My Voter Apathy Paper
I'd like some feedback on it, if you could :/
The first time eighteen year olds were allowed to vote in a presidential election was 1972. During that year, 50% of the 18 to 24-year-olds voted.1 In 2000, 42% of the 18-25 year olds voted.2 In 2004, about 18% of the voters were aged 18-29, leaving only about 9% of the 18-24 year olds to vote. The turnout rating was about 48%.3 This isn’t just a trend in the United States, either. This trend is also happening in Japan, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.4 There are many reasons for these young turnout ratings, such as many young voters feeling that their vote doesn’t matter because the older generations hold more political power, only white, wealthy men will win, or that politics are dirty; this problem however could be solved by introducing more candidates and focusing on the issues in which young voters identify with.
The older generations, aged 65 and older, had a voter turnout rate of 79%, leaving an incredibly large gap in the turnout ratings compared to their younger counterparts.5 Inevitably, this leads to the older generations becoming the majority and controlling politics. Because of this, many young voters feel that their vote doesn’t count, that it will be cancelled out anyway, so why even bother to vote. Unfortunately, by believing this, the younger generations give up what power they had, causing a Catch-22. By forfeiting their right to vote, the younger generations have less say-so, which causes even less turnout ratings.
Younger voters also believe the stigma that only white, wealthy men will gain in power in politics.6 As one may notice, the majority of presidents, or people in politics in generally, are all older, wealthy, white men. These men were born into politically involved families, which give off the idea that unless one is born into one of these families, it’s incredibly difficult to get involved in politics. However, as the Constitution states, one does not necessarily have to be born into one of “those” families, one must just meet certain standards: a certain age, citizenship, and location of living. It has been obvious however that the price for running (advertisement, traveling, funding, etc.) for any sort of public office has dramatically risen, so gaining support and money for one of these individuals not born into a political family may become more difficult.
Other voters believe that politics is a dirty business, and that the government is corrupt. These voters believe that the candidates with the moral and ethical values that they agree with would never run for office, because they couldn’t stomach the business, such as reporters and cutting “deals”.6 However, there are ways around these actions in politics. True, there may be dirty politicians, but for every dirty politician there is an equally as clean one. To do any job one must sacrifice and make deals, of which they might not always agree with, but just because one doesn’t agree with it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s “dirty.”
One way to “cure” this case of voter apathy is to include more minorities in the actual ranks of politicians, such as African-Americans, Asian Americans, women, etc., and focusing some of the subjects on to those which the younger voters can more easily identify with. For example, 20-year-old voters may have a difficult time connecting with the subject of Social Security. However, if the candidates focused on something with which they could strong identify with, such as college costs, or helping with the cost of living for college students and freshly graduated individuals, one might observe higher voter turnout ratings. By including more minorities into the “ranks”, the message will be sent that not only white, wealthy men will make it in politics. This gives hope to the voter that they will have more options and opinions to choose from, and that their particular viewpoint will be expressed.
As stated, there are many reasons for low voter turnout ratings among the young voters. If not because they feel that their vote doesn’t matter, or that politics is a dirty business, there are a thousand other reasons which one might give. The opinion of the author is that this is caused because, at this point in history, there is nothing for the youth to get behind. This generation has not had a world war, or a Vietnam, or a national depression, and so there is nothing for the generation to strongly fight for. We’ll see how this war on terrorism changes that, and how it effects the voter turnout ratings in the years to come.
The first time eighteen year olds were allowed to vote in a presidential election was 1972. During that year, 50% of the 18 to 24-year-olds voted.1 In 2000, 42% of the 18-25 year olds voted.2 In 2004, about 18% of the voters were aged 18-29, leaving only about 9% of the 18-24 year olds to vote. The turnout rating was about 48%.3 This isn’t just a trend in the United States, either. This trend is also happening in Japan, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.4 There are many reasons for these young turnout ratings, such as many young voters feeling that their vote doesn’t matter because the older generations hold more political power, only white, wealthy men will win, or that politics are dirty; this problem however could be solved by introducing more candidates and focusing on the issues in which young voters identify with.
The older generations, aged 65 and older, had a voter turnout rate of 79%, leaving an incredibly large gap in the turnout ratings compared to their younger counterparts.5 Inevitably, this leads to the older generations becoming the majority and controlling politics. Because of this, many young voters feel that their vote doesn’t count, that it will be cancelled out anyway, so why even bother to vote. Unfortunately, by believing this, the younger generations give up what power they had, causing a Catch-22. By forfeiting their right to vote, the younger generations have less say-so, which causes even less turnout ratings.
Younger voters also believe the stigma that only white, wealthy men will gain in power in politics.6 As one may notice, the majority of presidents, or people in politics in generally, are all older, wealthy, white men. These men were born into politically involved families, which give off the idea that unless one is born into one of these families, it’s incredibly difficult to get involved in politics. However, as the Constitution states, one does not necessarily have to be born into one of “those” families, one must just meet certain standards: a certain age, citizenship, and location of living. It has been obvious however that the price for running (advertisement, traveling, funding, etc.) for any sort of public office has dramatically risen, so gaining support and money for one of these individuals not born into a political family may become more difficult.
Other voters believe that politics is a dirty business, and that the government is corrupt. These voters believe that the candidates with the moral and ethical values that they agree with would never run for office, because they couldn’t stomach the business, such as reporters and cutting “deals”.6 However, there are ways around these actions in politics. True, there may be dirty politicians, but for every dirty politician there is an equally as clean one. To do any job one must sacrifice and make deals, of which they might not always agree with, but just because one doesn’t agree with it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s “dirty.”
One way to “cure” this case of voter apathy is to include more minorities in the actual ranks of politicians, such as African-Americans, Asian Americans, women, etc., and focusing some of the subjects on to those which the younger voters can more easily identify with. For example, 20-year-old voters may have a difficult time connecting with the subject of Social Security. However, if the candidates focused on something with which they could strong identify with, such as college costs, or helping with the cost of living for college students and freshly graduated individuals, one might observe higher voter turnout ratings. By including more minorities into the “ranks”, the message will be sent that not only white, wealthy men will make it in politics. This gives hope to the voter that they will have more options and opinions to choose from, and that their particular viewpoint will be expressed.
As stated, there are many reasons for low voter turnout ratings among the young voters. If not because they feel that their vote doesn’t matter, or that politics is a dirty business, there are a thousand other reasons which one might give. The opinion of the author is that this is caused because, at this point in history, there is nothing for the youth to get behind. This generation has not had a world war, or a Vietnam, or a national depression, and so there is nothing for the generation to strongly fight for. We’ll see how this war on terrorism changes that, and how it effects the voter turnout ratings in the years to come.