Summary: A recent study from Denmark highlights two reasons why the voting age should be lowered. First, lowering the voting age allows people to develop lifelong habits of voting consistently. Second, allowing more kids to vote encourages their parents to vote. Ultimately, allowing kids to vote at a younger age will "boost political participation" on two fronts since more young ones will develop the habit of voting regularly, and their parents will vote more as well. These studies were backed up by other countries, such as Austria and Scotland, where kids as young as 16 can vote in primary elections. While some believe that kids will not be able to make mature and informed decisions, the teens who are advocating for stricter gun legislation following the Parkland shooting are proving that kids can be articulate and powerful in the way they fight for what they believe in. Since the shooting directly affected them, shouldn't they have a voice in the kinds of laws related to guns that are passed?
Discussion Questions:
1. What do you think the voting age should be?
2. Is there a way to only allow some qualified teens to vote? Would this make more people open to allowing younger people to vote?
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/02/28/the-surprising-consequence-of-lowering-the-voting-age/?utm_term=.f466e0cd46c9
15 comments:
I honestly don't think that the voting age should be changed. While I definitely agree that there are some 16-17-year-olds that are educated enough to vote, I don't think that the majority of high schoolers are ready to vote yet. And while some are educated enough I also think that voting takes responsibility which I'm not sure 16-year-olds all have (although some adults don't either). For me personally, I don't think I would have been ready to vote this year if I haven't taken APUSH or APgov also.
I agree with Julia and I think the voting age is good where it's at. Many kids who are under 18 are still dependent on their families and sometimes, that might bias their voting. It could turn into a second or third or fourth vote for their parents if a kid doesn't really have their own opinion, which is unfair and skews the democratic value of the voting system. Furthermore, there really isn't a way to allow some people to vote and others to not, and I honestly don't think there should be. Merit/entrance exams have historically been discriminatory and biased, and I think any attempt to make a new one will uphold this trend. Educated people more familiar with American culture will probably perform the best, and I think that if we are going to lower the voting age, we should provide the opportunity to every citizen.
I agree that the voting age shouldn't be lowered because I feel like 16 year olds in general are not mature enough nor do they know enough to handle such a serious responsibility. I feel the same way as Julia in regards to the fact that I now know that I wouldn't have been ready to vote without taking APUSH and AP gov first, as those classes have taught me a lot of things that will help my knowledge on how I want to vote when I turn 18; although not every teen in the country will take these classes or learn as much as we did from them, I think any new bit of information possible can help how they vote, and this usually happens after age 16. Furthermore, although many teens know a lot about social issues, but that is different in other parts of the country, I feel like most 16 year olds would not have enough education or experience to be able to vote on economic/financial issues, something 18 year olds are likely able to understand more because they will have a job, are living on their own, or gain valuable experiences with in college.
I agree with the above comments against lowering the voting age, at least for major elections. That being said, I would advocate for 16- and 17-year-olds to have a vote or a fraction of a vote in local elections. These elections have the lowest voter turnout, and thus having youths voting would have a greater impact in increasing votes among parents. Additionally, voting only in local elections require less research than voting in all elections. It solves the issue that Erin brought up about teens being less informed in other parts of the country, as the policy would only affect this area.
I also agree that the voting age should not be lowered. Its not that I think that 16 year olds aren't mature enough, but I feel that 16 and 17 year olds haven't really gotten enough exposure to the world to vote. As Caroline said, most 18 year olds are still dependent on their families. Without having to pay rent, taxes, or work, I feel like 16 and 17 year olds will not have enough exposure to be able to form their own political opinions. Even if they are educated, they still haven't really been able to live on their own. As for the second question, I believe that you cannot and should not allow only qualified teens to vote. I feel like doing so will only lead to discrimination and restrictions on current freedoms.
I think that voting shouldn't be based on age in general, it should be based on intellect (I mean I can probably point out examples of people at any age who really really should not be given a vote). But since there is no real good way to measure intellect, and because America is founded on equality, I think that it is important everyone gets a vote, and 18 seems like a good age to begin. We just have to trust that in the future people will get smarter.
I would leave the voting age at 18. Most of the US is not well informed, and most teens also fall into that category. Students in high school usually have many things to deal with, and they usually are not focused on bigger issues that go on in the US.
As stated above, I don't think it is the best idea in the long run to lower the voting age. It may cause more political participation, but most teenagers are not educated enough to vote. I also believe that we can't allow some individuals to vote before others because there is no fair way to determine if they are "qualified" enough. Therefore, it is best to keep the voting age at 18 when individuals become an adult.
Personally, I think we already have enough to worry about at the age of 16. Most students are in the middle of their high school experience and worrying about getting into their desired college more than anything. There's also a large portion of students who simply don't care about politics at that age, so their vote would be an empty and potentially hurtful one. It takes time to mature and gain some knowledge about our country's politics, especially when our first government class is in senior year. I don't think it's a smart idea to let unexperienced people have such a substantial input into politics in the form of voting.
I totally agree with most of the people above. Many students under the age of 18 are generally high-schoolers with so much on their plate such as college apps, keeping grades up, and extracurriculars. I feel that since they have all this work to do, they don't have the time to thoroughly research politics and learn enough about the field to engage in voting. Of course there are those students who are very engaged with the country and politics, but with not enough being that engaged, I think that it is a big risk allowing people under the age of 18 to vote. And at 18, most kids are done with high school and in college, where they will learn government/politics at a more advanced level. At 18, I also think that students have a better sense of their limits and themselves; for example, at 16, students may just vote for someone because their friends are doing so.
I don't think the voting age needs to change, I mean most people who are 16 are half through high school, probably don't even know what they want to do in life and are still dependent. plus out of all the countries in the world america tends to pay attention to their politics the least, because statically america is one of the most overworked countries in the world so they don't have time to. So if the adults don't know much about their own countries politics, why trust an even younger demographic. While I do agree that their are some young individuals that have the maturity and knowledge to vote, I just don't think their is a big enough demographic of those people to warrant a change in the age of voting.
I do not think the voting age should be lowered and I am not sure if the studies done in Denmark or other countries can be applied to ours because there are different cultural attitudes towards politics. I also do not think 16 year olds or even 17 year olds should be able to vote on issues that do not apply to them yet, such as taxes or policies that apply to people 18 years or older. We should either allow everyone to vote or no one to vote, because we ought to uphold equality in a democracy and I'm sure many people 18 years or older probably have the maturity as some 17 year olds but they are still able to vote, but we need to draw the line somewhere. Furthermore, 16/17 year olds might not be independent enough and just be putting in another vote for their parents.
I do not think the voting age should change. While I understand their frustration and reasoning for wanting to lower the age, I think it will bring chaos. I think that 18 is the perfect age because one is still a young adult, yet they tend to be more mature. Also, in high school, that is one's time to learn and make their own political view on policies and parties. If people start voting too young then they are more likely to either not create their own beliefs regarding policies (maybe take their parent's views), or not fully understand certain topics. The students are not necessarily wrong, but I think they need to draw a line somewhere and that somewhere should be 18 as it seems to be in the middle of both young and old.
While I agree with the comments above on the immaturity and lack of knowledge of teens, I still believe the voting age should be lowered because teens are the future, and many of the government's action will affect them in the long run. Furthermore, most juniors are 16 when people learn US History, so I think it would be wise to integrate material on the election into that curriculum to teach students how to vote consciously, and become aware of the candidates that seek to represent them. Let it be known that many American citizens wouldn't be able to pass the American history citizenship tests given to immigrants and aliens who apply for a citizenship. I would also argue that high school students are more knowledgeable than some voters in the US. With that being said, 16 year olds still make rash, and irresponsible choices, therefore I think it would be useful to include a test or voting requirement that 16 and 17 year olds must meet prior to voting, just to ensure that they aren't putting in a joke vote, and that they actually want to perform in the democratic process that's so pivotal to our society.
Agh, i'm so conflicted on this issue because while it is very important to allow the younger generation to have a voice in politics, I also know of some VERY immature and ignorant 16 year olds who honestly shouldn't vote because they aren't sufficiently knowledgable in politics (then again, there are also some very irresponsible and ignorant adults who shouldn't be voting). I'm not sure if lowering the voting age would be the greatest idea but I guess we just got to take the risk? I mean the ones who's futures will be most affected by future politicians are the youth and therefore they should be able to contribute by voting.
Post a Comment