Article Link
In 1971 the 26th amendment to the Constitution lowered the voting age from 21 to 18. As we approach the fifty year anniversary of that amendment it may be time to consider lowering the voting age from 18 to 16. When teenagers are in high school, they learn about civics and current events, and may know as much as or more about election issues than voting age adults. Also, why not get them in the habit of voting at a young age so when they go to college and begin careers they are already civically engaged? The United States has low voter turnout compared with other developed nations, and this proposal may be a solution to get more people involved in choosing the leaders who will make the rules of the society that they live in.
Discussion Questions
1. Are 16 year old students well enough informed to vote in elections?
2. Would the study of government need to be moved up from senior year to freshman or sophomore year if this change were made?
3. Do you believe allowing 16 year old students to vote would increase voter turnout in future elections by building civic engagement among young people?
4. Is this too much of a knee jerk reaction to the school shooting epidemic, or is this actually a good idea?
The study of government should be moved down to freshman year if the voting age lowers to the age of 16. Many teens do not really affiliate with politics and how the government works. If allowed to vote many would make the same decision as their parents would when, not informed on how things work. It would have teens to think for themselves when it is time to vote in the elections. Based off the education that schools give teens, they could use it and with their judgment on laws that should be passed and the leaders that they think should lead this country.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is very important to let 16 year olds have a bigger voice in politics. Through recent events, like the Parkland School shooting, we can see that many high school children are working hard to have a voice in the changing of our gun laws. One student, Sabrina Fernandez, who attends Douglas High School, said that "this change will not be pushed to the side. We will not just be another statistic" (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/parkland-students-power/554399/). This teenager is just one example of students who are fighting harder than some adults to see a gun reform. If this change were to be made, I do believe that the study of government should be moved up to freshman/sophomore year. While students can become informed with current events, they do not have the experience that adults do in voting and law making, but this knowledge can be retained through classes.
ReplyDeleteAs much as I believe in having a voice, is it not smart to let 16 year old CHILDREN to vote. As people living in the Bay Area, we have to understand that much of the nation's 16-year-olds aren't as involved in politics as we may be. I mean, many adults in other parts of the country aren't even educated enough to make the right decisions. There have been so many viral videos and memes on social media that exposed people. For example, a Trump supporter was being interviewed for the reasons why he will be voting for Trump. His claims weren't even accurate, he incorrectly quotes Trump, and I believe he thought Mexico was north of the United States...
ReplyDeleteAs Ayla said, students do have a very strong voice, for example, gun violence/gun control protests run by students have been proven to be effective.
I just don't think that enabling ALL 16 year-olds the right to vote is very smart, considering the fact that there are people in our classes who don't follow politics. I agree that we are piloting the future but that means our decisions will have a major affect on the US.
If they do offer 16 year olds to vote, I think it is imperative for freshman and/or sophomores to take a Politics class embedded in their history class.
16 year olds, regardless of how well informed they are, are most likely to have some ideas of how they want the world they live in to be like. As for moving up the study of government, I do not believe it would be absolutely necessary, since voting on laws and amendments would likely not require specific understanding on how the government works. As for the recent shootings, I do not think it is an extreme reaction to it, since the idea of having the voting age lowered has been debated for a long time.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that this is more of a knee jerk reaction to the parkland shooting. While these teens did show that they were very mature in the way they handled debate and brought up many reasonable points and arguments, this is not all teenagers. The representation was only 4-8 members of the school,and while these people seem to have a very good understanding of politics and current policies, not all kids do. Clearly these teens had trained and studied for this events, and not all do (including myself). Thank you.
ReplyDeleteDespite how politically active teens today may be, they are still not ready to vote. Most teens at at age of 16 live with either their parents or other guardians and don't pay any of their own taxes and are covered by their family's healthcare etc. While kids have certainly demonstrated a willingness to become politically active, they simply lack the perspective to make an informed choice. If teens were to be allowed to vote, their contributions would have little effect on them, and a greater effect on the rest of the nation's adults. Finally, teens are also subject to peer pressure and often think with their hearts instead of their heads. Most kids are not comfortable enough to be outliers or standalone believers of unpopular things and it's common for teens to follow the masses. I do however believe that a study of government could be beneficial. It is important that students learn as much as possible about their government and it's direct effects before they are of voting age. Even though teens may not be able to vote, they offer an important perspective and there are still plenty of ways teen voices can be heard.
ReplyDeleteI think that allowing the voting age to be moved down to 16 years is not a good idea. One main reason is the maturity level that should be present when dealing with politics and how the country is going to be run, but isn’t in most teenagers. Many of them also don’t really care about any of this and might not even vote which will reduce the national average turnouts for elections. They also are not completely aware of its significance and because of this they are not sure where they stand and so they are heavily influnced by teachers and parents. Many 16 years olds can be manipulated thorugh speeches and promises made by candidates who aren’t the best choice. I think that we also need to be able to draw a line somewhere and 18 is a good place because that is the age where they become adults. If we don’t draw this “line,” next time people may be asking to lower it even more. This idea of lower the voting age, to me, seems to just be a “knee jerk” reaction to the school shooting epidemic.
ReplyDeleteTeenagers these days (Gen Z and young Millennials) definitely have a stronger, different voice than generations past. With advances in technology, it is becoming easier to educate yourself and have your own opinions as opposed to following what your parents taught you. However, on that note, despite having different political views as your parent/guardian, they may still force their children to vote for someone else, skewing it one way or another. In addition, as Ritika mentioned, we live in our Bay Area "bubble," where most of our schools and people are democratic and aren't scared to show it. While we may be taught the "correct" ideals, many states (mainly in the midwest) are more Republican and pro-gun. Teachers and parents are more likely to feed them false information, force religion onto them, and encourage very strong political views. While the recent shooting may have prompted this idea specifically, teens everywhere are becoming much more politically active and go after reforms and change that they want and are constantly advocating for different ideals, such as feminism and gun reform. We may be too young to vote, but we are certainly old enough to have a voice.
ReplyDeleteOf course the idea of students voting is one that seems beneficial, I feel that it would just add to a population of uneducated voters. Besides, many of the issues that would be voted on are things that a 16 year old isn't able to relate to or experience. Their actions won't necessarily affect them so how can we expect then to make a reasonable decision. The idea of getting students involved in voting and politics I feel is a good one. Having mock elections and opportunities for students to be given material explaining the democratic process is something that has the same purpose without jeopardizing the system already in place. In fact it would be interesting to see students vote when they are 16, and compare that to when they are 18. That difference would explain a lot of how experience changes ones opinion.
ReplyDeleteNo, if anything, I think it should be higher than 18. While, yes, it does sound nice that within a few months I would be eligible to vote (if the age was lowered to 16), I know that most sixteen year olds are just not prepared to vote. They are technically, by law, still a minor. For the majority, minors still live at home, where their parents/guardians provide the basic necessities - they simply do not know the weight and responsibilities that come with being an adult. They are not yet apart of the real world and therefore, they are just not ready to vote yet. I do think that our generation deserves to have a voice before they can vote. Teenagers are very passionate and very good at reacting on impulse, and unfortunately that is why I don't think we are ready to vote - we don't clearly see how our actions will affect us in the future.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWith todays political circumstance, I do not think that the voting age should be lowered. Some of my ideas is that even though in 1971 they lowered the age from 21 (drinking age) to 18 (legal adult) that does not mean they do not need to lower it to 16 because there will be no substance in our country. Even though the young people are the next generation it does not mean that we should arm them with firearms. With the lowering of the voting age, it will affect the voting turnout, this is because there is currently a 57.5% of voting approval and also there is a 489% of 16-year olds that do want to vote. This is a significant amount that can be added to the voting population. I agree with the article mainly talking about the age and if it is actually feasible. I agree that 16 year olds are still maturing and that is still the reason why the government will not let 16 year olds driving in the streets. There is 43% of 18 year olds actually voting so this adds in to the argument that these teens might not actually take voting seriously. Lastly most of the reason why the law wants to change is the idea of this new generation and that the government should not be placing dumb laws. E.g from the Parkland School Shooting students and the nation were furious through the idea of a teen with the ability to get a gun, yet we look at the voting issue and we are blind to it as if the age does get lowered it is like giving students guns as they are literally given the power of choosing a leader for our country. Which could ultimately be horrible. Just my thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the voting should not be lowered to 16. At this age, teenagers may have the same information as voters that are adults. However, teenage decision making is heavily impaired compared to that of an adult. I believe that teenagers won't be able to understand the best decision for who should be running our country. For a role as large as that, we need people to spend more time understanding government before making a decision that is as large as that.
ReplyDeleteBeing a current student in high school, I personally feel that we as the majority of the students who represent the underclass are not well informed enough to wield the power to vote at age 16. This is because of first the class structure that is presented to the students in high school and the political maturity that students possess. To address the problem of students not knowing much about the US government due to the class not being taken, this should not be changed. This stance is taken because as student we are still constantly learning and every course we take is adding on the previous ones. That is why taking the government course is put out later, because the students are not knowledgeable enough to take it. Accelerating the learning process will only lead to problems so changing that would be a no go. For the second problem of students not obtaining enough political maturity, high school students are still developing their views and beliefs as they go, so it is best to wait longer for them to actually seriously participate in an election. While the election turnout for 2016 showed that only 58% of the population voted, that is due to the non-mandatory nature of the polls. Lowering, the voting age may increase the number of ballots, but the quality of the elections may be affected for the worse. That is why the in my mind as a student, lowering the voting age will only end with negative results.
ReplyDeleteIn the bigger picture, students being able to vote seems to be beneficial since most teenagers are politically active, yet they are simply not ready to vote. Despite the large group of politically active students, there are still millions of 16 year olds who are not in the know of what occurs daily, even monthly, in our nation while still attending school. Also, this may be a lot of pressure for 16 year olds if their parent is forcing them to vote for someone/something that they don't believe in or if they are being taught information from a certain political view. Some teenagers are also not mature enough to make decisions on their own, so giving them the right to vote is just not the right way to go, and they are not fully prepared to vote either. Additionally, allowing 16 year olds to vote would increase the voter turnout in future elections by building civic engagement among young people, yet the turnout of the elections may be affected in a more negative way because teenagers are not fully prepared to make a fair decision. The poor quality from future elections could also be because of the fact that 16 year olds do not take a government class until their senior year, when they are 18.
ReplyDeleteI think that lowering the age of voting to 16 years old is too young. It has being scientifically proven that the age in which humans having fully matured is age 25, so having citizens who are not only adults but also not close to fully maturing is a risky move. Also, kids are still learning so they can find their political beliefs either through peers, parents and/or other adults such as teachers. Teenagers could vote because their parents force them to or have taught them to like a certain law or politicain before they find their own voice/opinion. The reason why the age limit is 18 is because citizens are now legally adults, having the fact that America would be letting kids vote doesn't have a good ring to it. No matter what the majority of teenagers below the age of 18 are voting for, it should not be legal for them to vote.
ReplyDeleteTo lower the voting age to 16 may seem beneficial to the politically active teenagers in the world but as Peter said, it has scientifically been proved that the age that humans mature is 25. I agree with what Camila said that the age for voting should be higher. Teenagers are easily moved by popular opinion and giving them the right to choose the leader of our country would be catastrophic to the citizens within the country. Teenagers of this age don't posses the amount of knowledge and don't have the emotional maturity to vote.
ReplyDeleteI think that the voting age should be kept at 18. I don’t believe that it is really a good idea to allow children to vote because many of them are not educated enough on government issues and politics. Some 16 year olds may not take voting very seriously, and as children, the issues they vote on are more likely to greater impact adults rather than children, so the people who get a voice in the matter should be adults. Furthermore, I do not think that it would really be worth it because it wouldn’t make a huge impact on voter turnout because as teenagers, many do not have very strong opinions on matters, and may not even care to vote. However, if the voting age were to be decreased, I do think that government studies should be moved to freshman or sophomore year so that children can be better informed on the voting system and the matters the would vote on.
ReplyDeleteI believe the age to vote should stay at 18. I think at the age of 16, students are still children and with the ability to vote, they could use this as a joke. Like Ritika said, some 16 year olds aren’t aware of current politics and allowing them to decide who they want as a president could be used irresponsibly. At the age of 18, the students are adults and done with high school education including politics. Some could use the lower voting age to help future college opportunities but social media does have an impact and young teenagers could use it as joke. Overall lowering the age to vote could be useful but is too young for the minds of 16 year old.
ReplyDelete