Pros And Cons Of Lowering The Voting Age
The policy of lowering the voting age from 18 years old to 16 years old has sparked political debates all over the United States. The main debate has originated from conservative and liberal ideals. The conservatives want to keep the voting age at 18 years old, while the liberals want to lower the voting age to 16 years old. This campaign has even already been successful in two Maryland cities. In Hyattsville and Takoma Park, Maryland, the voting age has been lowered to 17 and 16 years old. (Campaign). The voting age has also been lowered in several other countries.
Considering the miniscule success of the policy already, the subject should be seriously considered nationally. There are several advantages and disadvantages or “pros and …show more content…
cons” that correlate with the subject matter. The majority of pros associate with liberal ideals. First and foremost, the policy is more democratic. It gives younger citizens the ability to have an influence on decisions made by their own government. Second, the age of 18 is also arbitrary. Even though 18 is the age that legally makes someone an adult, teenagers as young as the age as 14 can get jobs and pay taxes. This fact begs the question: “If someone pays taxes, drives a car, and has a job, shouldn’t they be allowed to vote regardless of age?” Third, it will increase the number of votes. Studies have shown that the earlier voting is introduced into someone’s life, the more likely they’ll be to vote. The average 18-year-old is more than likely on their way to college, so they’ll be less focused on voting or in politics. 16 is definitely a better age than 18 to be introduced to voting. Fourth, if the U.S. government allows undereducated adults vote, why not allow educated youth vote? (5 Prominent).
The majority of cons associate with more conservative ideals. The main disadvantage is that 16-year-olds might be too inexperienced to cast a meaningful vote. The maturity level of that age group is in question. Some argue that the teenagers at that age still have developing brains that shouldn’t be choosing our next leader. Another problem is that people at this age can be easily influenced or swayed in their decision making. There have been previous occurrences in which teenagers have shown that the majority of their political knowledge only comes from social media. (5 Prominent.)
I personally support the policy of lowering the voting age.
Before I researched the topic, I was against it, but seeing several of advantages of the policy changed my mind. I believe that 16-years-olds should have the right to vote because they are given adult responsibilities, but no rights. If someone is expected to pay taxes, they should be able to have a say in who leads their country. I also believe that 16-year-olds will be mature enough to vote. (Campaign). An excerpt from youthrights.org highlights this topic of qualification by saying, “With the voting age at 16 there is the opportunity for new voters to have a greater opportunity to be educated voters as most are in high school. When the voting age is lowered schools will most likely schedule a civics class to coincide with 16 that will introduce the issues and prepare new voters. It stands to reason that these young voters will be better prepared to vote than their elders.” This means that 16-year-olds are more qualified to vote than a good chunk of the adult population. That idea in itself scares people because it means that if younger citizens are more qualified than them, that they are “better” than them. This mainly comes from a conservative point-of-view in which we don’t want anything to change. People might also argue that, “If we lower the age to 16, then why don’t lower it to 12 or 10 or 8?” This idea comes from a scared society afraid of change, because they think it will “ruin” the government. The simple fact is that, there are no wrong votes. Adults and elders can vote for the “wrong” candidate just as much as teenagers
can.
I simply support the policy because of the facts. It is a better age to be introduced to voting, because people at that age are still developing in high school. It also raises the number of votes. I have personally heard my own relatives and news channels complain about there not being enough votes in an election. This policy could balance that problem out, and be more beneficial to the nation as a whole. I think that teenagers are an underrepresented demographic when it comes to politics, because they have opinions on world events too. This policy is ultimately more beneficial than harmful when it comes down to it.
My plan of action to help this policy become a real thing is to have it be introduced in high schools. If 16-year-olds want to vote, they should be educated on the subject. The school should add a civics class to their schedule. This will allow the students to know about political voting inside and out. They will have the ability to think independently when it comes to politics. This also prepares them to be our future leaders.
More programs for youth voting should be created and introduced into high schools. If a youth voting program is directly introduced to youth, then there will be a rise in interest and general knowledge of the subject. A study from youthrights.org shows that voting can be extremely beneficial to the education and minds of teenagers. Here is an excerpt from that study: “Granting youth the right to vote will have a direct effect on their character, intelligence and sense of responsibility. Is it any wonder why many youth feel apathetic towards politics? After 18 years of their life being told their opinion doesn’t matter, they are just foolish children who should be seen and not heard, is anyone surprised that many people over 18 feel turned off by politics and don’t vote? We can see this contrast between volunteering and politics. Teenagers have amazingly high levels of volunteering and community service, however many feel turned off by politics. Even small gestures like mock voting has a large effect on teen’s interest in politics, of students participating in Kids Voting USA, “More than 71% of students reported frequently or occasionally questioning parents about elections at home. These same students also viewed voting with great importance. About 94% felt it was very important or somewhat important to vote.”13 Including youth in a real, substantive way in politics will lead to even more interest as they take their public-spirited nature into the political realm.” (Top Ten Reasons). That extremely long excerpt should be enough evidence to convince anyone of the benefits of youth votings.
Another way to push the policy forward is to start more petitions. It is almost guaranteed that there will be a plentiful amount of signatures for the policy that will give youth more rights. A large petition should work, considering the fact that there was a petition that was legitimately proposed to Congress to build a Death Star a couple years ago.
There are several other countries around the world where the voting age has either been lowered, or is 16, that have been successful because of this policy. The countries where the voting age is 16 includes: Scotland, Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Cuba, Ecuador and Nicaragua. Countries where the voting age is 17 includes: East Timor, Ethiopia, Indonesia, North Korea and Sudan. Austria is the only country in the European Union where 16-year-olds can vote in general elections. Turnout is roughly the same as in other age groups. In some countries 16-year-olds can vote if they’re employed or married. For example, in Hungary if someone gets married at 16 they become an adult with all the attached legal rights and responsibilities - including the right to vote. (Votes for 16-). In August 2014, Scotland’s bill “The Scottish Referendum” ensured that everyone the age of 16 and older could take part in voting. The bill to lower the voting age from 18 to 16 came just ahead of a separate piece of legislation on the arrangements to hold the referendum itself. The Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, stated that the bill will: set out who can vote in the referendum, placing young voters on an equal footing with other electors; give electoral registration officers powers to register those who will be 16 or over on the day of the vote; and store information on young people separately from other electoral registers, with restricted access to ensure the data is secure. (Scottish independence).
The UK government previously opposed votes for 16 and 17-year-olds in the independence referendum, although the measure was eventually included in the Edinburgh Agreement, which set out the terms for the vote and was signed by both Westminster and Scottish ministers. The politicians who opposed the referendum were part of the conservative party. The liberal Prime Minister Sturgeon went on to say, “We want to make sure that our young people have the opportunity to engage in Scotland’s democratic process… We want to give them the right to voice their views, freely and confidently, on the matters that affect them.” (Scottish independence). I think that Sturgeon’s views and opinions on the matter correlate almost exactly with my views and the policy that is being introduced to the United States government. We should take up this policy and lower the voting age. The abundant benefits of the policy are undeniable. This would also be a step forward progressively for the United States. The U.S. should use Scotland as an example for the voting policy, because Scotland has become a role model for progressiveness in youth driven programs.
Considering the miniscule success of the policy already, the subject should be seriously considered nationally. There are several advantages and disadvantages or “pros and …show more content…
cons” that correlate with the subject matter. The majority of pros associate with liberal ideals. First and foremost, the policy is more democratic. It gives younger citizens the ability to have an influence on decisions made by their own government. Second, the age of 18 is also arbitrary. Even though 18 is the age that legally makes someone an adult, teenagers as young as the age as 14 can get jobs and pay taxes. This fact begs the question: “If someone pays taxes, drives a car, and has a job, shouldn’t they be allowed to vote regardless of age?” Third, it will increase the number of votes. Studies have shown that the earlier voting is introduced into someone’s life, the more likely they’ll be to vote. The average 18-year-old is more than likely on their way to college, so they’ll be less focused on voting or in politics. 16 is definitely a better age than 18 to be introduced to voting. Fourth, if the U.S. government allows undereducated adults vote, why not allow educated youth vote? (5 Prominent).
The majority of cons associate with more conservative ideals. The main disadvantage is that 16-year-olds might be too inexperienced to cast a meaningful vote. The maturity level of that age group is in question. Some argue that the teenagers at that age still have developing brains that shouldn’t be choosing our next leader. Another problem is that people at this age can be easily influenced or swayed in their decision making. There have been previous occurrences in which teenagers have shown that the majority of their political knowledge only comes from social media. (5 Prominent.)
I personally support the policy of lowering the voting age.
Before I researched the topic, I was against it, but seeing several of advantages of the policy changed my mind. I believe that 16-years-olds should have the right to vote because they are given adult responsibilities, but no rights. If someone is expected to pay taxes, they should be able to have a say in who leads their country. I also believe that 16-year-olds will be mature enough to vote. (Campaign). An excerpt from youthrights.org highlights this topic of qualification by saying, “With the voting age at 16 there is the opportunity for new voters to have a greater opportunity to be educated voters as most are in high school. When the voting age is lowered schools will most likely schedule a civics class to coincide with 16 that will introduce the issues and prepare new voters. It stands to reason that these young voters will be better prepared to vote than their elders.” This means that 16-year-olds are more qualified to vote than a good chunk of the adult population. That idea in itself scares people because it means that if younger citizens are more qualified than them, that they are “better” than them. This mainly comes from a conservative point-of-view in which we don’t want anything to change. People might also argue that, “If we lower the age to 16, then why don’t lower it to 12 or 10 or 8?” This idea comes from a scared society afraid of change, because they think it will “ruin” the government. The simple fact is that, there are no wrong votes. Adults and elders can vote for the “wrong” candidate just as much as teenagers
can.
I simply support the policy because of the facts. It is a better age to be introduced to voting, because people at that age are still developing in high school. It also raises the number of votes. I have personally heard my own relatives and news channels complain about there not being enough votes in an election. This policy could balance that problem out, and be more beneficial to the nation as a whole. I think that teenagers are an underrepresented demographic when it comes to politics, because they have opinions on world events too. This policy is ultimately more beneficial than harmful when it comes down to it.
My plan of action to help this policy become a real thing is to have it be introduced in high schools. If 16-year-olds want to vote, they should be educated on the subject. The school should add a civics class to their schedule. This will allow the students to know about political voting inside and out. They will have the ability to think independently when it comes to politics. This also prepares them to be our future leaders.
More programs for youth voting should be created and introduced into high schools. If a youth voting program is directly introduced to youth, then there will be a rise in interest and general knowledge of the subject. A study from youthrights.org shows that voting can be extremely beneficial to the education and minds of teenagers. Here is an excerpt from that study: “Granting youth the right to vote will have a direct effect on their character, intelligence and sense of responsibility. Is it any wonder why many youth feel apathetic towards politics? After 18 years of their life being told their opinion doesn’t matter, they are just foolish children who should be seen and not heard, is anyone surprised that many people over 18 feel turned off by politics and don’t vote? We can see this contrast between volunteering and politics. Teenagers have amazingly high levels of volunteering and community service, however many feel turned off by politics. Even small gestures like mock voting has a large effect on teen’s interest in politics, of students participating in Kids Voting USA, “More than 71% of students reported frequently or occasionally questioning parents about elections at home. These same students also viewed voting with great importance. About 94% felt it was very important or somewhat important to vote.”13 Including youth in a real, substantive way in politics will lead to even more interest as they take their public-spirited nature into the political realm.” (Top Ten Reasons). That extremely long excerpt should be enough evidence to convince anyone of the benefits of youth votings.
Another way to push the policy forward is to start more petitions. It is almost guaranteed that there will be a plentiful amount of signatures for the policy that will give youth more rights. A large petition should work, considering the fact that there was a petition that was legitimately proposed to Congress to build a Death Star a couple years ago.
There are several other countries around the world where the voting age has either been lowered, or is 16, that have been successful because of this policy. The countries where the voting age is 16 includes: Scotland, Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Cuba, Ecuador and Nicaragua. Countries where the voting age is 17 includes: East Timor, Ethiopia, Indonesia, North Korea and Sudan. Austria is the only country in the European Union where 16-year-olds can vote in general elections. Turnout is roughly the same as in other age groups. In some countries 16-year-olds can vote if they’re employed or married. For example, in Hungary if someone gets married at 16 they become an adult with all the attached legal rights and responsibilities - including the right to vote. (Votes for 16-). In August 2014, Scotland’s bill “The Scottish Referendum” ensured that everyone the age of 16 and older could take part in voting. The bill to lower the voting age from 18 to 16 came just ahead of a separate piece of legislation on the arrangements to hold the referendum itself. The Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, stated that the bill will: set out who can vote in the referendum, placing young voters on an equal footing with other electors; give electoral registration officers powers to register those who will be 16 or over on the day of the vote; and store information on young people separately from other electoral registers, with restricted access to ensure the data is secure. (Scottish independence).
The UK government previously opposed votes for 16 and 17-year-olds in the independence referendum, although the measure was eventually included in the Edinburgh Agreement, which set out the terms for the vote and was signed by both Westminster and Scottish ministers. The politicians who opposed the referendum were part of the conservative party. The liberal Prime Minister Sturgeon went on to say, “We want to make sure that our young people have the opportunity to engage in Scotland’s democratic process… We want to give them the right to voice their views, freely and confidently, on the matters that affect them.” (Scottish independence). I think that Sturgeon’s views and opinions on the matter correlate almost exactly with my views and the policy that is being introduced to the United States government. We should take up this policy and lower the voting age. The abundant benefits of the policy are undeniable. This would also be a step forward progressively for the United States. The U.S. should use Scotland as an example for the voting policy, because Scotland has become a role model for progressiveness in youth driven programs.