Posted on 09/19/2014 2:56:32 PM PDT by right-wing agnostic
Scotland allowed 16 and 17 year olds to vote in yesterday’s historic referendum on independence. Georgetown political theorist Jason Brennan, author of the excellent book The Ethics of Voting, makes a strong case that the United States should do the same thing:
Scotland decided to trust its 16-year-olds to vote in the biggest question in its history when the country headed to the polls this week for a referendum on independence. Americans, in contrast, don’t even trust theirs to help pick the county sheriff. Who’s right?
Many here might be skeptical about the idea of the United States following Scotland’s lead in lowering the voting age. The trouble is that the main reason most people cite for barring 16- and 17-year-olds from voting looks like an equally good reason to stop most American adults from voting, too.
The key argument against letting high school juniors vote is simple: Their choice would affect all of us. After all, a voter chooses for everyone, not just him or herself. Many worry that most 16-year-olds lack the wisdom or knowledge to cast smart votes, so we don’t let them vote because we want to protect ourselves from their decisions.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I was on here 4 years before you. Try something with a little more substance if you disagree with the post. There are many valid arguments against my post, why not think of one
Yes!! Of course, “Lady Ga Ga, Mylie Cyrus or Fabolous for president”. s/
In Nevil Shute’s novel, “In The Wet”, written in 1953 but set in the 1980’s, England is exhausted, impoverished, and stifled by rationing and central planning – not unlike the post-WWII England with which Shute and his contemporary readers were familiar. In contrast to the mother country, Australia is vibrant, prosperous, and growing, conditions which the author attributes to its adoption some years earlier of a system of “multiple voting”. Citizens can acquire up to seven votes, in any combination.
‘How does your multiple vote work? It’s quite an issue here in England, as perhaps you know.’
The pilot raised his eyebrows. ‘I didn’t know that. You don’t have it, do you?’
‘No. How does it work out in practice?’
‘I don’t really know,’said David. ‘I’ve never thought about it much.’
Captain Osbome asked, ‘Have you got more than one vote, yourself?’
The pilot nodded. ‘I’m a three vote man.’
[…]
‘What do you get three votes for?’ the captain asked.
‘Basic, education, and foreign travel.’
‘The basic vote - that’s what everybody gets, is it?’
‘That’s right,’ the pilot said. ‘Everybody gets that at the age of twenty one.’
‘And education?’
‘That’s for higher education,’ David said. ‘You get it if you take a university degree. There’s a whole list of other things you get it for, like being a solicitor or a doctor. Officers get it when they’re commissioned. That’s how I got mine.’
‘And foreign travel?’’
‘That’s for earning your living outside Australia for two years. It’s a bit of a racket, that one, because in the war a lot of people got it for their war service. I got mine that way. I didn’t know anything about the Philippines, really, I when I came away, although I’d been there for three years, off and on.’
‘You had a wider outlook than if you’d stayed at home,’ the captain said. ‘I suppose that’s worth something.’
‘I suppose it is.’
‘So you’ve got three votes. How does that work out in practice, at an election?’
‘You get three voting papers given to you, and fill in all three, and put them in the box,’ the pilot said.
‘You’re on the register as having three votes?’
‘That’s right. You have to register again when you get an extra vote - produce some sort of a certificate.’
They sat in silence for a time, looking out over the crowded harbour in the sunset light. Rosemary came to the saloon ladder and spoke up to them. ‘You can get more votes than three, can’t you?’ she said. ‘Is it seven?’
David glanced down her. ‘The seventh is hardly ever given,’ he said. ‘Only the Queen can give that.’
She nodded. ‘I know. We get them coming through the office. I should think there must be about ten a year.’
‘The others are straightforward,’ David said. ‘You get a vote if you raise two children to the age of fourteen without getting a divorce. That’s the family vote.’
‘You can’t get it if you’re divorced?’ asked Rosemary smiling.
‘No. That puts you out.’
‘Do you both get it?’
‘Husband and wife both get it,’ David said.
‘What’s the fifth one?’
‘The achievement vote,’ said David. ‘You get an extra vote if your personal exertion income - what you call earned income here - if that was over something or other in the year before the election - five thousand a year, I think. I don’t aspire to that one. It’s supposed to cater for the man who’s got no education and has never been out of Australia and quarrelled with his wife, but built up a big business. They reckon that he ought to have more say in the affairs of the country than his junior typist.’
‘Maybe. And the sixth?’
‘That’s if you’re an official of a church. Any recognized Christian church - they’ve got a list of them. You don’t have to be a minister. I think churchwardens get it as well as vicars, but I’m really not quite sure. What it boils down to is that you get an extra vote if you’re doing a real job for a church.’
‘That’s an interesting one.’
‘It’s never interested me much.’ said the pilot. ‘I suppose I’m not ambitious. But I think it’s a good idea, all the same.’
‘So that’s six votes,’ Captain Osborne said. ‘The basic vote and education, and foreign travel, and the family vote, and the achievement vote, and the church vote. What’s the seventh?’
‘That’s at the Queen’s pleasure,’ said David. ‘I’’s a bit like a decoration. You get it if you’re such a hell of a chap that the Queen thinks you ought to have another vote.’
I was joking, Francis.
Answer: No.
Comment: However, it will happen along with the insane, the felon, the alien, the senile, and any other defective group.
If you declared as a dependent on someone's tax form, you should not be able to vote.
If your only means of income is a check from the government (excluding income for services rendered to the government), you should not be able to vote.
If you are a ward of the state, you should not be able to vote.
In all cases, you are dependent on the livelihood of others, and THEY should decide how the fruit of THEIR labors are spent.
In 2014, the voting age should be anyone paying taxes. everyone has no say!
Universal suffrage is the fallacy which converts democratic process into mob rule.
Voting is a leadership function. I would not allow a 16 year old to pick the CEO of Microsoft or Exxon, so I CERTAINLY would not allow a 16 year old to pick the President of the United States, arguably the most important position on earth.
Likewise, I would not allow anyone who is not responsible enough to support himself to choose these positions, or anyone who is an habitual drug abuser, or who practices a religion dedicated to evil (e.g. Satanism), or convicted felons, or those on medication for mental illness.
A Republic does not require universal suffrage, our Founders did not (with rare exception) endorse it, and no state in the original union practised universal suffrage. This notion sprang from the social contract theories of Rousseau and the French Revolution, the ideas that ultimately developed into socialism and Marxism.
You should be able to vote if you are still in school, that includes college, or on government assistance. If you can’t pull your own weight, you should have no say on how things are run.
No, but we should implement term limits ASAP on every position in government.
Back to the founders. 21 and land ownership required to vote.
YEP....I’m with you....Raise the voting age to 30
NFW.
NO!
His argument can be summed up in one sentence. Because there are so many ignorant people voting we should enable more ignorant people to vote. Why he limits it to 16 year old ignorance is anybody’s guess. 12 year olds are as ignorant as 16 year olds and the vast majority of lefties.
They don’t let 18 year-olds-drink. Why do we allow people who cannot even be trusted with alcohol to vote and serve in the military?
I hate to admit it it I agree. If you are not making enough to actually pay taxes then you have “no skin in the game.” Allowing moochers to vote means that the socialistic “gimme-some” ideas can take root and eventually devastate the country.
In my case, I could make an informed vote at 14.
But no way in heck I would want to see anyone that age today be anywhere near picking officials. I would even want it back at 21 outside of serving military that are younger.
I would have been a mostly conservative voter at 14 too. It was really all I knew.
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.