Emily Greene

Professor Kristin Kanthak

Capstone Seminar in American Politics

15 March 2016

Motivating the Millennials: Influential Factors that Encourage Young Voters

I. Introduction

Voter participation in the American electoral system is strikingly low. Despite the

country’s esteem for democracy, a mere 58.7% of Americans who met the criteria to vote turned

out to the polls during the November 2012 election (P2012). The statistic encompasses the entire

country, though some demographics yield even lower voter participation rates. Perhaps even

more alarming is the percent of citizens who voted in the 2014 Midterm election; only 36.7% of

eligible voters casted their votes for the Congressional elections—which was the lowest turnout

of voters since 1942 (United States Elections Project).

Young voters are no exception in regards to voting trends. Millennials—or, generally

speaking, individuals between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four—generate the lowest

percentages of voter participation, which is often attributed by older generations to a lack of

political knowledge or understanding. For example, in the November 2012 election, the Census

Bureau reported that only 41% of individuals voted in the election—a percentage that is

considerably lower than the national average. In 2014, the Institute of Politics at Harvard

University conducted a survey to interpret the attitudes of young adults in regards to voting; the

results found that, out of 2,727 individuals surveyed, 81% of the participants self-reported as

“not politically engaged or politically active” (Harvard University).

Greene 1

The lack of electoral participation from young voters is startling due to the fact that the

millennial generation will encompass the largest amount of individuals by this year, according to

the Pew Research Center. The population of millennials will eventually reach 80 million, far

surpassing the number of Baby Boomers alive today. As a result, it is fundamental to our

political system that millennials continue to increase the rate of voter participation.

Despite the apathetic manner in which young adults participate in federal elections, some

millennial voters do, in fact, consistently turn out to the polls to cast their vote. Likewise, many

campaigns such as “Rock the Vote”, which specifically target the younger demographic,

unwaveringly attempt to motivate millennials to register to vote and stay informed on

fundamental policy issues. The campaign officers are often members of the millennial

generation, which is a testament to the fact that young, enthusiastic voters do exist. The purpose

of the following research is to determine the factors that influence millennials to engage in

electoral participation, examined from the perspective of three varying categories of study.

II. Procedure

The task of determining which factors motivate young adults to vote in elections requires

the application of multivariate analysis. In order to best identify and assess influencing factors, I

chose three general categories of evaluation: education level, geographic location, and levels of

civic participation. The objective of the research is to determine whether increased attainment of

education and greater participation in various forms of civic engagement yield higher levels of

voter participation. Similarly, the data will determine whether there is a relationship between the

regions in which individuals reside and increased voter participation.

To scrutinize the effects of education level and voter participation, I utilized quantitative

data gathered by the Census Bureau regarding the November 2012 General Election. The data

Greene 2

was collected from participants between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four, both males and

females. Surveyed participants were categorized by the following levels of education: Some

High School, High School Graduate, Some College, Bachelor’s Degree, and Advanced Degree.

The sample size was comprised of 29,878 young adults, and the individuals who were surveyed

were asked both if they were registered to vote at the time of the November 2012 Election and if

they voted.

Similarly, to determine the effects of geographic location on increased millennial

electoral participation, I first examined data provided by the Census Bureau regarding the

percentage of voters who participated in the 2012 Election between the ages of eighteen and

twenty-four, organized by state. I collected the total number of voters from each respective state,

and grouped the total counts into four regions, designated by the Census Bureau: the Northeast,

the Midwest, the South, and the West. Next, I observed the data from the states with the five

largest cities located within their borders to determine if there is a relationship between the

presence of populated urban areas and higher millennial voter turnout. According to the 2012

Census, the five largest cities in the United States were New York, Los Angeles, Chicago,

Houston, and Philadelphia, respectively. I then assessed the percentages of voters between the

target age range for New York, California, Illinois, Texas, and Pennsylvania; I compared the data

to the average of all millennial voters to determine whether there is a correlation between urban

areas and increased voter participation.

To conclude my assessment of factors that influence millennial voters, I gathered

information regarding the presence of civic engagement surrounding the 2012 Election to

determine whether a relationship exists between high voter turnout and high civic engagement.

Greene 3

For the purposes of the research paper, I define civic engagement as the presence of both non-

profit involvement and social movements.

III. Analysis and Results

Education

Political scientist Steven Tenn concedes within the first paragraph of his work, “The

Effect of Education on Voter Turnout”, that “an empirical regularity found in numerous studies

is that the highly educated are more likely to vote” (Tenn 2). Without a doubt, a correlation

exists between education level and voter turnout. However, in the context of the research at hand,

the data provided by the Census Bureau regarding the 2012 General Election calculates and

demonstrates a clear positive relationship between increased levels of education and voter

participation within the demographic of millennials. Likewise, the data shows a positive

correlation between millennial education level and voter registration.

Graph 1. Education Level and Voter Registration

Some H

igh School

High School G

raduate

Some Colle

ge

Bachelo

r's D

egree

Advanced D

egree

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

33.0%42.1%

63.7%74.7%

67.5%

Registered to Vote in 2012

Registered to Vote in 2012

Greene 4

As evidenced by the graph above, millennials who were eligible to vote and had been exposed to

some degree of higher education were 21%-32% more likely to be registered to vote during the

November 2012 Election.

The data results show a similar trend in the relationship between education level and

voter turnout. Out of the individuals surveyed, those who had received some extent of higher

education were 20% more likely to vote in the 2012 Election than the sample of high school

graduates. Compared to the 458 surveyed millennials whom had only received a partial amount

of high school education, those with a college background were twice as likely to vote.

Graph 2. Education Level and Voter Turnout in the November 2012 Election

Some H

igh School

High School G

raduate

Some Colle

ge

Bachelo

r's D

egree

Advanced D

egree

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%

24.9% 29.1%

50.1%

63.0%55.9%

Voted in 2012

Voted in 2012

The data yielded a noticeable decline in voter participation and registration for

individuals who had received advanced degrees, but the discrepancy is likely due to the fact that

out of the 29,878 surveyed millennials, a mere 218 had achieved a certificate higher than a

Bachelor’s degree.

Region and Geography

Greene 5

An individual’s geographic location influences one’s ideology and plays a role in

determining the issues in which one may feel passionately about. Therefore, it would seem

feasible that geographic location would also influence the percent of voter turnout—particularly

within the millennial demographic. The Census Bureau’s data from the 2012 November election

indicates the attitudes of young voters in each of the fifty states. In assessing the data solely

based upon the four regions of the United States, it appeared that there is very little disproportion

between the national percentage of voters for the given age range and the percent of young voters

in each distinct region.

Graph 3. Percentage of Millennial Voters by Region

US Northeast Midwest South West0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

38.0% 38.2%

43.9%

35.5%38.9%

Voter Turnout by Region

As evidenced in the graph, the only noteworthy increase in young adult voter turnout in the 2012

Election was in the Midwest, which is comprised of the following states: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,

Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin.

However, the data does not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that geographic regions yield

significant influence over millennial voter turnout.

Greene 6

The data provided in the previous graphs disproves the working theory that millennial

voter turnout is impacted by region. Likewise, the Census Bureau’s data provides even less

evidence of a relationship between young voter participation and voter registration in regions

with highly populated urban spaces. The following data was chosen to represent the U.S. states

that contain the most highly populated cities within their borders; the purpose of this was to

determine whether the ideology within urban areas encourage young voters to turn out to the

polls. The states that the data was drawn from are not only representative of the five largest cities

in the country, but also home to other major cities. For instance, the state of New York does not

solely regard New York City, but also Buffalo and Rochester—both of which are home to well

over 200,000 residents, according to the Census. California, Texas, and Pennsylvania also boast

at least one other major city within their respective borders.

Graph 4. Young Voter Registration in States with Populated Urban Areas

New York

Californ

ia

Illin

ois

Texas

Pennsylvania US

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

45.7% 45.1%49.5%

38.2%

53.8%49.4%

Percent Registered to Vote in 2012

Percent Registered to Vote

The chart above denotes very little deviation amongst the percent of individuals between the ages

of eighteen and twenty-four who were registered to vote in the 2012 Election. The statistics

Greene 7

prove very little that there is a relationship between highly populated urban areas and voter

registration. Rather, the dramatic decrease in voter registration amongst Texas millennials

alludes to the fact that other factors may lead to the lack of voter registration, as the state also

contains both the cities of Austin and Dallas—two major urban areas with populations of over

one million people.

The data regarding voter participation within the same states produces very similar

statistics. There is no apparent relationship between the two variables, as the only state to claim a

higher percentage in voter participation than the national average is Pennsylvania, and the

disparity is a mere 1.9%. Following the same trend as the voter registration data, the percentage

of young voters to participate in the 2012 Election in Texas is considerably lower than the

percentage of young voters across the country.

Graph 4. Young Voter Participation in States with Populated Urban Areas

New York

Californ

ia

Illin

ois

Texas

Pennsylvania US

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%

35.0% 36.5%32.2%

22.5%

39.9% 38.0%

Percent Voted in 2012 Election

Percent Voted in 2012 Elec-tion

The results of the data provide no evidence to conclude that a relationship exists between

the geographic location of a millennial and the individual’s tendency to vote in elections.

Greene 8

Generally, the individual states’ percentages of voter turnout mirror that of the national average,

which demonstrates that an alternative force must influence millennial electoral participation.

Civic Engagement

The third and final category of influence over young voter turnout is the level of civic

engagement, particularly during the election season. In order to broadly assess the level of civic

engagement within a society, I evaluated two subcategories: non-profit involvement and

presence of social movement campaigns. Due to the low voter turnout during the November

2012 Election—specifically in regards to millennial participation—I hypothesized that, as a

society, civic engagement would be generally low.

In a survey conducted in 2012 by the Millennial Impact Project, which encompassed both

online surveys taken by 6,522 participants and detailed focus groups, the results showed that

63% of those surveyed had participated in some form of volunteer work for non-profit

organizations. In contrast, out of those who did not take part in the research, 62% cited that it

was not a lack of interest, but rather lack of time that deterred them from volunteering to some

capacity. The results also noted that in 2012, young people contributed to non-profits through the

form of monetary donations in a surprisingly frequent manner. A total of 93% of participants had

donated to at least one organization, and 63% of those individuals had donated to three or more

non-profit organizations. A whopping 90% of participants answered that they would volunteer at

least as much in the upcoming year as they had the previous year, further demonstrating the

encouraging level of non-profit participation influencing young adults during the time of the

2012 Election season.

Social movement campaigns in 2012 were regarded with the same enthusiasm as non-

profit participation. During the same year as the past general election, a social movement known

Greene 9

as Invisible Children received media attention due to the organization’s attempts to shed light on

the injustices of an African warlord named Joseph Kony. The organization launched a video that

instantly captured the attention of the millennial audience; in less than a week, 3.7 million people

had shown support for the organization through both voluntary and monetary means (Invisible

Children). The campaign, which Bloomberg had deemed as the “first millennial nonprofit”,

gathered the attention of millennials almost instantly. Research conducted a week after the

inception of the viral video found that 58% of those surveyed whom were between the ages of

eighteen and twenty-nine had already heard about the cause, and 66% of Twitter responses

concerning the campaign were posted out of support for the organization (Pew Research Center).

Invisible Children was one of the many social campaigns to rise during the time of the

election. In 2011, the Occupy Wall Street campaign saturated the news with constant media

coverage. The movement, which set out to combat the corruption of irresponsible monetary

policy set for by institutions and corporations, became a vital cause to the younger demographic.

The majority of participants (68%) were age 44 and younger, which is comprised of mostly

millennials (Statistic Brain Research Institute). The social movement became a pivotal issue in

the 2012 Election, and its popularity amongst young adults could have been considered method

of civic engagement that encourages millennials to vote, had the rate of young voters been

higher.

Despite the surge in non-profit participation and social movements surrounding the

previous general election, millennial voter turnout remained notably low. The analysis refutes the

hypothesis that higher civic engagement promotes millennial voter turnout, as it provides no

direct relationship between the two variables. Instead, the results demonstrate a generation of

Greene 10

individuals who lend their time to non-profits and protest causes, but remain to be unseen at the

polling locations on Election Day.

IV. Conclusion

Perhaps the best reason for low voter turnout amongst millennial voters, according to the

research analyzed above, is lack of time. Not only was this particular reason cited for why young

adults could not increase their participation in volunteer work, but also the majority of

millennials surveyed during the 2012 Election (54%) had received or were in the process of

receiving degrees in higher education—an indication that their time may have been constrained

by work assignments and other necessary tasks. However, students exposed to higher education

yielded the highest percentages of voter participation in both males and females. College

students engage in higher-level thinking and become immersed in the issues that plague our

country; as a result, the students feel connected to the political process and are more inclined to

work around the time constraints placed upon them by higher education or work responsibilities.

In contrast, no relationship was found between millennial voter turnout and geographic

region or urban population statistics. Accounting for both region and states with the largest urban

areas, the data found that there was no presence of noteworthy deviation from the national

percentage of millennial voter turnout. Geographic area may influence ideology, but it cannot

influence young voters to turn out to the polls on Election Day.

In the 2012 Election, an inverse relationship was demonstrated in regards to levels of

civic engagement and millennial voter participation. Though it seems inherent that young people

who engage in non-profit work and social campaigns—which are influenced by federal policy—

would choose to participate in federal elections, the results corroborate that this notion is false.

Undisputedly, the millennial generation is active within social campaigns, and the constant

Greene 11

growth in technology surrounding the generation makes it easier to get involved. However, the

enthusiasm to promote causes and social justice does not translate to electoral participation.

Millennials are perceived as a generation of unmotivated and self-interested individuals

with relatively low work ethic. Though these characteristics were found to be false within the

realms of education and civic engagement, the sentiment reflects the general apathy toward

political elections. As evidenced in the research, young people engage in non-profits and

campaigns in which they feel connected to; perhaps increased voter turnout can be achieved only

when the issues surrounding a federal election mobilize and target the otherwise blasé attitudes

of the millennial generation.

Greene 12

Works Cited

"Early and Absentee Voting A Growing Trend." Election Day. P2012, 2012. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.

Feldmann, Derrick, and Angela E. White. "The Millennial Impact Report 2012." (n.d.): n. pag.

The Millennial Impact Report 2012. The Millennial Impact, 2013. Web. 12 Mar. 2016.

Fry, Richard. "This Year, Millennials Will Overtake Baby Boomers." FactTank. Pew Research

Center, 16 Jan. 2015. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.

"KONY 2012 | Invisible Children." Invisible Children KONY 2012 Comments. N.p., n.d. Web.

13 Mar. 2016.

McDonald, Michael P. "2014G - United States Elections Project." 2014G - United States

Elections Project. United States Elections Project, n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2016.

"Occupy Wall Street Statistics and Demographics." Statistics Brain Resarch Institute, n.d. Web.

13 Mar. 2016.

Rainie, Lee, Paul Hitlin, Mark Jurkowitz, Michael Dimock, and Shawn Neidorf. "The Viral

Kony 2012 Video." Pew Research Center, 15 Mar. 2012. Web. 14 Mar. 2016.

"Survey of Young Americans' Attitude Toward Politics and Public Service: 25th Edition." The

Institute of Politics at Harvard University. N.p., 29 Apr. 2014. Web. 12 Mar. 2016.

Tenn, Steven. "The Effect of Education on Voter Turnout." Political Analysis 15.4 (2007): 446-

64. Web

"Voting and Registration." Voting and Registration in the Election of November 2012. United

States Census Bureau, 2012. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.

Greene 13

I certify that the words and ideas in this document are entirely my own, except for words that are

in properly attributed quotations or ideas that properly attributed to their originator. I

understand that any use of words or ideas that are not my own is theft and a violation of

the code of Academic Integrity which will result in a failing grade for the course.

Emily Greene

Greene 14