Parental proxy voting and political representation

This paper reviews the proposal to give parents extra votes that they can cast as proxies on behalf of their children. Justifications of parental proxy voting (PPV) are examined with a focus on various interpretations of the concept of ‘proxy’. The first part of the paper assesses the notion that PPV does not violate the principles of equal and direct suffrage. Contrary to proponents of PPV, I argue that parents voting on behalf of their children cannot be considered as merely expressing children’s political preferences, and that persons who are taken to be unable to make a decision themselves cannot be represented in this way. Thus, PPV actually allocates extra voting rights to parents, giving additional weight to their preferences in decision-making. The second part turns to parents as possible proxies for children’s interests, with their extra votes being meant to overweigh those of the elderly or of non-parents. PPV thus understood could be supported by the claim that parents are better situated to represent their children’s interests than the average voter. Proposals of PPV usually refer to parents’ better access to information, their shared interests with their children, and/or their selflessness. These arguments are, however, either irrelevant or questionable, and do not therefore actually speak in favour of the introduction of PPV. In conclusion, while PPV is usually depicted as making political decisions simultaneously more democratic and more prudent, it does neither. Since these aims cannot be achieved through a single institution, different methods to achieve each aim need to be explored.