Why is youth voter turnout in American elections consistently the lowest of all age demographics? Each generation has seen their 18- to 29-year-olds disengaged with politics for a plethora of reasons.
Whether it be geography, education, time, or inability to vote by mail, young people face multiple barriers as they transition into an adulthood that begs for active civic engagement but provides limited resources to achieve it.
Students who seek higher education outside of their home state must deal with the infamously bureaucratic DMV in order to change where and how they can vote, and those living in a new region may have no knowledge of the local and state politics.
Dr. Paul Lewis, an associate professor in the School of Politics and Global Studies at ASU, explained that although young people today are navigating a political atmosphere brimming with partisan divide and political apathy, “the youngest group has always been the least participating group in politics.”
Lewis said that in order to make something habitual, it must be practiced, and voting every two years “is not yet a habit for young people” as they have just gained this newfound right upon turning 18.
Voter turnout from 18- to -29-year-olds in midterm and presidential elections has been the lowest of the age demographics throughout history, but young people produced a substantial increase in turnout in the 2018 midterm elections.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, “among 18- to 29-year-olds, voter turnout went from 20 percent in 2014 to 36 percent in 2018, the largest percentage point increase for any age group — a 79 percent jump.”
He explained that this unknowingness on how, where or when to vote is not the only factor in determining one’s aptitude to be civically engaged.
“If you think of determinants of (youth voter) turnout, educational attainment is a big one … you have people who are still learning (about politics),” Lewis said. “While many are in college, others are not, so they have not quite been through the educational process yet.”
Lewis added that income and “stability of residence” are two major variables in determining youth voter turnout.
“Every time we move we have to re-register at the new address,” Lewis said. “Registration, while it’s not a big headache, it’s one more barrier that can affect people on their way to the voting booth.”
Any member of Generation Z is no stranger to moving around. A housing study conducted by Harvard University determined that “among householders under age 25, some 78 percent are renters.”
With leases usually ending after a year and career opportunities dwindling by the hour, younger Americans are the age demographic most likely to find themselves jetting across the country for permanent business, not pleasure.
Lewis added that a flighty residential status is a hindrance to voting because individuals find themselves more invested in local and state politics if they have lived within the same community for a prolonged period of time.
Along with these factors, polling locations that require identification prior to letting someone into the voting booth can act as a barrier for student voters.
“In Texas, a student ID from the University of Texas would not be considered sufficient, and yet a state issued gun license was,” Lewis said, referring to Texas Senate Bill 5, passed at the start of 2018.
He added that many states have their party primary elections during spring break for universities.
Lewis said that because of the notion that college-educated youths are typically more liberal, “a strategic, conservative-leaning state legislature may have that in the back of their minds as they devise rules for voting.”
A Surge of Independence
Despite all of these mountains a young person must overcome to exercise their right to vote, members of Generation Z seem to be more inclined to engage in politics through bilateral discourse.
As Generation Z grew within the American electorate in 2020, Millennials, Generation X and Boomer percentages began to decline, according to a Pew Research Center study.
Dr. Richard Herrera, an associate professor in the School of Politics and Global Studies at ASU, said that throughout his tenure, he hasn’t noticed a major difference in an aptitude for politics in young people, except in one case.
“I would say that the most current generation at least talks more about being active,” Herrera said. “There’s been a greater interest in hearing other people’s point of view, even though you’re probably going to disagree.”
A study from the Pew Research Center states that in 2020, 10% of the American electorate will be a member of Generation Z.
He added that he viewed the youth of the 90s and early 200s as being more partisan, while “there seems to be this sort of resurgence of independence” among young people today.
“They might like a little bit of this and a little bit of that, but they don’t really want to commit that way,” Herrera said. “They want to be interested in politics but not have to choose a side in terms of parties.”
Young people are registering as independents more frequently. A Pew Research Center study found that 44% of millennials were registered as independents in 2017.
Those with more radical views feel that the American two-party system is entirely inadequate in representing their beliefs, and many have abandoned their previous partisan loyalty to help build grassroots movements.
Alexia Isais, an undergraduate student studying political science and president of Students for Socialism, explained that “American electoral politics is very confined.”
“We are told that we have two options. And more often than not the candidates that come through the parties are not exciting,” Isais said.
She said that in recent years, certain political figures have risen within the party structures with the help of populism's firm grip on American politics.
“It’s hard to look past American electoral politics just because it seems like that’s all that there is,” Isais said. “But in reality the structure of things is so much more broad, and the system is much more flawed than we think.”
Social Media and Politics
As young people begin to shift towards independence from parties, they have a new weapon at their disposal in the game of political and ideological discourse: Twitter.
Joe Pitts, an undergraduate student studying business law and Vice President of College Republicans at ASU, explained that “social media to a very large extent has poisoned politics” for young and old individuals alike.
Pitts said that Twitter’s “algorithms are made to make you feel happy,” and that the more one engages with other users online, they begin to see an influx of niche political content on their feed.
“Social media has become a public forum, but it's a public forum that is so individualized,” Pitts said. “Unless you purposefully go out there and try, it doesn’t encourage debate and the free marketplace of ideas.”
Herrera echoed Pitts’ sentiments, explaining that although Twitter allows users to engage with each other instantly and easily, the concept of a curated political feed can be toxic to the state of open political discussion.
Herrera added that another major change with Twitter was that young people are habitually looking to public figures for the dissemination of important information rather than news organizations.
“That is to me a little unsettling because it’s narrowing the viewpoint,” Herrera said. “But I think that’s almost always been the case, at least since the reduction in number of news organizations.”
However, Herrera said that he has also seen his students use Twitter to formulate online communities of both like-minded individuals and those with opposing views to discuss politics amongst themselves.
Pitts said that on the other side of the debate, “the positive of (Twitter) is you get more kids civically engaged, you get them more active.”
He explained although information is easily found and digested in the 21st century, “it is much more rampant that you see a political skew in whatever you read, even if it presents itself as nonpartisan.”
Pitts said that “polarization is not a good thing in any sense of the word” as it pushes individuals to the ideological fringes of society, whether it be communism, ethno-nationalism or anarchism.
“The super majority of our generation of Americans and across the world are not on those fringes, and they shouldn’t be, because the ideologies are dumb, Pitts said.
Making Voting Easier
While Twitter has exploded in terms of political content on the platform, younger people are still finding it difficult to direct their political pique towards the ballot box.
National efforts, like automatic voter registration, to help expand the number of registered voters have been picking up speed. Oregon has shifted to an AVR system that has been called a “phenomenal success” by the state’s governor.
Research from the Center for American Progress in 2018 indicated that “if every state implemented Oregon’s model of AVR, more than 22 million registered voters could be added to state voter rolls in just the first year.”
Pitts explained that although the ideal would be to increase voter turnout universally, “we don’t want a higher turnout that’s artificially inflated.”
Pitts explained that he worried if automatic voter registration were implemented federally, voters would be “pushed to the polls, not because they actually believe in a candidate or a movement, but just because they can.”
“Clearly, it would increase turnout. The question is ‘Is that actually making America a more civically engaged society’,” Pitts said.
Pitts noted that voter turnout has had a multitude of imposing variables over time.
“During the Industrial Revolution and the Gilded Age (people) like to say ‘Well look how high (voter) turnout was’,” Pitts said. “Yeah, it was high because corporate bosses would go employee-to-employee and say ‘Hey, here’s your voter card, vote for the candidate that’s going to help my corporate interests.’
“So you can’t make voter turnout the only metric of how civically engaged a country is … you have to weigh it with other factors,” Pitts said.
Life Shaping Our Ideologies
As Twitter opens up new ideological doors to younger users and they begin to think critically about their lives, some members of Generation Z are opting out of partisanship for more adverse political positions.
Herrera said that a person’s life experiences directly affect their aptitude to vote and how people view the role of government, and that “there’s a lot to be said for a generation that grows up with the War on Terror.”
Isais’ life experiences have driven her to adopt new views that better represent her, and these experiences that intertwine with politics have led her to a new conclusion regarding partisanship.
She explained that she views Democrats and Republicans as being “two sides of the same coin,” and that “they both represent the same interests if you put them on a checklist.”
Isais cited bipartisan support for use of force against Iraq in 2002, or Joint Resolution 114, and President Clinton’s signing of NAFTA, as two key pieces of legislation that negatively impacted marginalized communities within the U.S. and abroad.
She added that “transcending what you’re told,” or adopting a more radical ideology, allows people to engage with American politics in a different format.
A current national talking point that was once a distant radical dream is the implementation of Medicare for All, a healthcare initiative backed by Senator Bernie Sanders. Public advocacy for an expansion of government healthcare has grown in recent years.
Despite this mounting support, assumed Democratic nominee Joe Biden suggested in March 2020 that he would veto a Congress-approved Medicare for All bill to assess the true costs it would take on.
Isais said that although many regard this era of politics as overtly polarized and divided, she feels “fortunate along with everyone else in my generation” to live through a time where radical views are gradually becoming more accepted in American political discourse.
“My generation is the one that has taken a lot of the blow. We live in an era where all we know is war, all we know is a crippling economy, all we know is our parents losing our jobs or some sort of economic instability,” Isais said. “Even having trouble finding jobs ourselves … we are really lost, and there’s not much that we feel capable of doing other than talking about and acting upon the issues that affect us.”
She explained that she once felt out of control in her life, and “she sort of realized that she’s not in control of it.”
“It’s really troubling. You kind of grow up traumatized your whole life and you want to see some change come out of that, and you want to actually be that change,” Isais said “The fact that all of us are supporters of radical politics more than ever before, I think that’s really optimistic of our generation. I’m proud to be a part of that.”
Comments