Lowering the Voting Age

Download the PDF

A smart move for Labor, a real oppor­tun­ity for the Liberals, and good public policy — can this really be?

When it comes to voting, some Australians may see it as nothing more than a hassle, one more onerous incur­sion on their time by the Government. Of course, many see it quite dif­fer­ently. It might come as a sur­prise, but sen­ti­ment today sug­gests a sig­ni­fic­ant number of young Australians under the age of 18 view the right to vote as some­thing of incred­ible value. Later this year, the Rudd Government intends to raise the issue in its second green paper on elect­oral reform. However, the debate at least is not a new one. In 2004, the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) pro­duced a research paper entitled “Lowering the Voting Age: A Discussion of the Issues from the Victorian Electoral Commission’s Perspective.” This detailed most of the popular argu­ments against lower­ing the voting age and provided con­vin­cing responses. The VEC it seems is clearly in favour of lower­ing the voting age. The report can be used equally to analyse Federal elect­oral rules.

To under­stand the issue more fully though, the polit­ical effects must also be considered.

The VEC paper states, broadly, that people are eli­gible to vote in Victoria if they answer two ques­tions, the first in the pos­it­ive and the second in the neg­at­ive: do they have a sub­stan­tial stake in the Governance of Victoria? (in the pos­it­ive) And, are they excluded from voting? (in the neg­at­ive). The author makes the claim that, “It is hard to think of an argu­ment that would show that 16 and 17 year olds do not have a sub­stan­tial stake in gov­ern­ment decisions.” The exclu­sion of young people from voting tends to stem from one of the exclu­sion cri­teria, namely that they, “Are incap­able of under­stand­ing the nature and sig­ni­fic­ance of enrol­ment and voting”. Assuming a very liberal inter­pret­a­tion of these words, the excuse for many years has been that young people just don’t under­stand the import­ance of voting, and if they did, they wouldn’t vote prop­erly. The paper goes on to high­light the argu­ments that are used to further that claim, and sys­tem­at­ic­ally provide evid­ence to the con­trary. I strongly urge anybody inter­ested in this issue to read the VEC research paper, a link to which is provided at the end of this piece.

With an appre­ci­ation of the basic debate, an aware­ness of the polit­ical motiv­a­tion is illu­min­at­ing. It is well accep­ted that young people, Australians included, tend to be polit­ic­ally left leaning. The virtues and ideals of the left are indeed admir­able. The Labor party, thanks in part to Kevin07’s presidential-like cam­paign for the Prime Ministership, has managed to recruit vast numbers of young people to their ranks, whether offi­cially or not. This has been seen in other coun­tries too, with the most recent perhaps being the elec­tion of Barack Obama in the United States. It is clear that the inspir­a­tion and mobil­isa­tion of the younger demo­graphic paid enorm­ous dividends to the Democratic party’s push. Does it seem that far-fetched to suggest that a decrease in the voting age would produce even more young votes for the left? I think not. The Liberal party con­tinu­ally struggle to engage Australia’s young people rel­at­ive to Labor, even if it is through no fault of their own. With a com­mand­ing pres­ence in youth circles, the time is right for the Labor party to be pushing for a lower voting age, it makes perfect polit­ical sense.

The case for non-compulsory voting for young people was also dis­cussed in the VEC report. In order to min­im­ise the dis­ad­vant­ages of lower­ing the voting age, the VEC support a lower­ing of the voting age to 17 with non com­puls­ory voting for those young people only. Voting would then become com­puls­ory at the age of 18, as is the law cur­rently. In many ways, this is a very attract­ive pro­pos­i­tion. It should be imple­men­ted. So, we arrive at a rather dis­turb­ing dilemma. The pro­posal is good public policy. It will lead to an increase in Democratic rights without the common dis­ad­vant­ages of health, eco­nomic or envir­on­mental con­cerns. It is founded on rational thought and clear reas­on­ing, without spin or obfus­ca­tion. However, its polit­ical rami­fic­a­tions are immense and demand careful con­sid­er­a­tion. Giving a polit­ical party easy votes isn’t the most effect­ive way to pre­serve our Democratic system and rep­res­ent­at­ive Parliament. That’s the Liberal party line.

Seen in a dif­fer­ent light though, the change may just inspire the Liberal party to make a con­cer­ted effort to try and connect with young people in a mean­ing­ful way.

This pro­posal will lead to a bene­fi­cial form of com­pet­i­tion, and it might just shake up our polit­ical process enough to make young people a key interest group, not just sym­bolic showpieces for Governments and large cor­por­a­tions. The claim by Government and cor­por­ate Australia that they ‘consult’ young people needs to be replaced with “Young people have a key stake in our con­tinual oper­a­tion; the time to treat them ser­i­ously has come.” This thought trans­form­a­tion is integ­ral to the future of good gov­ernance in Australia.

Tim Udorovic, 20, is a Policy Officer at Left Right Think-Tank, Australia’s first inde­pend­ent and non­par­tisan think-tank of young minds.

Posted Thursday, August 6th, 2009 04:29 pm Written by Left Right Think-Tank

Comments