The Future of US Elections: Potential Changes and Emerging Issues

The issues debated by candidates and political parties change over time based on technological, economic, and cultural changes in society. In the early American republic, many election issues dealt with federalism and the scope of power of the central government. In the 1840s and 1850s, slavery became a dominant election issue at the national level. Economic issues dominated the elections of the 1930s during the Great Depression. Using the most recent societal changes today, we can predict the looming election issues of tomorrow. Some of these issues are new, being thrust on us by technological or foreign policy changes, while others are perennial (recurring) issues that have returned to the forefront. Here’s a look at our next few election cycles.

The first potential political issue to become fodder for future federal elections (US House of Representatives, US Senate, US President/Vice President) is school vouchers. Currently, this is a state issue, as states are in charge of public K-12 education. However, federal candidates may want to make it a national issue by linking federal funding to school vouchers. The school choice movement, which often includes vouchers, has been seen as a winner by many Republicans: countless parents like the idea of receiving government subsidies to send their children to private schools or engage in homeschooling if they wish.

However, advocates of public schools—which are often the largest individual local employers—have pushed back fiercely on vouchers. They argue that voucher funding will inevitably cut into funding for public schools, threatening teacher and staff livelihoods and subjecting public school students to fewer resources. Many also question the quality of education that voucher-receiving students will receive at non-public schools, which do not have to meet objective requirements like standardized testing. With lots of powerful rhetoric on both sides, look for the school voucher debate to grow in upcoming election cycles.

State(ish) to National: Higher Education Costs and Funding

Democrats and Republicans are likely to diverge significantly on their desired solution for rising college costs. Democrats have proposed forgiving existing college debt, coupled with more generous terms for student loans and grants. Republicans, by contrast, have proposed forcing schools to use their endowments to subsidize tuition, resulting in lower out-of-pocket costs for students.

Similar to the debate over school choice and school vouchers, there is a strong cultural component to this debate. Critics of rising college costs often blame a tendency for high schools to uniformly push college enrollment on graduating seniors, driving up demand for college and raising tuition and fees as a result. These critics argue that K-12 schools should give students more options for career readiness and recognize that not all high school students will benefit from, or even desire, a traditional 4-year university experience. Look for both higher education funding and expectations of high schools in promoting college readiness to be significant political issues in upcoming election cycles.

Long before K-12 public education and higher education became political issues, immigration was always an issue. Going back to the 1840s, the United States has had a controversial relationship with immigrants, alternating between acceptance and demonization of people coming to our shores. Immigration has heated up again as a political issue in recent years due to an increase in immigration from Latin America coming across the southern border. Republicans have blamed Democrats for failing to “secure the border,” while Democrats have accused Republicans of inhumane treatment toward migrants and using rhetoric more than action to achieve fair immigration policies.

The new angle in 2024 and beyond comes from America’s declining birthrate. Worldwide, birth rates are slumping as parents are having fewer children, largely due to rising costs and a decrease in the use of children as labor. Proponents of more relaxed immigration policies will likely point to the declining American birthrate as a reason to be more generous on immigration, arguing that immigrants will help continue economic growth as native-born citizens average fewer than two children per couple. The 2024 Republican vice presidential nominee likely intensified this debate by claiming in 2021 that childless families should pay more taxes due to having “less stake” in America’s future.

A Renewed Foreign Policy Debate: NATO and Russia

The eruption of the Russo-Ukrainian War in February 2022 renewed political debates about America’s relationship with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). As the United States rushed military equipment and assets to Ukraine, some Republicans began questioning the economic impact of spending so much money on foreign aid. The war also intensified the use of new technologies in combat, particularly computer-controlled drones and cyberwarfare, to target an opponent’s infrastructure. Some questioned whether continued support for Ukraine would put American infrastructure at risk of Russian hackers.

America’s allies in the region have supported Ukraine to differing degrees, provoking some criticism that the United States is effectively footing the bill for protecting Western Europe from Russian aggression. Many conservatives have complained that most NATO members are underspending on national defense and not meeting a 2 percent GDP target on defense spending. As the United States continues to suffer from high inflation, it is likely that many conservatives will criticize sending defense dollars to Europe instead of building infrastructure at home. However, liberals will likely defend such spending as akin to the Lend-Lease Program at the start of World War II, which helped prevent Nazi Germany from seizing all of Europe.

As a former superpower, Russia is likely to be a renewed foreign policy challenge for the United States in upcoming elections. Similarly, Islamic terrorism is back at the foreign policy forefront as well due to the brutal beginning of the Israeli-Hamas War, which erupted on October 7, 2023. The terrorist attack by Hamas on Israeli citizens on October 7 brought about global condemnation, but Israel’s aggressive military intervention in Gaza in response quickly brought about its own criticism. Many Americans were and are divided on how the United States should respond: continued support for Israel or increased support for innocent civilians in Gaza and Palestine?

The war between Israel and the various supporters of Hamas will likely continue for some time, making it a potent issue for upcoming election cycles. Having supported Israel during three previous wars (in 1948, 1967, and 1973), the United States is expected to continue backing its longtime ally in the Middle East. However, in a new development, the US government has formally criticized Israel’s failure to minimize civilian casualties. This could spark a new debate similar to early American intervention during the Vietnam War when protesters criticized the government of South Vietnam as brutal and repressive.

A Growing Debate With New Financial Consequences: Climate Change 

The modern environmental movement dates back to the 1960s when critics attacked pollution being spewed by corporations. Over time, scientists began pointing to more widespread dilemmas caused by decades of fossil fuel and chemical use: climate change. Although the first predictions of global warming were made as far back as 1896, it took many years of data for most scientists to agree that the planet was actually experiencing the phenomenon. The late 1980s and early 1990s saw the first international efforts to understand and attempt to limit climate change and global warming. With each subsequent election cycle, liberals increased their focus on environmental issues, often facing conservative denial.

Recent elections have seen increased partisan intensity over climate change, especially as governments around the world have proposed reforms and limits on activities. In the United States, Republicans have largely opposed government efforts to limit carbon emissions and investment in clean energy. This increase in heated rhetoric is likely to continue in future election cycles as climate scientists report continued—even accelerated—global warming. Environmentalists will urge governments to reduce the use of fossil fuels, and conservatives will argue that such restrictions will cost more money and eliminate jobs in the fossil fuel industry.

The national debt has been a perennial political issue in the United States, especially since Reaganomics in the 1980s. Although the national debt remained relatively stable during the economic boom of the 1990s, it began increasing rapidly again after the September 11 terror attacks in 2001. The Global War on Terror, which saw the US invasion of both Afghanistan and Iraq, cost hundreds of billions of dollars directly. Amid this increased defense spending, the Great Recession erupted after the financial crisis of 2008. Government stimulus spending helped limit unemployment and protect domestic industries but at the cost of further deficit spending. While both Democrats and Republicans have criticized excessive federal spending, there is little bipartisan agreement on how to limit such excess.

Traditionally, liberals have called for reductions in federal spending on defense, law enforcement, prisons, and subsidies for industries like petroleum and retail. Conservatives, meanwhile, have called for reduced spending on welfare programs, grants for education and the arts, and subsidies for clean energy industries. With the national debt steadily increasing, look for the partisan battles to intensify in future election cycles as the government is forced to pay the interest on the debt. This mandatory debt service is more expensive every year and will soon force cuts to other federal spending, triggering tremendous battles in Congress.

A Second Classic: Energy Independence

As old as the national debt debate is the debate over energy policy. How far should the US government go to ensure energy independence, or not having to import petroleum? Since the 1973 oil embargo, the United States has sought various means to wean itself off foreign oil, with little success. High oil prices increase demands for energy independence, either through increased domestic oil production or an increase in clean energy sources, but tend to relax when oil prices fall again. The petroleum market is very complicated, leading to lots of political debate over the necessity of government intervention when oil prices are considered too high or too low.

Complicating the oil price issue is the large American oil industry, which likes high prices. Unfortunately, high oil prices tend to harm other industries through elevated costs of production via fuel and energy. Energy independence has long been considered a national security issue, with proponents concerned that foreign suppliers could “cut off” the United States in the event of a conflict. However, the two major parties staunchly differ on how to achieve this energy independence, with Republicans wanting to support the domestic oil industry through relaxed regulations on drilling and Democrats wanting to support a shift to clean and renewable energy sources.

Many people have likely heard of AI policies in regard to education, with teachers concerned about students using artificial intelligence programs to cheat on assignments. At the federal level, many policymakers may currently know little about AI and its status…but that will almost undoubtedly change.

As businesses and common citizens come to better understand and utilize AI software to its full capability, there could be major shifts in how human activities occur—ranging from education to online shopping to creating and consuming entertainment. These changes are likely to be embraced by some but rejected by others, sparking political values.

Currently, education policymakers are struggling with how to handle AI. Should students be prevented from using it now, even though they will have access to it as adults? But could open use of AI cause unexpected ethical dilemmas, such as AI giving users access to private data?

Politically, there are lots of potential pitfalls to both allowing free and open AI and trying to limit people’s access to AI. Open AI could violate privacy rights or inadvertently benefit hackers, while limiting AI could be seen as reactionary and repressive. It is almost certain that staffers in both major parties are crafting their issue papers on artificial intelligence in anticipation of debates in 2026, 2028, and beyond.

A Dark Horse Issue: Medicare for All Returneth?

Single-payer healthcare erupted as a political issue in 2016 and energized millions of voters. In 2020, it returned amid the Covid pandemic and presidential election cycle. With healthcare costs rising, both major parties will undoubtedly tackle healthcare reform in future election cycles. Will Democrats re-open their Medicare for All proposal for single-payer healthcare? Polling shows a slight majority of US voters in favor of the proposal, which is similar to systems in other developed countries like Canada, Australia, and much of Western Europe.

Demand for healthcare in the United States will increase in the near future as the population ages, which will also increase the number of Americans on Medicare. As more Americans are on Medicare already, liberals may feel emboldened to make renewed pushes to expand Medicare to the entire population. This will likely be strongly resisted by conservatives, who argue that government provision of healthcare will be inefficient and rob consumers of choice. This broad argument has been debated between both sides periodically since World War II but seems likely to re-emerge in the next few election cycles.