March 16, 2003, marked a monumental event in my life. I turned eighteen. Friends were quick to point out that as a new adult, I gained many privileges including legally being able to purchase lottery tickets, cigarettes, and yes, even pornography. Interestingly enough, no one’s first reaction was, “Congratulations, now you can vote!” This is not surprising either, considering only 42 percent of 18 to 24 year olds voted in the 2000 presidential election. According to the Census Bureau, this age group has the lowest voter-turnout rate compared to any other age group. What causes this? A common misconception blames young adults political inactivity on laziness and lack of information, but this only scratches the surface. Rather, the current two party system helps discourage young adults from participating in their civic duty, because parties undermine a democratic principle upon which this nation was founded: equal representation. By targeting specific groups such as the elderly, wealthy, and big business while ignoring the common citizen, resorting to unscrupulous tactics in order to win votes, and having only two major parties in the U.S. government, equal representation no longer exists since certain citizens and voices are favored over others.
The U.S. government has practically become dependant upon political parties, yet they are not mentioned anywhere within the U.S. Constitution. The founding fathers purposely omitted them because most felt political parties would tear this country apart. Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison, authors that critiqued the Constitution through The Federalist Papers, believed it was necessary for governments to be operated by the masses because political parties might turn the U.S. into an empire “controlled by tyrannical nobles”(Bordon). Their fear materialized when a split occurred between the federalists who supported a strong centralized government, and the anti-federalists who believed states should have the majority of power. Out of this division, political parties emerged with the intent to educate, unite, and mobilize the masses.
Although political parties arose with the intent to unify citizens with similar political beliefs, they actually divide them by encouraging ageism. They focus their campaigns and platforms toward upper class, college-level educated people over the age of 65 since most voters who consistently participate possess these qualitites (Cooper 9). Through an endless Catch-22 scenario, favoritism is directed towards the elderly since their age group has the highest voter-turnout rate. Therefore, young adults are neglected and subsequently abstain from voting because current political issues do not concern them. They feel too old to be interested in public-education reform, yet consider themselves too young to worry about social security and healthcare. Since the latter issues are important to the elderly, older citizens vote in higher percentages. Coming full circle, politicians in return focus their campaigns to appeal to them. If young adults were targeted by political parties, maybe then they would make an effort to vote.
Under Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, it states that “No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States.” In other words, no person is placed at a higher value nor is more important than another. However, according to political parties, the financially elite achieve a state of supremacy since they fund parties’ campaigns. The 1974 Federal Election Campaign Act FECA Amendments state that individuals may contribute up to “$1,000 per candidate in any primary, runoff or general election, and no more than $25,000 annually to all presidential and congressional candidates,” also know as soft money (7). As a result, political parties are bound to the corporations that support them through this “soft money” and only listen to wealthy people's issues such as taxes, government policies, and big business. Young adults are categorized as less important since they cannot contribute nearly as much to parties as the wealthy.
Furthermore, a loophole enables the wealthy’s power to increase even more. Parties can circumvent the laws “...if the money ostensibly is used by the parties, not individual candidates” (qtd. in Bettelheim 16). Parties spend the money on issue ads that either promote or attack a policy. When contributions are used in this manner, the donating corporation is not technically endorsing a specific party or candidate; therefore campaign-finance laws no longer apply in this circumstance. As a result, an unlimited amount of funds can exchange hands. The additional pressure that the wealthy can now place upon parties translates into a government centered around upper class citizens, not the common man. Political parties subvert those amendments when they accept massive donations from the rich. In effect, political voice is not equally available; it must be bought. Because young adults are unable to compete with the seemingly bottomless wallets of the rich, their voice is not easily heard, if not silenced completely.
Even though 26th Amendment of the Constitution states that a citizen’s right to vote “...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age,” political parties actually further discourage young adults from voting when distrust is bred between potential voters and candidates. Young adults view political parties as untrustworthy since parties do not consistently adhere to their platforms. Sometimes parties evade demands to declare exactly where they stand on a given issue to avoid offending anyone and possibly losing votes. Instead, platforms commonly consist of “middle of the road” stances, or worse yet, they might sell personalities rather than ideas. Citizens with misleading levels of information become vulnerable and thus “...make judgements on the bias of character rather than issues, and are significantly less inclined to participate in politics at all” (Galston 217). Young adults often exhibit this behavior since they are relatively novice voters. They are poorly informed about candidates so name recognition and party affiliation strongly impact their vote.
The Constitution, through the 9th and 14th Amendments, also guarantees everyone a fair and equal voice. However, currently a two party system acts as a gatekeeper into democracy, destroying equal representation because they dominate public agenda as the only two voices heard. The system allows one party to dominate and oppress the other. Having only two major parties means fewer addressed views, less empowered young adults, and lower voter-turnout rates. Opposition of the two major parties, Democratic and Republican, “provide alternative platforms, but they are often limited and specifically focused” around reform-oriented issues (Cooper 3). Minor parties cannot adequately compete against the two parties due to financial reasons so they focus their efforts towards local elections instead. This enables the two main parties to dictate what is important rather than reflect the people’s desires and concerns.
With all this deceitful corruption occurring within political parties it is not astonishing that young adults refrain from voting. In effect, by not voting, they are indirectly protesting against the corruption. Until political parties change their fundamental means of operating, address the needs of young adults, and abandon their corrupt practices, voter-turnout rates amongst young adults will continue to dwindle. Political parties have yet to realize that young adults are a valuable untapped resource. They are young, fresh, hip, and typically more open to new ideas. Through the young adults, U.S. politics has the ability to evolve and change for the better. After all, they hold the future by the reigns.
Works CitedBettelheim, Adriel. “Are confrontational politics here to stay?” CQ Researcher 9.11 (March 1999): 16. 23 Oct. 2003
.
Bordon, Morton, ed. The Anti-Federalist Papers. Michigan: Michigan State University Press, 1965.2 Nov. 2003 .
Cooper, Mary H. “Do wealthy donors subvert the democratic process?” CQResearcher 10.12 (March 2000): 3-9. 23 Oct. 2003 .
Galston, William A. “Political Knowledge, Political Engagement, and Civic Education.” Annual Review of Political Science June 2001: 217-234.
U.S. Constitution. Article I, Section 9. 23 Oct. 2003.
—. Ammendment IX. 23 Oct. 2003.
—. Ammendment XIV. 23 Oct. 2003.
—. Ammendment XVI. 23 Oct. 2003.
