Lowering Voting Age To 16?

[ecnarf]

I was listening to CFRB in the car tuesday night (what can I say? Jim Richards is the cool) and they were discussing a recent proposal by Statistics Canada (or whoever) that lowering the voting age to 16 could potentially increase voting among young people by engaging them in the political process earlier. Virtually every guest that phoned in that night a) disagreed and B) was well over the age of 30, and they all participated in an orgy of poorly formulated opinions, which were rationalized by the following gems:

 

-this would allow them to run for office, and all it would take is a collaboration of all the high schools in Toronto to get one 16 year old into parliament (I particularly like this one, because it shows blatant ignorance of how our election system works, not to mention ignorance of the fact that 16 year olds have school to go to). If I can remember correctly, "When you're 16, you want to take over the world."

-they can't serve in the army, so they shouldn't be allowed to vote

-they can't buy cigarettes, so they shouldn't be allowed to vote

-they can't buy/drink alcohol, so they shouldn't be allowed to vote

-WE'RE TRUSTING 16 YEAR OLDS WITH A VOTE???

-this would create problems in social science courses, with restrictions on what teachers could or couldn't tell students

 

And so on and so on. If I had access to a phone at the time (I was driving the car down to band rehearsal), I would have phoned in and torn these idiots a new one for their extreme stupidity. I'm not sure that I agree that the voting age should be lowered to 16, but if you're going to have an opinion on the topic, at least try to not be full of shit.

 

I would like to know - what exactly would explode if 16 year olds were allowed to vote? I really can't think of anything set to kill millions of people if the voting age were lowered. Besides that, there definitely is potential to increase voting among youths if they're engaged in the political process earlier. We are, after all, forced to take courses where we learn the painfully irrelevant details of our government that one adult who phoned in to voice his stupidity seemed to have forgotten. The caller who phoned in to say that it would cause sweeping regulations on political correctness - bullshit. A good social science teacher is capable of taking an opinion and playing devil's advocate without revealing very much about their own political beliefs. I took a world history course last year that dealt with everything from the Renaissance to the Cold War. I did a major ISP on the Vietnam War to boot. Forming and defending opinions are a part of education, and when the subjects deal with something other than who is to blame for the downfall of an obscure Shakespearean character, it makes everything that much more interesting. Simply because we can vote for one party or another won't take away from classroom discussions on the Cold War.

 

And lastly, the pathetic argument I like this most is "You can't do x or y, therefore you cannot z." We are told on an almost constant basis not to smoke and not to drink. Constantly. I remember one of the grade six teachers back in the day telling her students abject lies on the dangers of alcohol (i.e. the carbonation in beer can kill you if your body doesn't expell the carbon dioxide). So if they're going to lie to us about alcohol and bombard us with messages about not smoking, why is it that we shouldn't be able to vote because we can't do something we're told not to do in the first place? Whether or not one can legally spend money on alcohol has as much to do with one's ability to vote as it does with your ability to juggle. It just doesn't follow logic to any degree.

 

Granted, there are plenty of 16 year olds that just won't vote within the first few years. That's to be expected. But I'd be willing to wager that, if the voting age were lowered to 16 today, within five years, the voter turnour among that age group would rise considerably. And the same effects would transfer to slightly older age groups.

 

Anyways, carry on.

[manfromharoldwood]

i know some 16 year old who are smarter than some 25 year olds.

 

what i find baffling... you have a right to have your say in the way your COUNTRY is run when you're 18--you're considered THAT mature--yet you still cannot drink until you're 19.

[The_Rat_Who_Would_be_King]

I voted no then wrote a bunch of stuff to back it up, but I changed my mind. I'm in the middle now. While I believe that a lot of 16 year olds aren't responsible enough to be voting (and I'm only three years past and still question my own maturity, so you youngsters don't have to cuss me out), I also think that it would be a very good move to get them involved earlier. I turned 18 and it had been years since grade 10 civics class. After that I had one teacher who made sure his students were informed about voting. He set up a display for each party in one of the main hallways of the school and took all of his classes down to see them and write some major points about each one. Most people took this as a throw away assignment because it was a history class, so no one really did it. Myself included. I think 16 year olds voting or not, they need to establish something beyond the civics class, which everyone hates and therefor doesn't care about. I'm 19 not and I still know very little about the parties I'll be voting for, and instead know more about how the government works, thanks once again to that class.

 

Time for a break in paragraph. Anyway, I'm on the fence about 16 year olds voting because I question how important voting would be to them when they don't have a lot of the privilages older people have, but either way think that there needs to be something set up that not only gets people that young involved, but also educated. How can we call ourself a democracy if we don't encourage participation in it? I'm really just babbling here sorry.

 

Also, Jim Richards is the coolest. I'm practically his best friend, but I won't get into that.

[Ruettiger]

I can drink when I'm 18. As for lowering the age, I don't see why not. The only 16 year olds who are going to vote are the ones that will be engaged in politics. I mean I know many people above 18 that still don't vote because they don't know what's going on nor do they care (I dont know why...). Aside from that, people are lazy...if a 16 year old doesn't want to go to a polling station they won't. It's not like EVERY 16 year old will vote just because they can. If that were the case with any age, the voter turn out would be huge, but it's not.

[Crusader]

I liked the quarter vote for 16, half vote for 17 idea.

[The_Rat_Who_Would_be_King]

I think you should have to pass a test to be allowed to vote, and if you don't pass the test you lose all citizen rights. In this fantasy world, a person of any age can vote.

[Matt]

I'm all for voting, but truthfully 18 is a great age, it's just as people are starting to mature, and while no one ever knows everything, at least the kids are starting to learn what the world's really like.

[ecnarf]

I liked the quarter vote for 16, half vote for 17 idea.

Bullshit, Anton.

 

If there were a more demeaning way to treat minors, I couldn't think of it.

 

"Okay... your opinion is worth one fourth of this guy's, and next year, you'll be smart enough that your opinion will be worth half!"

 

They might as well not institute voting under 18 if you're not going to institute a full vote.

[Moonlight_Graham]

ecnarf, u are the expection to most young people not yet able to vote. You are very informed and involved in whats happening in politics, but the vast majority of 16 year olds are not.

 

I'm 25, and follow politics faily closely as the average voting adults would i guess. But when i was 16 i really didn't know shit. When i first voted when i was 18, my criteria was "does the country seem pretty good right now?" (a pretty vague question) so i said "yes" and voted the Liberals back in even though i didn't know shit about anything.

 

Most 16 years would vote either how their parents voted (yes, parents totally brainwash their kids politically until they start to know better ie: college), or would just make a totally uninformed decisions because most teens don't read newspapers (beyond Sports and Arts section), or watch the evening news etc.

 

I remember talking to my friends during 2000 Federal election and they didn't know shit. I said Chretien was a big crook and they didn't know either way. I said Canada was one of the highest taxed countries in the world and they had no idea.

 

my point: I want ecnarf to vote, but i don't want 90% of his classmates within 50 feet of a ballot box.

[ecnarf]

ecnarf, u are the expection to most young people not yet able to vote. You are very informed and involved in whats happening in politics, but the vast majority of 16 year olds are not.

I am completely aware of that.

 

Like I said, if the voting age were lowered to 16 today, you wouldn't see very much participation in the election in January. But give it a few years, and I'd be willing to bet money that the rate would go up significantly.

[Ruettiger]

I wouldn't say significantly, but it would go up. It's just that most 16 year olds don't care about politics (or the ones that I encountered WAY back a SUPER long time ago when I was 16) so I doubt the majority of them are just going to pick up and go to a polling station "just because they can". People 18+ don't even do that now.

[crazycanuck]

ecnarf, u are the expection to most young people not yet able to vote.  You are very informed and involved in whats happening in politics, but the vast majority of 16 year olds are not.

I could name a vast number of people over the age of 18 who don't know anything about politics. Any argument that 16 years old are too ignorant to vote hinges on people magically becoming informed at the age of eighteen. There are tons of people who vote without the slightest clue as to what's going on. Besides, if you're 16, under-informed and apathatic, you're probably not going to vote anyway.

Edited December 11, 2005 by crazycanuck

[borntohula]

i think they should focus on engaging the youths on matters and i think more emphasis should be placed on teaching politics but i don't see the point in lowerring the voting age.

 

most politicians have a total disregard for youths in their campaigns anyway, regardless of the numbers. so, i'm not sure how effective this would be.

[middle class gangster]

two things that would happen if 16 year olds(like me) could vote:

1. either weed would get legalized or the green party will get mighty powerful. since all the stoners who havn't grown out of the "hey hey smoke weed every day" phase will have a voice.

 

2. it might even out all the senior citizens who vote, which would be a good thing. i mean most of them can't poop on their own but they get more influnce in this country than 16 year olds who could actually undersand the issues.

[ecnarf]

Well, I highly doubt the stoners would show up and vote (they'd all space out on the day, a la the simpsons). And even then, legalizing marijuana is a long way off, precisely because of all those baby boomers who think that marijuana is the devil incarnate and that legalizing it will bring about the apocalypse.

 

However, I think 16 year olds definitely have a stake in the government, as secondary and post-secondary education are two issues that drastically effect us, especially when it comes to provincial politics.

[Mouko]

I think it's a bad idea. Despite what 16 year olds may think, they are generally not more intelligent than 25 year olds. Of course, there are some exceptions, but a lot of teenagers don't have strong political opinions and would probably vote the same way as their parents.

 

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies in this case, I think.

[Lauren]

i think it's hard for teenagers to vote because we don't really see the result of it. we don't have to worry about the health care system and such. also, most of us don't pay the sort of taxes that 18+ do, so why should we tell them how to use it?

[Moonlight_Graham]

I could name a vast number of people over the age of 18 who don't know anything about politics. Any argument that 16 years old are too ignorant to vote hinges on people magically becoming informed at the age of eighteen. There are tons of people who vote without the slightest clue as to what's going on. Besides, if you're 16, under-informed and apathatic, you're probably not going to vote anyway.

Totally true. Lots of voters 18 and older are uninformed or just plain dumb. However, lowering the age to 16 would make the % of uninformed/dumb voters rise. (sorry if i sound blunt)

 

P.S. Lauren, thats a very good point. I think as you get older and older along your life (get a job, own a house, have kids, get older and need healthcare) the more political issues personally affect your life. Thats likely why most young voters vote Green and NDP since things like social freedoms and the environment are issues that most young people care about, compared to other issues that is (taxes, healthcare etc.).

Edited December 11, 2005 by Moonlight_Graham

[ecnarf]

Quite true, Moonlight.

 

I still don't see how that entirely justifies keeping the voting age at 18, though. It still tends to operate on that assumption that the second you turn 18, you have gained all the wisdom of the world.

 

p.s. for the record, I am 17, not 16, since some of you probably thought I was 16.

[crazycanuck]

P.S. Lauren, thats a very good point. I think as you get older and older along your life (get a job, own a house, have kids, get older and need healthcare) the more political issues personally affect your life. Thats likely why most young voters vote Green and NDP since things like social freedoms and the environment are issues that most young people care about, compared to other issues that is (taxes, healthcare etc.).

Why shouldn't young people have a say in our society? True, youth have a different view of the world but what makes that less important than the middle-aged? Aside from schooling, there are issues such as minimum wage, driving restrictions, and the such that affect teens, and they should have a say.

 

The only main problem I have with 16 and 17 year olds voting is the fact that they don't pay full taxes. If they get the vote, they should pay as well. It's only fair.

[little miss sunshine]

I'm 27. Because of education credits, I get ALL of my income tax back? Does this mean I shouldn't be able to vote? Discuss

[Matt]

It's not education that gives people the smarts to vote, it's life experience, and while even at 18 they still don't have much of that, it's the first step towards it.

[Mouko]

It still tends to operate on that assumption that the second you turn 18, you have gained all the wisdom of the world.

Why lower it to 16? Why not to 10, or hell, 1 year old?

 

18 makes perfect sense to me. People usually have a stable sense of identity and political affliation by that age, much more so than when they're 16.

[Ravenous megin-sane]

I think it's a bad idea. Despite what 16 year olds may think, they are generally not more intelligent than 25 year olds. Of course, there are some exceptions, but a lot of teenagers don't have strong political opinions and would probably vote the same way as their parents.

 

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies in this case, I think.

it's irrelevant to compare a 16 year old to a 25 year old.

2 years doesn't make that much of a difference.

 

most people by the age of 16 have taken a 'civics' course at school (at least you have to around here).

but still at 16, no matter what, your opinion is still shaped by your parents. either you're liberal because they are, or green because they're conservative. so their reasoning isn't always in the right place.

 

18 has just as many ignorant, over confidence idiots to vote as 16 does.

 

over all, i don't really think the age should change.

it's not like that many 17 year olds are counting down the days to their 18th birthday so they can vote anyways.

[Matt]

Actually some people come from a Liberal family, and when I was younger I supported the P.C.s and did for a few months until Belinda lost the leadership convention. I actually switched because the Liberals were close enough anyways to the P.C.s and my party was gone at that point. So, family doesn't always shape you.