By Cameron Spivy, Alanah Muller, Zoe Rapp

Faculty Mentor: Jared McDonald

Abstract

The Vote 16 movement represents a collaboration of advocates and researchers organizing in favor of lowering the voting age to 16 in the United States. Central to the success of this movement is the ability to persuade skeptical Americans that 16- and 17-year-olds merit the right to vote, a question with broader implications about the types of citizens Americans view as more “deserving” of voting rights. With this research, we explore the desired attributes of voters as identified by the American public. Based on a review of existing scholarly research, we identify a citizen’s economic contribution as one of the top factors. In addition to economic contribution, a preparedness to exercise the rights of citizenship were also found to shape perceptions of who is qualified to vote, such as competence, knowledge, and engagement in politics. Based on the concerns frequently expressed about 16- and 17-year-old’s economic contributions and capacity to fulfill the duties of civic citizenship, we conducted a series of survey experiments to test the effect of persuasive messages intended to boost or reduce support for Vote 16’s efforts. Results indicate that messages demonstrating youth competence and civic engagement are especially effective. These effects, however, did not yield majority support, and persuasive negative messaging was often just as effective. To further explore predictors of Vote 16 support, we examined the role of partisanship, testing the effect of a perceived partisan advantage on support for Vote 16. When respondents thought Vote 16 would benefit their party, they had greater support, but this effect was only significant among Democrats, a majority of whom supported implementing the policy at the local level when they perceived a partisan benefit.