Voting Flashcards
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
Introduction
Proponents of the reform argue that 16 year olds are already politically and socially responsible in many areas of life- they can work, pay taxes and make medial decisions- and thus deserve a voice at the ballot box. Opponents argue that many lack the maturity and political understanding to make informed choices, and that expanding the franchise might lower turnout and undermine electoral credibility. However, this essay will argue that the voting should be lowered to 16, as evidence from the UK’s devolved nations and comparative democracies show that these young citizens are not only capable of participation, but that their inclusion would enhance long-term civic engagement and democratic fairness.
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
1: concerns about maturity, independence and political competence
Point
It could be argued that the voting age should remain at 18 because 16 and 17 year olds lack the independence and political literacy required for responsible participation.
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
1: concerns about maturity, independence and political competence
Points and analyses (AGAINST)
-at 16, most individuals in England are still in full-time education, live at home and rely financially on their parents or guardians. Critics argue that this continued economic dependency and parental influence compromises their ability to vote independently or critically assess political information. In contrast, 18 year olds are more likely to be living away from home, attending university nor working- a lifestyle transition that arguably encourages a more autonomous and considered approach to politics.
-research also highlights gaps in political knowledge. A YouGov poll 2017 found that only 30% of 16-17 year olds could correctly identify the Chancellor of the Exchequer and that many struggled with basic policy distinctions. This is reinforced by the inconsistent delivery of citizenship education, which remains a non-mandatory subject at GCSE level in England- leading to highly variable standards across schools. Without robust, compulsory civic education, critics fear that enfranchising younger voters may result in shallow or emotionally driven choices.
-turnout data further raises questions. Among those already enfranchised, the 18-24 age group had the lowest turnout in the 2019 general election (47%) compared to 74% of over 65s. Opponents argue that extending the vote to 16 and 17 year olds may only deepen generational turnout disparities and offer symbolic reform without substantive democratic benefit
-while political literacy and independent thinking are legitimate concerns, they apply to adults as well. The key question is whether the state should exclude an entire demographic based on average maturity, or work to cultivate and support participation- especially among future voters
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
1: concerns about maturity, independence and political competence
Volta
However a more convincing argument is that 16 year olds already entrusted with significant legal and moral responsibilities and should therefore be granted the democratic right to vote
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
1: concerns about maturity, independence and political competence
Points and analyses (FOR)
-at 16, young people can join armed forces with parental consent, get married, leave school, consent to sexual activity and pay tax and national insurance if employed. These rights reflect a legal recognition of moral agency and social contribution. To withhold the vote while allowing these responsibilities creates a demographic inconsistency where individuals are affected by laws they have no say in shaping
-the Gillick competence principle, establish in Gillick v West Norfolk AHA 1985) allows individuals under 16 to make medical decisions if they demonstrate sufficient maturity and understanding. If the law accepts that under 18s can make potentially life0altering decisions in medicine and family law, it is difficult to defend the exclusion from political decision-making
-moreover, many 16 and 17 year olds are already politically active in non-electoral forms. The UK Student Climate Network, part of the Fridays for Future movement, mobilised thousands of teenagers in school walkouts, protests and petitions demanding stronger environmental policies. This movement illustrates that young people are not politically apathetic but deeply invested in future-oriented issues- precisely the kinds of challenges governments must address
-the right to vote should not be reserved only for the most informed or independent- it is a fundamental democratic entitlement. Many 16-year olds are already civic actors, and denying them the vote discredits their political engagement and contributions.
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
2: Turnout and participation - risk of disengagement or opportunity for long-term engagement
Point
It could be argued that lowering the voting age risks weakening electoral legitimacy by expanding the franchise to a demographic less likely to participate
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
2: Turnout and participation - risk of disengagement or opportunity for long-term engagement
Points and analyses (AGAINST)
-turnout among young voters is consistently low. In 2019, only 47% of 18-2 year olds voted, and in 2005 that figure was just 38%. Critics worry that enfranchising 16 and 17 year olds will introduce even lower participation rates, reducing the perceived legitimacy of electoral outcomes and inflating the “non-voting electorate”.
-surveys also show that political participation among teenagers is often issue-based and local, rather than focused on formal electoral politics. For example, the British Youth Council’s 2019 Youth Voice Census found that while over 70% of respondents cared about social issues, less than half felt confident engaging in formal political systems. Critics argue that this emotional connection to causes does not translate into informed or sustained voting behaviour.
-if the aim is to raise participation, then lowering the voting age must be accompanied by structural reforms- such as civic education, voter registration drives and outreach. Turnout reflects systemic design not innate disinterest.
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
2: Turnout and participation - risk of disengagement or opportunity for long-term engagement
Volta
However a more convincing argument is that early enfranchisement encourages lifelong voting habits, especially when paired with institutional support.
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
2: Turnout and participation - risk of disengagement or opportunity for long-term engagement
Points and analyses (FOR)
-the 2014 Scottish independence Referendum provided a real-world case study: 16 and 17 year olds were allowed to vote for the first time, and turnout among that age group was estimated at over 75%. Follow up surveys by the Electoral commission found that most young voters felt informed and engaged- and that the vote had strengthened their identification as active citizens.
-since 2021, both Scotland and Wales have permanently extended the vote to 16 year olds in devolved and local elections. Early evaluations suggest that turnout among first time voters, especially those still in school or supported by civic infrastructure is significantly higher than among first time voters enfranchised at 18, who are often in transitional life stages, university, moving home, employment shifts.
-in Austria, which lowered the voting age to 16 in 2007, studies have shown that 16 and 17 year olds vote at similar or higher rates than 18-21 year olds, and that habit formation is stronger among those who vote earlier. Researchers (zeglovits and Aichholzer 201) found that early enfranchisement when paired with civic education, boosted democratic engagement long-term.
-the evidence shows that 16 is not too young to vote, in fact, it may be the ideal age to begin voting, especially when it is embedded within social and educational structures that reinforce civic identity.
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
3: democratic consistency and principle of fairness
Point
It could be argued that retaining the voting age at 18 maintains consistency with international democratic norms and protects electoral integrity
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
3: democratic consistency and principle of fairness
Points and analyses (AGAINST)
-most established democracies including the united states, canada, germany and france- retain 18 as the minimum voting age. The UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, ratified by the UK, defines adulthood as beginning from 18. From this perspective, 18 reflects a global standard of maturity.
-opponents also cite the administrative and legal complexities in lowering the voting age. Changes would require reforms to electoral registration systems, updates to citizenship and political education curricula and potentially safeguarding frameworks for campaign access to minors. Some argue that these efforts may detract from more urgent reforms, such as increasing overall turnout or reducing voter suppression among existing groups
-while these concerns are not trivial, they reflect pragmatic caution not democratic principle. Democracy is a living system- and norms evolve in response to changing conceptions of fairness and inclusion
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
3: democratic consistency and principle of fairness
Volta
However a more convincing argument is that retaining 18 creates unjustifiable inconsistencies and violates the principle of equal citizenship
1: evaluate the view that the voting age in the UK should be lowered to 16
3: democratic consistency and principle of fairness
Points and analyses (FOR)
-the current system creates a postcode lottery for young voters. A 16 year old in Glasgow can vote in Scottish Parliament and local elections; a 16 year old in London cannot vote in any public election. This fragmentation undermines coherence and equity in the UK’s democratic system.
-the principle of affected interests- rooted in democratic theory and advocated by thinkers like Robert Dahl- holds that all those significantly affected by public decisions should have a say in them. From education funding and mental health policy to environmental law and employment rights 16 and 17 year olds are deeply affected by public decisions but remain politically voiceless in general elections.
-enfranchising younger voters would force political parties to address youth issues more seriously and design policies that reflect intergenerational justice. As long as the median voter is over 50, policy agendas risk neglecting housing affordability, education investment and environmental protection- issues critical to younger generations
-inclusion is the hallmark of democratic legitimacy. The vote is not a reward for civic perfection- it is a foundational right that might be extended to those who are already politically engaged, legally responsible and disproportionately affected by public policy
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
Introduction
The UK has long faced declining voter turnout, with particularly low engagement among the young and socioeconomically disadvantages. In response, some propose compulsory voting, which is already implemented in democracies such as Australia and Belgium to ensure broader political participation and greater democratic legitimacy. Critics argue that mandatory voting undermines individual freedom, leads to uninformed voting and fails to address deeper political disengagement. However, this essay will argue that although such concerns are not unfounded, compulsory voting offers a fairer, more inclusive and more democratically sustainable solution to growing inequalities in political engagement- especially when combined with civic education and structural reform.
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
1:liberty and political freedom- forced participation or civic duty.
Point
It could be argued that compulsory voting violates individual liberty and democratic choice
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
1:liberty and political freedom- forced participation or civic duty.
Points and analyses (AGAINST)
-a core principle of liberal democracy is autonomy and freedom of conscience. Compulsory voting is often framed as coercive, especially when backed by penalties- even minor fines- for non-participation. Critics argue that forcing individuals to engage in the political process contradicts the very essence of democracy as voluntary self-rule
-abstention may be an act of protest. In a system where no party or candidate represents a voter’s view, the deliberate choice to withhold a vote can be a legitimate political expression. Compulsion may suppress silent dissent and artificially inflate political legitimacy
-moreover, there is concern that compulsory voting could encourage uninformed, apathetic or random voting, with citizens ticking boxed to avoid penalties. This could distort electoral outcomes and diminish the deliberative quality of democracy leading to less meaningful mandates.
-this argument holds moral weight - a democracy must protect freedom of choice, including the choice not to vote. However, freedom without equal voice may reinforce existing inequalities, especially if the abstention of marginalised groups becomes habitual
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
1:liberty and political freedom- forced participation or civic duty.
Volta
However a more convincing argument is that compulsory voting is a civic duty, like jury service or taxation and essential for equal democratic representation
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
1:liberty and political freedom- forced participation or civic duty.
Points and analyses (AGAINST)
- in a functioning democracy, participation is not just a right but a responsibility. Just as citizens are compelled to pay taxes to fund public goods, they should be expected to contribute to democratic decision-making. Compulsory voting would institutionalise participation as a shared civic obligation rather than a passive privilege
-voluntary voting systems like the UK have produced structurally unequal turnout. In 2019, 74% of over 65s voted, compared to 47% of 18-24 year olds, creating an imbalance that skews political attention toward older demographics. This is compounded by class and race- turnout among the poorest voters is often 25-30 points lower than among the wealthiest, according to Electoral Commission data.
-by contrast, Australia where voting has been compulsory since 1924, achieves turnout of over 90% in federal elections. Crucially, turnout is consistent across age, income and educational background, meaning elections are more representative of the population as a whole, and policy outcomes are less distorted by turnout inequality.
-importantly, compulsory voting does not compel voters to choose a party, they may spoil their ballot, submit a blank vote or write in protest. This it maintains the right to dissent within a framework of civic equality.
-compulsory voting is not about state overreach- its about restoring political equality in a system where voluntary participation increasingly benefits the privileged and marginalises the disadvantaged.
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
2: Turnout and legitimacy- artificial inflation or revitalised democracy
Point
It could be argued that compulsory voting increases turnout artificially without increasing genuine political engagement
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
2: Turnout and legitimacy- artificial inflation or revitalised democracy
Points and analyses (AGAINST)
-high turnout alone does not equal healthy democracy. Belgium, where voting is mandatory, consistently achieves turnout over 85%, yet suffers widespread political disengagement, with rising support for populist and protest parties. A 2020 survey found that only 36% of Belgians trusted their parliament- showing that enforced voting does not guarantee trust or enthusiasm
-similarly in Brazil , where voting is mandatory for adults aged 18-70, turnout remains high, but recent elections have been marred by polarisation, disinformation and increasing numbers of blank ballots. In 2022 presidential election, 21% of all ballots were spoiled or left blank, reflecting formal participation but not meaningful engagement.
-if political alienation is the real issue, compulsory voting might mask disengagement rather than solve it- creating the illusion of legitimacy while failing to address party dissatisfaction, media cynicism or electoral system flaws, such as the FPTP.
-these criticism caution against over-reliance on turnout as a metric of democratic health. Compulsory voting may improve quantity of participation, but not qualify, unless paired with civic education, electoral reform and political responsiveness.
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
2: Turnout and legitimacy- artificial inflation or revitalised democracy
Volta
However a more convincing argument is that high turnout under compulsory voting systems enhances the legitimacy and inclusivity of elections
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
2: Turnout and legitimacy- artificial inflation or revitalised democracy
Points and analyses (FOR)
-the UK has seen severe dips in turnout- just 59% in 2001, when labour secured a landslide with only 26% of the eligible electorate’s votes. This erodes the legitimacy of democratic mandates, especially under FPTP, which already distorts proportionality. Compulsory voting would increase the legitimacy of elected governments, making mandates more credible and representative.
-in australia, turnout has never fallen below 90% in a century of compulsory voting. This level of participation ensures that governments cannot ignore any demographic, and parties are forced to campaign across all groups, not just “likely voters”. This reduces reliance on negative campaigning and can soften partisan polarisation by broadening electoral outreach.
-additionally, participation begets participation. Compulsory voting creates habits of engagement particularly among first-time voters. In voluntary systems, failure to vote in the first eligible election strongly correlates with long-term abstention. By contrast, in Australia, voting is a normalised social expectation,not an elite behaviour- which strengthens democratic culture over time
-compulsory voting strengthens both the form and function of democracy. It provides stronger mandates, greater legitimacy and encourages politicians to be accountable to the full electorate, not just the most vocal.
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
3: practicality, implementation, and alternatives
Point
It could be argued that compulsory voting is difficult to implement effectively and may not be the best route to higher participation
2: evaluate the view that voting in the UK should be made compulsory
3: practicality, implementation, and alternatives
Points and analyses (AGAINST)
-one challenge is enforcement. In Australia, non-voters receive a small 20$ fine, but roughly 13% fail to vote in each election, and many simply pay the penalty. This raised concerns about whether the policy is enforceable- and whether it punishes disengaged or marginalised citizens who may already face barriers to participation
-also critics highlight the administrative burden of tracking and penalising non-voters, particularly in areas with transient populations, students, renters, homeless individuals. Enforcement may disproportionately affect poorer citizens, defeating the inclusionary aims of the policy.
-additionally, the UK could pursue alternative reforms such as voter registration, expanding postal voting, better political education and voting at 16. In Sweden and Denmark, where such reforms exist, turnout remains over 80%, without compulsion. This suggests that institutional design and political culture can drive participation voluntarily,
-these are valid concerns but none are insurmountable. Many of the UK’s existing voting procedures like postal voting and registration already involve data infrastructure- the issue is political will, not capacity
