220
Missouri teens want to lower the voting age to 16 in local and school elections
(news.stlpublicradio.org)
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
220 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10181 readers
202 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The graduated system of adulthood in this country is very odd in many ways. The age of consent, when you're old enough to start drawing a paycheck, when you're allowed to start driving, when you're allowed to start voting, and when you're allowed to buy marajuana or alcohol are all different ages. And through all of this you're expected to conduct yourself like an adult while your brain chemistry is going through radical changes. I don't know what the right system is, but I feel like it's surely not this one. Maybe the increased franchisement these kids are asking for is right. Maybe we should just be expecting less from our youth. I don't know
i think it makes sense for voting age to be 16 at least in some cases; internationally it's not that weird of a policy. actually i think a big problem would just be the logistics of carrying it out: since the US doesn't inherently have distinct election dates for municipal, local, state, and federal elections, it's possible for all of them to be on the same ballot (meaning you could be eligible to vote in some races but not others and you'd be potentially committing a crime if you did).
DC and cities in three states allow noncitizen to vote in local elections, so clearly there's a way to get it done. I suspect it's as Nougat suggests, a separate ballot for non-citizens and/or under-18 voters.
Yeah I feel like I sound more negative about this than I am. I think generally speaking we should be raising the age of consent (this is the most critical change, I'm not okay with it being 14 in places), raising the age you're allowed to start hiring at (seriously what the fuck Arkansas), prooobably leaving the driving age where it is though I've heard strong arguments 16 is the worst age for motor control, lowering the voting age, and raising the age you can buy lotto tickets and cigarettes at. In fact abolish the lottory. Tax the rich instead
So there's two ballots instead of one. They already give you the ballot for the specific district you're in when you go to vote now. Problem solved.
@Nougat @Cube6392 @alyaza that wouldn't achieve the goal of locking up as many untermenschen as possible. Remember the time a black person asked the government if she could vote and they said yes, then she got a long prison sentence for illegally voting?
that's a solution--but i'm guessing that'd singlehandedly double the additional overhead and complexity for printing and sending out ballots, on top of what those already have to account for.
My town has six districts for the village board but we only have one polling place for the whole town (it's a small town) additionally you can vote early at the county office.
They simply print your ballot when you give them your name at the polling place. You fill in the bubbles and then put it into the ballot machine. It counts it electronically, but it drops down into a locked cabinet.
I'm assuming it's the same procedure for everyone in my county for all the different voting/government body districts people are in.
I'm not so sure I completely agree. A better done graduated system could do a lot better than a single all or nothing system could. Specifically, drugs in general. It's not just that drugs are bad or whatever. it's that the ease with which a company can exploit a younger person, combined with the fact that under a general age the young adults are all having their brains still developed, that the cost to society for allowing drug use is a lot higher than the cost of allowing drug use for older folks.
I agree. Whatever the age is, we need to afford one the full suite of adult privileges. If we want it to be 16, okay, fine. Then we must allow them to drink, gamble, have sex, buy a house, join the military and get deployed overseas. And they must be accountable for their actions, so they must be tried as adults. Every time.
The reason the system is so confusing right now is that laws are written for convenience and political gain. For example, Democrats in the US are currently pushing for younger people to have the right to vote because they will gain a political advantage. I'm only on board with ideological consistency. It's all or nothing. Define the age of adulthood and provide all privileges.
That's not how learning works. A graduated system allows people to gradually take on responsibility. Going from a total child to full adult is too much of a shock. It's bad enough as is, with kids having a hard time "adulting."
If there were to be a graduated system then voting would be the very last thing to bequeath. Deciding the fate of a nation carries far more responsibility than anything else I described.
I mean... that's basically how it is now, excluding drinking. I'd rather they learn to vote before legally drinking.
Voting comes first right now. If there were to be a graduated system then voting should be the very last thing to bequeath. Deciding the fate of a nation carries far more responsibility than drinking. Best they learn to handle their liquor before deciding whether the nation should go to war.
i don't think this is really accurate. Democrats broadly don't care about lowering the voting age and it's not a signature plank for them--at most it's an incidental part of voting rights. mostly, the people pushing this are youth activists who also happen to be Democrats because young people are overwhelmingly a Democratic constituency.
They're against it because they know young people won't vote for old people. Why would you hamstring yourself like that?
I'm all for it because it will cause the parties to favor more youthful people. Yes, I'm an ageist when it comes to politicians and for good reasons.
1.You can't make sound decisions for the future if you won't be around to suffer the consequences of your actions.