Posted on 09/18/2003 10:43:04 AM PDT by freepatriot32
Sept. 17 -- Americans may be getting used to the Terminator on the ballot. But can they handle his teenage fans in the voting booth?
Laura Finstad says yes. She works, pays taxes, and has been a political activist for years. And she's finally won the right to vote in the United States.
Her big accomplishment? Turning 18 last Saturday.
Finstad fumes about the law that made her wait so long and is campaigning for the voting rights of younger teenagers. The teen is gathering signatures for a petition to lower the voting age in suburban Takoma Park, Md.
"Young people have jobs, pay taxes, go to school to learn about government, and know about the issues," Finstad said. "We think 16 would be a fair age to be able to vote."
Supporters of lowering the voting age from 18, the national legal standard since the 26th Amendment was ratified 32 years ago, think the time for their issue has come. There's movement in several states and municipalities to give younger teens the right to vote.
In Baltimore, Md., 16- and 17-year olds voted in the mayoral primary on Sept. 9. An electoral quirk separated the primary from the general election by 14 months, and anyone who will be 18 during the general election was eligible to vote. Now, a prominent lawmaker wants to permanently extend the privilege to these younger teens.
The Cambridge, Mass., city council recently approved lowering the voting age to 17, and now the state legislature must approve the petition.
A Maine legislative panel in April approved, then reconsidered, extending voting rights to 17-year-olds. Similar legislation is being considered in Texas and California, and has been debated in Minnesota.
Youth voting rights advocates are also campaigning to lower the voting age in Florida, Hawaii, North Dakota, Anchorage, Alaska, and New York City.
Hot Topic Overseas, Too
The debate has caught momentum in Europe, as well, with Great Britain considering a proposal to lower the voting age from 18 to 16.
Globally, though, the most radical proposal to enfranchise youth belongs to Germany, where parliament will consider this fall giving children the vote from infancy, giving new meaning to the social policy "from cradle to grave."
Under the proposal, which would immediately increase the number of potential voters by 13.8 million, parents would vote on behalf of their children until they are 12, when the children could decide whether to allow their parents to vote for them.
A key rallying point for the German proposal is balancing out the political clout of the elderly, a growing demographic there, and boosting the political prowess of families. But U.S. advocates for youth voting rights say they're less interested in countering the power of the elderly than empowering people of all ages.
"The right to vote is essential, no matter who you are," said Alex Koroknay-Palicz, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based National Youth Rights Association.
Germany's proposal might be extreme, but supporters of youth voting rights here say it's a step in the right direction.
"As people begin to respect young people as individuals, parents will give children the right to cast their own ballot," Koroknay-Palicz said. "If it happens in Germany, it will change the law for the better. Then it will be a matter of changing the mindset and changing the culture."
Not Ready for Democracy?
Typically, youth voting rights supporters in the United States advocate lowering the voting age by a couple of years. They argue that teens often work, and should not be subject to taxation without representation, an American battle cry dating back to Boston Tea Party days.
Also, if teens went to the voting booth at younger ages, they would grow accustomed to casting ballots and more likely become habitual adult voters, advocates argue. Teens' political involvement would also boost the civic interest, and perhaps voter turnout, of their parents, say supporters of youth voting rights.
Critics of a younger voting age, however, say teens are not ready for democracy, and their participation as voters would not improve the electoral process.
"You're dealing with people who don't have any knowledge of or any stake in our democracy," said Curtis Gans, executive director of the Washington-based Committee for the Study of the American Electorate. "If they're lucky, they will have had one civics course before 16, and many won't have that. They're not parents, not homeowners, not raising children, and they're not in any responsible jobs."
Gans argues that younger voters are actually less likely than older citizens to make it to the ballot box on Election Day, so extending the vote to teens younger than 18 would damage already poor voter turnout.
Influence, With or Without the Vote
In Baltimore's mayoral primary last Tuesday, teens did not seem to be much of a factor in voter turnout. Approximately 2,400 16- and 17-year-olds registered to vote. Voter turnout was about 35 percent, matching the turnout for the most recent primary four years ago, the city elections office said.
Still, with 40 million young people between the ages of 12 and 19, teenagers should not be underestimated as a political force, says Sara Jane Boyers, author of 'Teen Power Politics.'
"They're thinking people. They're working, contributing and buying — they're a huge economic force," Boyers said.
Even when young people can't wield voting power, Boyers said, they can influence their parents' votes or use other political tools such as protests. "They want people to pay attention to them," she said.
With young, college-aged voters expected to be a swing vote in the 2004 presidential election, lowering the voting age could get more attention in the coming months. "I think it's going to continue to pick up steam," Koroknay-Palicz said.
"As people realize that young people have power in politics, they're going to key into their interests and desires. Lowering the voting age will come up as part of that."
09-17-03 11:49 EDT
You sound like one of those "haters" ... and a funny one at that.
Give the kid a frickin' break. He's understands the problem, and that's better than I've seen in many. Restricting the franchise has always been a legitimate point of discussion for independent individuals.
The founders originally wanted freeholder elections. In the modern era, Robert Heinlein conceived of voluntary military service as the qualifier, ala "starship troopers."
How do you come up with a workable method to get incompetents to give up their franchise?
You don't, and that's the point. I can't believe there are conservatives who actually want to government to regulate who can and can't vote! This amazes me. Frankly, I think anyone that can't see what a extraordinarily bad idea it is for government to regulate the voting rights of the citizens borders on incompetent. But yet I think ya'll should be able to vote.
I think that if you cannot successfully punch a hole in a sheet of paper, you should not be allowed to vote.
Only a kid would ax this question.
When I was 8 years old I could answer much harder ones; I'd bet a lot of "voters" could not...
--Boris
Or, a Dumbocrat, trolling for votes. I think maybe that's how we got the 19th.
But by allowing them to vote, you have essentially made your vote worthless.
I say this in all seriousness: I doubt one could note the difference.
Functionally, a significant percentage of voters are kids.
That is not to say I would not love to see some minimal voter qualification.
Voting was never intended to ask "who wants money from the government"?
How about this, which I mentioned in an earlier post: get rid of all pre-printed ballots. Give voters a pencil and slip of paper. If they can write the name of their preferred candidate, their votes count.
Makes sense.
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.