The Key to Increasing Youth Voter Turnout: Is "Apathy" Really the Reason Young People Don't Vote? The Proposal of "A Nudge via SMS" Causes a Stir

The Key to Increasing Youth Voter Turnout: Is "Apathy" Really the Reason Young People Don't Vote? The Proposal of "A Nudge via SMS" Causes a Stir

"Young people don't vote because they're not interested in politics"—this assumption is a convenient excuse. However, if that were truly the case, the political side could simply stop thinking by blaming "the youth." The Bertelsmann Foundation in Germany has provided a framework to avoid such oversimplifications. They suggest that what hinders young people's voting behavior is not a single cause but a series of "hurdles" that form an "obstacle course."


The premise that "not voting ≠ disinterest"

The report emphasizes not equating young people's abstention from voting with political apathy. Although the 18-29 age group still has a low voter turnout, there exists a structure where they "want to vote but get stopped along the way." For example, the voting date, procedures, necessary documents, polling locations, and early voting methods. While these may be "common knowledge" to adults, they can become a "bundle of unknowns" for first-timers.


This "lack of understanding" is amplified when combined with a sense of distance from politics. Political language is difficult, issues are complex, and when you open social media, fragmented information and strong assertions flow in. As a result, people end up not knowing "where to start understanding" or feeling "exhausted the more they research." The report treats this psychology not as an "individual trait" but as a matter of "system and information environment design."


Four hurdles: Access, Understanding, Motivation, and Impact

The report categorizes the obstacles into four main areas.
The first is access (whether one can reach the state of being able to vote).
The second is understanding and ability (whether one can understand the voting system and issues).
The third is motivation (whether one feels inclined to vote).
The fourth is impact (whether one feels that their vote "made a difference").


The importance of this framework lies in its ability to distinguish which hurdle a "policy to increase voter turnout" addresses. For example, "awareness posters" might help with motivation but won't reduce access barriers (such as procedural complexity). Conversely, even if the system is simplified, if politics continues to ignore young people, the lack of impact, or the feeling that "nothing will change anyway," will persist. The issue is not "just one thing" but a "chain" of factors.


Prescription ①: Can voting reminder SMS be the "final push"?

The most potentially controversial proposal is reminder SMS from election authorities. As the voting day approaches, information such as "It's voting day," "Here is your polling station," and "Early voting is always possible" is sent to smartphones. The report cites an example from Sweden where this led to increased voter turnout among young people.


The aim is not to change political attitudes. It's more realistic, subtle, but effective in reducing "I forgot" or "I was too busy to prioritize it." Voting doesn't happen with just "motivation." When exams, work, moving, or family matters pile up, actions are often the first to be dropped. SMS fills that gap.


However, there are clear issues here. First is personal information. Who sends it, based on which list, and to which numbers? How will the opt-out (refusal to receive) mechanism work? Second is neutrality. Notifications from the government must be carefully managed to avoid being mistaken for propaganda from a specific party. Third is the potential for backlash. There is a risk that some may feel "interfered with by politics." SMS can be seen as either "imposing" or "helpful." If designed poorly, it can erode trust.


Prescription ②: Strengthening political education to overcome the "understanding barrier"

The report also suggests improving the quality and quantity of political education in schools. Particularly, practical learning on "how voting works," "how to view party differences," and "how to verify pledges" is considered effective.


The key here is not to "indoctrinate specific ideologies" but to cultivate "literacy to navigate the system." Issues like taxes, social security, diplomacy, and energy policy are complex. However, "not voting because I don't understand" leads to a society that progresses without understanding. The role of school education is at least to share the procedures of "where to start researching when you don't understand" and "what to base your judgments on."


On the other hand, the burden on educational settings cannot be ignored. The expertise of teachers, the flexibility of the curriculum, and the differences between regions and states. The reality is that simply "increasing" political education is challenging. Therefore, efforts such as standardizing online materials and collaboration between local governments, election commissions, and schools are needed in system design.


Prescription ③: Mock elections as a mechanism to "make voting a habit"

Mock elections in schools (e.g., "Under-18 elections" where those under 18 can participate) are said to help overcome the motivation barrier. Receiving a ballot, filling it out, and placing it in the ballot box. Experiencing this "tactile" process lowers the psychological hurdle of the first time.


Voting requires not just knowledge but also the procedure of action. Those without experience worry, "What if I make a mistake?" Mock elections are a system to eliminate that anxiety through "practice." Just like being nervous the first time at a club competition or a job interview, voting is also nerve-wracking the first time. Practice works.


A common concern in SNS discussions is, "Won't mock elections ultimately be influenced by the 'atmosphere' of the school?" Therefore, it is essential to thoroughly emphasize that the purpose of mock elections is the "process" rather than the "result," and to handle the multifaceted nature of issues and how to discern information as a set.


Prescription ④: Can "Youth Councils" restore the sense of "impact"?

The most political and challenging proposal is the "substantial participation of young people." By institutionalizing the connection of young people's perspectives to law-making through forms like youth councils (future councils), increasing dialogue opportunities, and optimizing government communication for young people, the aim is to counteract the lack of "impact" or the feeling that "my voice won't be heard anyway."


The question here is whether it truly becomes "participation." If it ends with mere opinion gathering, young people may feel it's just a "venting mechanism." Conversely, if legal authority is strengthened too much, it raises debates about the balance with representative democracy. How to balance effectiveness and legitimacy? System design is not simple.


However, if the discussion about voter turnout ends with "efforts to get people to polling stations," the fundamental dissatisfaction remains. If voting becomes merely an event that gives a "sense of participation," it won't continue next time. Politics must respond to young people's life issues (rent, education costs, future anxiety, climate change, labor) and show visible changes. Only then can voting become a "habit."


SNS Reactions: Why Agreement and Opposition Emerge Equally

The current proposal typically generates several reaction patterns on social media.

1) "That's fine, it's subtle but effective" Realists

For reminder SMS, there is often affirmation like "It's the same as hospital appointment reminders" and "Behavior changes just by having a notification." Mock elections and political education also receive evaluations such as "reduces first-time anxiety" and "makes voting not a 'special event.'"

2) "The government sending SMS? Isn't that the gateway to a surveillance society?" Cautious Types

On the other hand, the more "convenient" SMS is, the more it can also be seen as "scary." Who holds the numbers, how is the data managed, and won't it be repurposed for other uses in the future? Those with strong political distrust are more likely to think, "Good intentions can be misused later." Here, the issues of privacy and trust are condensed.

3) "Fix the ease of voting before worrying about turnout" System Reform Advocates

If you want to increase young people's voter turnout, voices often suggest that before notifications, "simplifying procedures," "expanding early voting," "making registration easier after moving," and "improving access to polling stations" should come first. Rather than supplementing access barriers with "behavioral change," they argue for fixing the structure.

4) "Politics won't listen anyway" Resigned/Cynical Types

Regarding the youth council proposal, skepticism arises such as "It'll just end with 'we listened'" and "Only convenient young people will be invited." Unless politics changes, the sense of voting impact won't return. On SNS, short cynicism or resignation spreads easily.

5) "Lower the voting age, raise education" Divisive Points

Lowering the voting age is one of the most divisive issues. Supporters argue, "The sooner you experience it, the more it becomes a habit" and "The longest-term interests are those of young people." Opponents focus on "maturity," "information resilience," and "influence from parents and schools." This easily becomes a clash of values.


The reason discussions on SNS tend to become heated is that these reactions all have "simultaneously valid aspects." Convenience is necessary, but without trust, it becomes eerie. Education is important, but results are slow. Participation is crucial, but it can easily become a formality. Therefore, proposals need to be considered as a package.


Conclusion: Moving "Youth Voting" from an "Effort Goal" to "Design"

The low voter turnout among young people is not just their problem. If democracy pushes future stakeholders outside the system, its legitimacy will be undermined in the long term. The report presented a framework that clarifies "where to intervene" by breaking down the issue into access, understanding, motivation, and impact, rather than dismissing it as "young people are indifferent."


While reminder SMS can be expected to have immediate effects, they are contingent on privacy and trust. Political education and mock elections are roundabout but reduce first-time anxiety and bring voting closer to a habit. Participation measures like youth councils are challenging but unavoidable to regain the sense that "voting works."


Ultimately, voter turnout doesn't increase with "spirit" alone. The system and information environment need to be redesigned so that voting feels "understandable," "doable," "desirable," and "effective." This subtle accumulation may be the shortest path to renewing democracy.


Source URL

Related Articles