
interest of the youth are equivalent to those of adults on average. And although they are less attracted to
traditional institutions, they are willing to engage in classic forms when actual issues are concerned. We
see the engagement also exemplified by the fact that nearly all young people surveyed had discussed the
referendum with at least one, but mostly multiple groups of people. The next concern was that the youth
will simply follow their parents political choices so they need not vote. Their study showed that more than
40% of the youth actually had different political views from their parents. Young people seem to distinguish
between normative behavior that parents suggest as important (such as voting), but do not see their parents
as sources of authoritative political insight. Another concern was that even if there are no negative
consequences, why cant the youth wait for 2 more years? The research showed increased student political
confidence and closeness to a political party when the issues are discussed in class. Early engagement with
politics, in which young people have a vote that is supported through schools as a neutral space for
discussion, may improve the starting point into their political lives. The last concern was that schools should
not engage with political debate to avoid inappropriate politicization. Students political understanding and
engagement is not necessarily enhanced by classes teaching political structures. But schools should allow
an environment where students can have informed political discussions.

Comm2_MHD2_Somozo
Argumentative Research Paper
6
2.1.2

Voting at 16: Turnout and the quality of vote choice

Critics of giving citizens under 18 the right to vote argue that such teenagers lack the ability and

motivation to participate effectively in elections. If this argument is true, lowering the voting age would
have negative consequences for the quality of democracy. We test the argument using survey data from
Austria, the only European country with a voting age of 16 in nation-wide elections. While the turnout
levels of young people under 18 are relatively low, their failure to vote cannot be explained by a lower
ability or motivation to participate. In addition, the quality of these citizens' choices is similar to that of
older voters, so they do cast votes in ways that enable their interests to be represented equally well. These
results are encouraging for supporters of a lower voting age (Wagner, Johann, & Kritzinger, 2012).

2.1.3

Experiments in Political Socialization: Kids Voting USA as a Model for Civic Education
Reform
Even as a brief school intervention, taught only during the final weeks of the 2002 campaign, Kids

Voting stimulated news attention, cognition, discussion with parents and friends, deliberative dispositions,
and civic identity. These results held up despite a rigorous block of demographic controls. The strongest
impacts involved discussion inside and outside the family. As neophyte citizens, KVUSA students were
much more responsive to the civic environment, much more attuned to political messages flowing from
media and schools, and more willing to share their knowledge and opinions with parents and friends. The
sheer size of their discussion networks had grown significantly. We consequently judge the breadth of Kids
Votings immediate effects as impressive in light of prior studies showing modest influence from standard
civic instruction. Parents got caught up in their childrens enthusiasm for politics. Student-parent
conversations stimulated by Kids Voting in 2002 predicted the following measures of parent civic
involvement in 2004: news attention, cognition, discussion inside and outside the home, deliberative habits,
support for unconventional participation, volunteering, and activism (McDevitt & Kiousis, 2006).

2.1.4

Child Abuse and Neglect: Challenges and Opportunities

Having the right to is both an access to real influence and an important symbol of being a part of a

democracy. Many Countries in Europe have lowered the voting age already. The test election was deemed
a success after the 16 and 17 year olds had a turnout of 58% which is considerably higher than the 46%
turnout among 18 and 21 year olds. The main arguments for lowering the voting age were that if the voting
age was 18, the average age of a first time voter would be 20. And High School ends by the age of 19 in
Norway where many of the first time voters would have left home and the municipality they have lived in.
The community needs their votes. Another was that the youth has a lot of experience regarding the
municipal services, such as school and health system. Lowering the voting age also forces the politicians
to take into account the needs of the youth.

Comm2_MHD2_Somozo
Argumentative Research Paper
7
In Norway, Children were involved in the recruitment of the new Ombudsman for Children. The
rationale was that in order to become a good Ombudsman for Children, one must be able to communicate
and connect with them. The recruitment process was inspired by the one Ireland used in the recruitment
of their Ombudsman for Children. Children aged 12 to 17 from different youth organizations formed the
youth panel. The youth panel helped decide the needed credentials to hold the position. They interviewed
the candidates and even submitted evaluative reports on each candidate (Srivastava, Seth, & Niekerk, 2013).

2.1.5

American Sixteen- and Seventeen-Year-Olds Are Ready to Vote

American 16- and 17-year-olds ought to be allowed to vote in state and national elections. This

claim rests upon a line of argument that begins with an exegesis of legal and philosophical notions of
citizenship that identify core qualities of citizenship: membership, concern for rights, and participation in
society. Each of these qualities is present in rudimentary form in childhood and adolescence. Analyses of
national survey data demonstrate that by 16 years of agebut not before American adolescents manifest
levels of development in each quality of citizenship that are approximately the same as those apparent in
young American adults who are allowed to vote. Awarding voting rights to 16- and 17-year-olds is
important, given the changing age demographics in the country, which have resulted in the growing block
of older voters displacing the interests of younger Americans in the political arena. Finally, the authors
critically examine claims that adolescents are neither neurologically nor socially mature enough to vote
responsibly and conclude that empirical evidence and fairness suggest that 16- and 17-year-olds ought to
be awarded the vote (Hart & Atkins, 2011).

2.2
2.2.1

Studies against the Lowering of Voting Age

Should 16-Year-Olds Be Allowed to Vote in Westminster Elections? Public Opinion and
Electoral Franchise Reform
Britain has a long and often celebrated history of progressively expanding the electoral franchise.

In recent years, the idea has been advanced to allow 16-year-olds to vote in general elections. This article
uses data from a July 2013 national survey to examine public attitudes on this topic. These data show that
less than one person in six favors lowering the voting age, with a large majority preferring the status quo.
Youngerbut not the youngestpeople, men, working class and lower income persons, self-identified
members of the ethnic majority and Scots tend to be most favorably disposed towards lowering the voting
age. Although statistically significant, none of the relationships of interest is especially strong. Thus, an
effort to lower the age of majority would lack widespread popularity and be only weakly leveraged by the
demographics of the British electorate. If franchise change occurs, it likely will be the result of an elitedriven project that succeeds because of widespread public indifference (Birch, Clarke, & Whiteley, 2015).

Comm2_MHD2_Somozo
Argumentative Research Paper
8
CHAPTER III
DISCUSSION

The study shows that young people are as interested in politics as adults. Young people engage
with politics in conversations and through voting when actual issues are concerned. Parents do not strongly
influence young peoples political perceptions and confidence. Apart from normative views on the
importance to vote. Political perceptions of young people are not substantially related to parental
educational background. Discussing political issues in schools increases students political confidence and
closeness to political parties in ways nothing else does. Teaching classes dealing with political structures
itself is not sufficient to enhance political understanding and engagement. Schools need to allow for
informed political discussions in the classroom (Eichhorn, 2014). Studies also show that while voter turnout
of young people aged below 18 are relatively lower than the norm (Wagner, Johann, & Kritzinger, 2012),
in some cases it is still higher than those aged 18 (Srivastava, Seth, & Niekerk, 2013). Voting quality is also
seen to be on par with older voters showing that the youth do cast votes that represent their ideals well
(Wagner, Johann, & Kritzinger, 2012). Studies also show that 16 and 17 year olds are neurologically and
socially mature enough to vote responsibly (Hart & Atkins, 2011). The engagement of the youth also affects
those of their peers and family, especially that of their parents (McDevitt & Kiousis, 2006). Furthermore,
several studies discredit the arguments against the lowering of voting age such as teenage citizens are not
able or motivated to participate effectively in politics and that this both drives their turnout decisions and
means that their electoral choices are of lower quality (Wagner, Johann, & Kritzinger, 2012) and that these
citizens are not neurologically nor socially mature enough to vote responsibly (Hart & Atkins, 2011).

CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this study, it shows that lowering the voting age to 16 would be beneficial to the nation. Studies
also further illustrate that those aged 16 and 17 are ready and capable of voting properly. Lowering the
voting age would also increase political awareness for all involved.
The author recommends that further research and testing be done to get truly accurate data. The
author also recommends that testing be done in the locality where the hypothesis be applied in order to get
accurate data as to the effectivity of the solution in the locality.

Comm2_MHD2_Somozo
Argumentative Research Paper
9
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Birch, S., Clarke, H. D., & Whiteley, P. (2015). Should 16-Year-Olds Be Allowed to Vote in Westminster
Elections? Public Opinion and Electoral Franchise Reform. Parliamentary Affairs, 68(2), 291313. doi:10.1093/pa/gsu019
Democracy. (n.d.). Retrieved May 26, 2015, from Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy
Eichhorn, J. (2014). How lowering the voting age to 16 can be an opportunity. Retrieved April 29, 2015,
from
http://www.politischepartizipation.de/images/downloads/dpart_Eichhorn_16VotingAge_Briefing.
pdf
Hart, D., & Atkins, R. (2011). American Sixteen- and Seventeen-Year-Olds Are Ready to Vote. The
ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 633(1), 201-202.
doi:10.1177/0002716210382395
McDevitt, M., & Kiousis, S. (2006). Experiments in Political Socialization: Kids Voting USA as a Model
for Civic Education Reform. CIRCLE: The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning
& Engagement. Retrieved April 29, 2015, from
http://civicyouth.org/PopUps/WorkingPapers/WP49McDevitt.pdf
National Statistics Office. (2014). Philippines in Figures 2014. Quezon City: National Statistics Office.
Srivastava, R. N., Seth, R., & Niekerk, J. V. (2013). Child Abuse and Neglect: Challenges and
Opportunities. New Delhi, India: JP Medical Ltd. Retrieved April 29, 2015, from
https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=SgpEpebbhWcC&pg=PA233&dq=Lowering+the+voting
+age+to+16&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ERpGVf7zDYKwmwW85oDAAw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q
=Lowering%20the%20voting%20age%20to%2016&f=false
Wagner, M., Johann, D., & Kritzinger, S. (2012). Voting at 16: Turnout and the quality of vote choice.
Electoral Studies, 31(2), 372383. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2012.01.007