Should the US lower the voting age to 16?

Divya Beeram and Sofia Serna are both high school juniors in San Antonio, Texas.

Yes — Divya.

When do we decide that we’re mature enough to have a say in government? Surely, the right to vote should depend on more than just the year on your birth certificate—that feels remarkably arbitrary. In reality, I believe the voting age must meet a twofold burden: first, that a person is old enough to be affected by state decisions, and second, that they are capable of evaluating candidates and making informed choices about who should shape those decisions.

On the first burden, it’s clear that many 16- and 17-year-olds are already impacted by the state, even though they can’t vote. By 16, many teens are working jobs, paying taxes, and contributing to their communities. I’m 15, and I’ve already held jobs and paid taxes on my income. It seems unfair that we’re expected to help fund the government but denied any voice in how those funds are spent.

The reasonable argument against a lower voting age is, of course, that not all teenagers are working, and not all teenagers are civically engaged. Some may lack the experience or maturity to vote responsibly. I agree—and that’s why I believe a more nuanced approach to voting rights is needed. While it may be logistically challenging, I support issue-specific voting at the local and state level. In other words, 16- and 17-year-olds should have the right to vote on policies directly affecting them—like education, mental health, and youth services.

National elections are trickier, since one representative governs many issues. But on principle, if a group is significantly affected by federal decisions, they should have some influence over who makes those policies. Sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds meet that threshold.

As for the second burden, it’s less clear-cut. Are 16-year-olds ready to help decide the fate of a nation? Moreover, what makes the difference between someone who is 17 and 364 days vs 18 years old on election day? It’s hard to draw a clean line, especially in a world where technology is central to our information diets.

To me, lowering the voting age makes sense given how connected my generation is. With constant news notifications and content coming from every app on our phones, we’re more aware of global events than ever.

However, that same connection had led to intense polarization. Social media has fueled extremism and misinformation, so whether younger voters are able to brave a confusing online world is a valid concern. But this isn’t a uniquely teenage problem – adults are just as susceptible, if not more so. And in some ways, engaging young people in voting might actually help. The act of voting requires you to consider different perspectives, and the earlier that habit starts, the more thoughtfully it might develop.

Finally, a case study. I chose this topic for Countervailing Voices’ first article because it’s topical to the world right now. Last week, the UK said it planned to lower the voting age to 16. In most parts of the UK, 16- and 17-year-olds could already vote in local elections. Interestingly, studies show that 16-year-olds are more likely than 18-year-olds to vote in their first election. That’s promising for the United States—because if people vote once, they’re more likely to vote again.

No — Sofia.

Voting is one of the many rights that uphold the democracy of the United States. It carries significant power—not only in the political world but also in shaping our social lives. In the U.S., citizens gain the right to vote at 18, the same age at which they are legally recognized as adults. Many people support this age because they associate adulthood with the responsibility of voting. However, is that the way it should be?

As a 16-year-old American female, I’ve often wondered what it would be like if my peers and I could vote. After some thought, I’ve concluded that it would not be the best idea. Why? Because of the era we live in.

If you had asked me this question before social media became such a major influence, I might have said that 16 is a reasonable age to consider. But that is no longer the case. On platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, political content appears constantly—especially on my feed. While I know not everyone has the same algorithm as I do, I also know that many people my age encounter political videos regularly.

Social media, in a broader sense, has deeply shaped the values of its users—especially the younger generation. At 16 and 17, our brains are still developing, and with the usage of social media, it becomes part of that development. As it influences our thinking, our beliefs and values are shaped not always by careful thought, but by algorithms, influencers, and trends. With the constant presence of political propaganda, misinformation, and people forcefully pushing their opinions, younger users like myself can easily adopt political beliefs that may not be fully informed or independent.

If 16- and 17-year-olds were given the right to vote while under such influence, it would risk undermining the integrity of the democratic process. Voting is supposed to reflect your belief in who is best for a position of power—not someone else’s belief that was pushed onto you through a screen. While not every teenager is on social media, the majority are, and that widespread exposure matters.

I believe we should be allowed to vote when our brains are closer to full development and when our values are more firmly established—not still being shaped by trends and peer pressure online. Voting is powerful. We should treat it with the seriousness it deserves.