Voting Rights Thresholds Through History: From 20 to 18, Two Decades of Unfinished Constitutional Reform

That Afternoon at Four

On November 26, 2022, at 4 p.m., all 17,773 polling stations across Taiwan simultaneously closed and locked their doors¹. That day, Taiwan was simultaneously electing nine types of positions in the nine-in-one elections (municipal mayors, county/city mayors, legislators, township/city mayors, village/neighborhood chiefs, indigenous district chiefs, and indigenous district representatives). The last ballot cast was not one of those nine ballots—many voters also held a tenth ballot in their hands, its cover printed with "Constitutional Amendments of the Republic of China."

This was the first time since the seventh amendment in 2005—which abolished the now-defunct National Assembly and switched to a system of "Legislative Yuan proposal + public referendum"—that a constitutional amendment had run the full process and entered the referendum stage². The amendment was just one clause: changing Article 130 of the Constitution from "twenty years of age" to "eighteen years of age."

At four o'clock the polls closed; by five-thirty results began to emerge. That evening, the Central Election Commission announced: 5,647,102 votes in favor, 5,016,427 against, roughly 53% approval, and a 59.10% turnout³. The "yes" votes exceeded the "no" votes by 600,000—a result where 22 of Taiwan's 23 cities and counties voted majority yes. But because the referendum threshold was set at "valid yes votes exceeding half of all eligible voters in the free area of the Republic of China" (then 9,619,697 votes), this constitutional amendment fell short by 3.97 million votes⁴.

2026 九合一選舉 will proceed with the same nine positions, 九合一選舉是什麼 unchanged, the electoral structure unchanged, and this twenty-year-old voting-rights threshold unchanged: the question this piece answers is simple—why has Taiwan's voting age remained the same for 75 years?

1947's Clause: The Starting Point of Twenty

The Constitution of the Republic of China was passed by the Constituent National Assembly on December 25, 1946, promulgated on January 1, 1947, and implemented on December 25, 1947⁵. Article 130 read:

"Citizens of the Republic of China who have reached the age of twenty years shall have the right to vote by law; except as otherwise provided in this Constitution and laws, those who have reached the age of twenty-three years shall have the right to be elected by law."⁶

Twenty to vote, twenty-three to run: this clause has remained unchanged for seventy-nine years, from the drafting of the Constitution to today in 2026. Compared to other clauses, Article 130's stability is remarkable: the Additional Articles have been amended nine times, modifying over twenty clauses—national flag provisions (Article 6) have been revised, Examination Yuan provisions (Articles 83–89) have been revised, and the five-yuan structure has undergone major adjustments—but the voting age has sat quietly in place.

The Constitution's archives do not preserve much debate on how this twenty-year-old number was decided. The historical context was the 35th year of the Republic of China era, with World War II just ended, the Chinese Civil War about to erupt, and democratic politics not yet truly functioning. Twenty was considered a reasonable age of majority at the time, even slightly lower than the standard in most contemporary countries (the U.S., UK, and Japan were all 21 then)⁷.

Notably, from the drafting of the Constitution through to post-war Taiwan's electoral practice, the voting age was always twenty and never changed. Sometimes people say "it used to be 21, then changed to 20"—this claim does not match the constitutional text. It may be a confusion of the U.S. 26th Amendment (21 → 18) with Taiwan's local history [NEEDS-VERIFY source of the folk 21→20 claim].

2005's Threshold: Constitutional Reform Becomes Very Hard

To understand why 5.64 million votes in 2022 were not enough, we must return to June 7, 2005—the day the now-defunct National Assembly passed the seventh amendment to the Additional Articles, doing two things: abolishing the National Assembly and switching constitutional reform to referendum-based decision-making⁸.

The amended Additional Articles, Article 12, read:

"Amendments to the Constitution shall be proposed by one-fourth of the total number of members of the Legislative Yuan, passed by a three-fourths majority of those present, and decided by a three-fourths majority of the members present; the proposed constitutional amendments shall be submitted for referendum decision by the electorate of the free area of the Republic of China within six months after promulgation, and shall take effect upon approval by a majority of the valid votes cast."⁹

This clause established one of the world's highest constitutional amendment thresholds:

1. One-fourth of Legislative Yuan members to propose (1/4 of 113 seats = 29 seats)
2. Three-fourths attendance in the Legislative Yuan (3/4 of 113 seats = 85 seats)
3. Three-fourths of attending members to pass (3/4 of 85 attending = 64 votes; if all attend, 85 votes)
4. Submitted for referendum six months after promulgation
5. Majority of all eligible voters in the free area (9.62 million votes in 2022)

The fifth item is the real hard threshold. "Majority of all eligible voters" is not "majority of votes cast"—it is "half of all people with the right to vote." In other words, those who do not vote are counted as voting "no." Even with 100% turnout, more than half of all eligible voters must check "yes" for it to pass.

How high is this threshold? Compare it to presidential elections: in 2020, Tsai Ing-wen won re-election with 8.17 million votes, the highest vote count in history¹⁰; in 2024, Lai Ching-te won with 5.58 million votes, a 40.05% vote share¹¹. No president in Taiwan's history has received more votes than the 9.62 million threshold required for a constitutional amendment.

When the 2005 National Assembly designed this threshold, the original intent was "constitutional reform should be extremely difficult and should not be easily manipulated by the majority party"—an understandable intention. But twenty years later, the practical result is: since 2005's switch to referendum-based decision-making, Taiwan's Constitution is effectively frozen. The 2022 18-year-old suffrage referendum was the first attempt after the reform, and so far the only one.

Twenty Years of Appeals: From 2005 to 2022

Lowering the voting age to 18 was not a claim that emerged in 2022. Stretching the timeline reveals at least twenty years of accumulation:

• 2005: In the second year of the Public Referendum Act's implementation, civil society groups "Youth Platform" and "Youth Labor 95 Union" began discussing youth political participation thresholds¹²
• 2014: After 太陽花學運, the younger generation's political consciousness awakened, and "18-year-old suffrage" became a shared demand across partisan youth organizations¹³
• 2017: The National Development Council's "Youth Vision National Affairs Conference" concluded with "recommend promoting lowering the voting age to 18"¹⁴
• 2018: The Civil Code's age of majority was changed to 18 (Civil Code Article 12 amendment), and Public Referendum Act Article 7 simultaneously lowered the referendum voting age from 20 to 18, creating the systemic gap of "18-year-olds can vote in referendums but not in presidential elections"¹⁵
• 2020: The Legislative Yuan's Constitutional Amendment Committee was formed, discussing amendments to Article 130
• March 25, 2022: The Constitutional Amendment Committee of the Legislative Yuan passed the "18-year-old suffrage" amendment proposal with a 109-0 unanimous vote, setting a rare cross-party consensus record in Taiwan's constitutional amendment history¹⁶
• November 26, 2022: The constitutional amendment referendum, with 5.64 million agreeing and 5.02 million disagreeing, failed to meet the threshold

Particularly worth noting is the March 2022 Legislative Yuan vote. That day, all members of the Kuomintang, Democratic Progressive Party, Taiwan People's Party, and independents attended and voted yes—this is almost unmatched in Taiwan's legislative politics. Cross-party consensus was not lacking; what was lacking was voter mobilization in the referendum stage.

That Slogan: "Pay Taxes, Serve the Military, But Can't Vote"

The core talking point of the 18-year-old suffrage movement was a structurally simple comparison:

"I pay taxes, I have to serve in the military, but I can't elect the president."

The Republic of China's Civil Code lowered the age of majority from 20 to 18 starting in 2023¹⁷—at 18 you can marry, sign contracts, bear civil liability independently, serve in the military, bear criminal responsibility, pay income tax, and vote in referendums (per Public Referendum Act Article 7), but you still cannot vote for president, legislators, or local elections.

This systemic gap became the movement's main narrative in 2022. Supporters' arguments were: since all other civic duties begin at 18, the right to vote should not stop at 20. Opponents' arguments generally fell into three categories: (1) 18-year-olds' mental maturity is debatable; (2) the constitutional amendment tied to referendum decision-making raises procedural concerns; (3) once lowered, it might be lowered further to 16.

Neither side's arguments are what this piece evaluates—this piece records the systemic structure: the Civil Code's age of majority changed to 18, the referendum right changed to 18, but the voting right remains at 20. This asymmetry itself is the legacy left by the failed constitutional amendment.

International Comparison: Taiwan's Twenty-Year-Old in the World's Coordinates

Zooming out to the international stage, Taiwan's 20-year-old voting age is a minority among democratic countries.

United States: The 26th Amendment of 1971, Driven by the Vietnam War

The U.S. Constitution's 26th Amendment was proposed by Congress on March 23, 1971, and ratified by three-fourths of the states within three and a half months, taking effect on July 1—the fastest ratification in U.S. constitutional amendment history¹⁸. The text is simple:

"The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age."

The driving force was the Vietnam War. In the 1960s, the U.S. military draft age was 18, but the voting age was 21—"old enough to fight, old enough to vote" became a rallying slogan. By the time it passed in 1971, the Vietnam War was in its late stages, with 58,000 American military deaths, most of them drafted 18-to-20-year-old youths¹⁹.

United Kingdom: The Representation of the People Act of 1969

The UK acted earlier than the U.S., passing the Representation of the People Act 1969 in 1969, lowering the voting age from 21 to 18²⁰. This act did not go through constitutional amendment (the UK has no written constitution) and was passed by parliamentary majority—this is the flexibility of parliamentary sovereignty.

Japan: The 2015 Public Office Election Law Amendment, the First Reduction in 70 Years

Japan's House of Representatives passed the Act Amending the Public Office Election Law (Heisei 27 Year Law No. 43) on June 17, 2015, lowering the voting age from 20 to 18²¹. It took effect on June 19, 2016, and the July 10, 2016 House of Councillors election became the first to apply the new rule, adding approximately 2.4 million new 18-19-year-old voters nationwide.

Japan's reduction was the first adjustment to the voting age in 70 years since 1945—from the Showa 20 year (20 years) set in 1945 to 18 years in 2015. The background of the amendment was partly a response to criticism of "silver democracy" (overly skewed toward elderly voters) and partly aligned with the 2014 amendment to the National Referendum Act (which lowered the referendum voting age to 18).

South Korea: The 2020 Public Office Election Law Amendment

South Korea passed the Public Office Election Law amendment in December 2019, lowering the voting age from 19 to 18, effective January 2020²². This reduction was timed for the April 2020 National Assembly election, adding approximately 530,000 new 18-year-old voters.

Notably, South Korea's original voting age was 19 (not Taiwan or Japan's 20)—this 19-year-old history can be traced back to the 1948 setting of the Republic of Korea's election law.

Global Trend: 18 Is the Mainstream Among Democratic Countries

Compiling OECD's 38 countries' voting ages:

• 18 years: 36 countries (U.S., UK, France, Germany, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Poland, Czech Republic, and the vast majority of EU members)
• 19 years: 0 countries (South Korea lowered in 2020)
• 20 years: 1 country (Taiwan—noted here as Taiwan is not an OECD member, listed for comparison)
• 16 years: Austria nationwide (since 2007), some German local elections, some Scottish local elections, Brazil (voluntary for 16-17)²³

In other words: Taiwan's 20-year-old voting age is an outlier among OECD-level democratic countries. Even excluding OECD, looking at other Asian democracies (Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia changed to 18 in 2019), 18 is the mainstream.

The Controversy of Binding Referendums to Elections: Another Structural Variable

November 26, 2022, also had another often-overlooked structural background: it was Taiwan's last time a constitutional amendment referendum was held on the same day as a general election.

After the four referendums held nationwide on December 18, 2021, the Legislative Yuan passed amendments to the Public Referendum Act, forcing referendums and elections to be decoupled—ordinary referendums must be held on separate days from elections²⁴. But the constitutional amendment passed in March 2022 had a special clause: the constitutional amendment referendum was bound to the November 26, 2022 nine-in-one elections, a compromise design by the Legislative Yuan to save costs and boost turnout.

This design created two contradictions:

1. Boosting turnout: Riding on the nine-in-one elections, the overall turnout on November 26 reached 59.86%, far higher than the 41% turnout of the December 2021 standalone referendum
2. Diluting the referendum focus: When voters entered the polling stations, they prioritized the nine types of election positions, and the tenth constitutional amendment ballot was often treated as an "add-on"—some voters did not even know there was such a ballot

The final data shows an interesting tension: turnout was not low (59%), approval was not low (53%), cross-party consensus was complete (Legislative Yuan 109-0)—but the threshold was too high (9.62 million). These three "not lows" combined still fell short by 3.97 million votes.

After the Failed Amendment: The Silence of the System

On November 27, 2022, the day after the referendum failed, legislators from both sides of the aisle responded to the result. Both the Kuomintang caucus and the Democratic Progressive Party caucus issued statements praising the "cross-party consensus," but regarding next steps, there was no concrete timeline²⁵.

From November 2022 to May 2026, the Legislative Yuan has not initiated any constitutional amendment. Although legislators from various parties mentioned "should restart the 18-year-old suffrage constitutional amendment" on different occasions, in practice:

• No new constitutional amendment proposal has entered the Constitutional Amendment Committee
• No second Legislative Yuan session has achieved three-fourths attendance and three-fourths passage
• No second referendum decision-making

In 2026, Taiwan's voting age is still 20. Article 130's "twenty years of age" remains unchanged. Seventy-nine years since the Constitution was drafted.

Democratic countries do not usually amend their constitutions frequently (it is common sense in constitutional politics that amendments should be difficult), but "thresholds so high they lead to practical freezing" is another matter. Taiwan's 21 years since 2005 have seen zero successful constitutional amendments—this number itself is a result of institutional design.

Why This Number Matters

Zooming the lens further out, in the narratives of 民主化 and 台灣民主轉型, the voting rights threshold is often treated as a "formal issue"—not as visible as electoral fairness, party rotation, or press freedom. But this age threshold touches on the fundamental definition of "who is a citizen":

• The 20-year threshold means Taiwan society implicitly assumes 18-19-year-olds are "not yet full political citizens"
• At the same time, these people are already full civil liability subjects, criminal liability subjects, taxpayers, and military service obligations
• This gap does not affect daily life, but every election year (presidential elections every four years, nine-in-one every four years) it resurfaces

In November 2026, Taiwan will hold the next nine-in-one elections. If the Legislative Yuan does not restart the constitutional amendment process before then, the 18-19-year-olds in 2026 (born in 2007-2008) will still be unable to vote—they will have to wait until 2028 (presidential election) or 2030 (next nine-in-one) to obtain the right to vote. Among these youths, many were still in elementary school during the 2014 太陽花學運; by the time they grow old enough to vote, the movement will be 14 years in the past.

The timeline of democratic institutions is longer than a single generation. The 20-year-old set in 1947 now affects the generation born in 2007. From which year this line can move down, there is still no answer.

Further Reading

• 九合一選舉是什麼: The institutional origins of the nine types of local elections to be held in November 2026
• [2026 九合一選舉](/politics/2026 九合一選舉): This election's schedule, nominations, and issue tracking
• 太陽花學運: The landmark event of youth political awakening in 2014
• 民主化: The long-term structure of Taiwan's post-war democratization
• 台灣民主轉型: Institutional changes from authoritarianism to democracy
• Politics Hub: Overview of Taiwan's political system knowledge

Footnotes

This article belongs to the 2026 Election Series Tier 1.1 evergreen institutional articles, following the symmetry principle (no partisan bias, only institutional evolution) + institutional layer focus (no candidate-level) + three-layer self-application filter (MANIFESTO §Autonomous Rights Boundaries / REFLEXES #16 Cross-source Verification / Five Buckets Classification). Last verified date: 2026-05-27.