Young people vote when issues speak to them
Youths are far from apolitical, write Valerie-Anne Maheo & Dietlind Stolle
In winning the California primaries, Hillary Clinton has secured her path to the Democratic nomination. She is poised to become the first meaningful female candidate for the presidency of the United States. However, the Sanders campaign has its own success story. Bernie Sanders admirably mobilized youth behind his campaign, even though they are notorious for their low levels of electoral participation.
In Canada as well, we have seen a recent surge in young people’s enthusiasm for voting. Elections Canada released rates of voter turnout for the 2015 federal election last week. These clearly show that the youngest age groups witnessed an extraordinary rise in electoral participation. The turnout rate for 18-to-24-year-olds was a remarkable 57.2 per cent, which represents a substantial increase of 18 percentage points over the 2011 elections.
No other age group witnessed such a significant leap. Based on a separate study, we also know that the youth vote disproportionately favoured the Liberals (Canadian Election Survey, 2015).
This unprecedented mobilization proves that young people are not as apolitical as some had claimed.
Quite the contrary: They are stirred to action when leaders speak to them and address their concerns. They turn out when they feel their interests are at stake.
Results from the Canadian Youth Study (McGill-UQAM, 2015), which surveyed a group of 24-year-olds in Quebec and Ontario months before the election, show that around half of those surveyed are either interested or very interested in public issues; only 10 per cent say they are not interested at all.
However, when it comes to party politics, they remain overtly skeptical. The parties themselves bear some of the responsibility for this. Indeed, 70 per cent of surveyed youth believe that political parties are solely interested in their votes and not people’s opinions. This type of cynicism would predictably steer them away from ballot boxes.
Assessing young people’s political engagement based solely on electoral participation would be a mistake, though.
Even though casting a ballot is a fundamental democratic act, when politics fail to entice, elections become but one dimension of democracy. As the Canadian Youth Study showed, a majority of young citizens compensate by making donations to social or political causes, signing petitions, or boycotting products for ethical or political reasons.
In some instances, such alternative forms of political action can spur electoral participation. This was precisely the case with the Maple Spring of 2012. Following months of intense protest, young people did end up voting in higher numbers in the 2012 Quebec election.
But as much as it is a mistake to portray all youth as politically apathetic, it is equally misleading to think of them as a monolithic group. Indeed, their experience of politics is just as diverse as Canadian society. Immigrant, low-income or aboriginal youth are faced with serious obstacles when it comes to being politically active. Politics is far from being a level playing field.
Much energy has been spent on trying to solve the conundrum that is youth’s low voter turnout. For good reason: We know that voting is habit-forming. Getting young people hooked on politics is a sure way to keep them engaged in the long term.
We need to overcome our biases about the supposed apathy of youth, and understand how and why diverse youth become (or fail to become) politically active. Engaging youth is a means of bolstering democracy.
We should learn the important lessons that the 2016 U.S. primaries and 2015 Canadian elections can teach us about youth political engagement, lessons that transcend questions of ideology or party politics.
After all, the young will ultimately determine the future depth and vitality of our democracies.