Posted on 05/05/2017 9:26:27 AM PDT by EinNYC
Political and social activism is surging in America. Protest groups are springing up across the country. Concerned citizens are marching in the streets to support science, women's rights, justice and immigration. Congressional offices are flooded with calls from constituents.
And much of the renewed political and social activity is being carried out by high school students — many of them committed and informed activists, yet still too young to vote.
It is time to give those students a voice in government.
That’s the goal of the New York Young Voter Act, a bill the Youth Progressive Policy Group is pushing with the support of Assemblyman Robert Carroll (D–Brooklyn) and State Sen. Brad Hoylman (D–Manhattan). The bill — A.6839/S.5646, if you want to look it up — would lower the voting age in New York State to 17 in all local and statewide elections. It would also improve the high school curriculum by bolstering nuts-and-bolts civic education with lessons on the history and meaning of the Constitution, plus more intense focus on "genocide, slavery, the Holocaust, and the mass starvation in Ireland," according to the bill.
As a practical matter, the bill would also provide all high school students with the opportunity to register in their classrooms so they’re eligible in time for the next Election Day.
Opponents may contend that 17 year olds are not emotionally or intellectually ready for the responsibility of voting. But American 17 year olds already shoulder many of the responsibilities of adulthood: They can join the military (with parental consent), they can drop out of high school and work to support themselves and their families (80% of American high school students will hold jobs and pay taxes before they graduate), and, of course, they can drive a motor vehicle — one of their most dangerous responsibilities.
Still, these 17 year olds are left with no say in public affairs; they have no say in how their tax dollars are spent, how their public schools are run, how the criminal justice system is administered, and how legislators set their agendas.
Beyond enshrining the adult responsibilities and maturity of most 17 year olds, setting the voting age at 17 would expand and improve dismally low levels of democratic participation and civic engagement. In Austria, Brazil, Argentina, Scotland and one Maryland city, civic engagement soared when lawmakers lowered the voting age to 16. For example, the voter turnout by newly eligible 16- and 17-year olds in the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 was 75% — far higher than the 54% turnout by 18- to 24-year olds.
So this is how the NEA wants to expand the power of the Democratic Party that they own.
“You left off the “/sarc”.”
Either that, or he left off the “I’m an idiot”.
We’d have a much freer, less intrusive government. Just look at voting patterns. What’s wrong with that?
You should either own property or own a business to be able to vote. One should have a financial interest in the financial success of the Country.
If you owned a Business with 10 people on the Board as Owners and 100 employees, would you let the Employees have a VOTE equal to each Owner on their Compensation package???
That’s what I thought!
Apples and oranges-——and you know it.
.
I would agree to extend it to people that actually Pay Federal Taxes, NET!
If you owned a Business with 10 people on the Board as Owners and 100 employees, would you let the Employees have a VOTE equal to each Owner on their Compensation package???
That’s what I thought!
Really?? Do you think a Town of 100 with 75 on Welfare should have an equal vote as to how much property Taxes are paid by the other 25?? Or how much money they should receive from the Public Treasury??
Not apples and oranges, logic 101 and hypocrisy 101
Your original post said that only property owners should vote,and now you’re yapping about people on welfare.
You may be astonished to find out that people that are employed often rent,by choice———somebody is paying the big money rents for the apartments in my area.
Voting should not be restricted to property owners.
.
How are they different from ordinary democrats then?
Democrats want empty headed kids as voters because they know that is a trick they have used to great advantage for years.
Age should not be criterion for voting. Work history, property owning, etc, should be a requirement to vote. Any fool can be a citizen. But fools shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
I’ve ignored this thread all day because, well, it’s just a stupid idea. But it does reinforce the notion that democRats really need ignorant voters to win elections.
Hahahaha.. highschoolers.
The democrat voter base: criminals, sexual deviants, communists, illegal aliens, people who vote multiple times, fake voter registration, the dead and the stupid.
I think I was about 24 when I voted for the first time. I wanted to know all about it to be able to make the best decision possible.
21 and pass a civics exam.
“This will result in Bella Thorne being elected Governor of New York.”
She would be better than what they’ve got.
The voting age should be 40-65: old enough to have life experience, not yet old enough to be senile.
In the Old Testament a man had to be 20 years old to fight in the army. how about 20 yrs for all, military, smoking, drinking, voting.
so, the guy opens a restaurant employing 100 people runs at a loss for the first couple of years due to start up costs loses his right to vote?
your post makes no sense as a response to my post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.