Lower the U.S. Voting Age to 16

I strongly believe that the U.S. voting age should be lowered to 16. I am a long time Social Studies teacher at the high school level and as someone who has interacted with 16 and 17 year olds at a high level, believe me they are capable of serving as informed voters. I was constantly blown away by the intelligence, civic awareness and concern, integrity and civic motivation of these young people who unfortunately, were not able to vote. Especially today, with information available at such a high degree than in previous eras, young people have a keen awareness of the world, the importance of diversity and the level of knowledge that would be good to have in an informed voter. I have seen countless adults of all ages who don’t possess these qualities and legally vote, guided by misinformation and emotion. Think of all the voters out there who were so easily duped by the Trump b.s.

Honestly, if legal, the 16 and 17 year olds who are engaged, motivated and eager would contribute so much to the true legitimacy of our elections. The ones that don’t care or aren’t informed will choose to stay home and not vote. No harm done, no harm no foul. No one would be putting a gun to all their heads forcing them all to vote. It would be good for our country and give these teens a say in a world they are about to enter as adults.

You’re not the only one who thinks so
The number one reason being, imo, is that 16yo are allowed to work, which means they pay taxes (I believe there was some kind of keruffle a few years ago about taxation without representation). And #2 would be that they have a vested interest in the laws that will be made now that affect their futures.

(Top Ten Reasons to Lower the Voting Age – NYRA
https://www.fairvote.org/why_should_we_lower_the_voting_age_to_16
4 Reasons for lowering the US voting age to 16 | Vote16 USA

Just like the driving age, right?
We’ve been there, done that.
And it didn’t work.

Impulsive kids who are dangerous behind the steering wheel are also impulsive and dangerous with other responsibilities.
In most places, we don’t let them get married at 16, either.

Maturity comes in stages, as we grow up. From toilet training , to crossing the street alone, to driving, and, yes…to voting.

I don’t know where you live (L.A. I guess), but apparently a lot of teens here are just as red/Republican/Trump-supporting as their parents. They don’t seem to read news outside of Snapchat stories and plain old gossip that is sourced from someone’s parent.

In my state only one half credit in government is required for graduation. Fla stat. 1003.4282(d). It is the last social studies credit which means most kids don’t take govt. until senior year. For example, my sister is nearly eighteen and has not started her government class.

In short, pls no

~Max

Given the results in 2016, I’m not particularly impressed by the maturity level of the current electorate.

We take away old fogies driving privileges when they can’t be trusted. Should we do the same for voting with them?

Should we make people take regular civics tests to maintain their right to vote?

If the last 4 years have proven anything it’s that a massive swath of the voting public is rash, ignorant, reactive, bigoted, deluded and totally and completely unable to be educated. Those 16 year olds can’t be any worse.

And of course, it’s scientifically proven that impulsiveness evaporates on the 18th birthday and is never seen again.

You are both right…which is why I said that letting 16 yr olds vote is a bad idea. It would make a bad situation even worse.
We already have tens of millions of stupid voters who get all their news from Facebook and Twitter… Adding another couple million 16 yr old kids , who are even more stupid and less mature, won’t help anything.

Most people do grow up a bit by age 18* . But at 16, virtually nobody is mature enough to vote responsibly.

*compare traffic accidents of today’s teens vs my teenage years in the 1970’s , when everybody got their drivers license at 16.

It’s not teens who I’m worried about.

It’s the Boomers and Silents whose main political gripe is “Negroes have too many rights these days” that concern me.

“Dangerous”? What dangers, specifically, are you worried about that do not already exist in the current system? (Note, also, that it’s only possible for the 16-to-18-year-old voting bloc to sway an election if the election in question is already very close among older voters – some wild-eyed nut job who only appeals to the young and immature is going to be dead in the water anyway.)

I’m for it. Most sixteen-year-olds are intellectually capable of understanding the issues and the choices before them, and I think it would be better if people have a chance to get into the habit of voting before they go off to college and have to deal with the added layer of complexity that comes with changes of legal residence, absentee ballots, etc.

I wanted the vote when I was 10. I’m for it, especially if enough 16 year olds (and/or a few vocal and erudite ones) make the case for it.

I’ve heard this argument in many contexts, but never before has it been phrased so absurdly.

No one ever claimed that impulsiveness evaporates suddenly at any particular age. Not for people in general, and not for any particular individual.

Rather, when rules are made, the rulemakers need to figure out some way of establishing that enough people will meet the criteria to a sufficient degree. People do not suddenly become reasonable on their 18th birthday, but the rulemakers felt that at that point, enough 18-year-olds are sufficiently reasonable that they should be allowed to vote.

If the voting age were suddenly lowered to 16, I wouldn’t have a big problem with it. I also don’t think that it would radically change the tenor or the quality of our political discourse very much, either for better or for worse.

I teach United States history in the California State University system, where all students, no matter what their major, are required to take courses in United States history and government. I’ve seen students like the ones described in the OP: smart, engaged, and with a strong sense of civic responsibility. I’ve also seen students who have managed to complete 13 years of school without knowing (or caring) how many senators each state has. I’ve seen students who can’t name their own elected representatives at any level of government. I’ve seen students who can repeat the words “checks and balances” when you ask them about the federal government, because it’s a term they remember from their Grade 10 civics class, but who can’t explain what that term actually means or why it might be important.

But this is not, as others have noted, just a problem of youth.

Now that we’re set to evict the worst President in history from the White House, I have begun preparing, after 20 years in the United States, to apply for citizenship. I procrastinated while Obama was President, and there’s no way I was going to take my oath under Trump’s picture. I downloaded the recently-revised set of questions for the citizenship test the other day, and I’d be willing to bet that a substantial portion of the adult population of the United States could not get more than 50 percent of the 128 questions correct.

Hell, the people who wrote the questions couldn’t even get them all correct. For example, I was surprised to learn from the citizenship test that, as a legal permanent resident, I am not actually represented by my Senators or by my Representative. Apparently, those people only represent “the citizens” in their states or districts. That was news to me, and to quite a lot of legal scholars.

I was also impressed that the founders had discovered time travel. One question asks the citizenship applicant to name a document that influenced the United States Constitution. Two of the possible correct answers listed are the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers. I am still wondering how a group of documents written AFTER the Constitution was completed and circulated could possibly have influenced the Constitution. I guess, at a stretch, you could argue that the debates over ratification led to the addition of the Bill of Rights, which then became a part of the Constitution, but I don’t think this is what they were getting at.

When you get asked about the rights of Americans, freedom of speech and religion, and the right to own guns, are on the list of acceptable responses, but not listed as correct answers for that question are the right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures, nor the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, nor the right of due process, nor the right not to have property taken without just compensation.

Jesse Ventura. 'Nuff said?

Say what? There are numerous US states that still have 16 (or 16.5) as their full driver’s license ages. And I don’t think say, North Carolina or Wisconsin have become lawless wastelands as a result.

For every 16-year old you can name who is highly informed about social/civic matters, you can find one who is woefully ignorant. (Fact is, there is also no shortage of 26/36/46 year olds who are woefully ignorant too.)

There may be valid reasons to lower the voting age but this sort of sample size is not representative.

This is the best argument I’ve seen so far for lowing the voting age to 16. Get them involved in the process while they still retain a modicum of the optimism and altruism that college and working life tend to start eating away at.

Change “one” to “fifty” and you may be getting close. But it’s not ignorance that is the real issue, it’s the ability to make informed decisions instead of acting impulsively. At 16, most kids’ brains are still developing and hormones are still running rampant

I’ve been on the fence about this issue, not seeing it very important in the big picture because the rates of participation will probably be pretty low by newly enfranchised sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds. But odds are good that those who do vote will be among the most engaged and informed of their peers and developing the habits of good citizenship is enough to bring me to the “in favor of” side.

Sixteen year olds can work and pay taxes, but AFAIK they can’t be property holders or sign binding contracts can they? So then they can vote on property tax issues. Granted there’s a whole swath of voters who aren’t property owners who vote, but at least they are eligible to be property owners.

And also regarding the issue of taxes, people of all ages pay sales tax but can’t vote. Lord knows my preteen nieces are running to boost the economy and local tax coffers every time they get a penny in their bank.

So, if we lower the voting age to 16 do we lower the age of “capacity to contract”? OR…do parents have control over their child’s vote?