Is 18 the Right Age for Voting in Today's Society?

[Moonbear]

In the quest for something "different" on this forum, I'm posting a poll to ask whether the current voting age of 18 in the U.S. should be raised.

The reason I ask is that I'm wondering if the majority of 18 year-olds in our current society (not the way the society was 20 or 50 or 100 years ago) are sufficiently mature and independent to make such an important decision as who should be elected to government office.

I think it's a fairly generally known fact that young children generally reflect their parents' political views (if it isn't, then this can be a debate point). At some point as adults, we develop our own independence and may no longer share political views with our parents (many of course do share those views, but they arrive at those views independently; in other words, not just because it's what their parents told them to believe). What I'm unsure of is when during the developmental continuum from adolescence to adulthood do people stop taking their parents' view of the world and politics for granted and make independent political decisions?

Given that in other areas of life, indicators of independence seem to appear at a later age than historically (for example, adult children living at home with their parents over the age of 18, still dependent on their parents for financial support, or college students still having their parents come resolve their problems rather than doing it themselves), are 18 year-olds sufficiently independent to perform a function as important as voting, or are they only replicating their parents' votes? (You may disagree with the premise of this statement as well.)

You'll notice, I'm not working from hard data here, but my personal impression of changes in society and maturity of 18 year-olds. Hence, the poll and opportunity to discuss and present both supporting and opposing views.

Above, I probably should have defined majority...simple majority, 2/3 majority, overwhelming majority? I've chosen not to. If the difference would sway your opinion from yes to no, or vice versa, then choose unsure and explain.

Now that I've set up the general question, I'd like to put one restriction on the discussion. Discuss the merits of raising the voting age or keeping the status quo only as they apply to the maturity, independence, education, etc., of people in that age grouping, and not with regard to whether they are permitted or required to do other things at that age. For example, "If they can be sent to war at that age, they should vote," would not be a valid argument in this debate: make the assumption that whatever we set the voting age at, all related responsibilities that require that level of maturity would also be subject to revision as well.

I'll urge those who are around the age of 18 or nearing it to please not simply react to having to wait longer to vote. I tend to think the teens participating on this forum are more mature than the general population, so take into consideration your peers, classmates, etc., and think about whether enough of them have the maturity to make their own informed decisions when it comes to voting to merit keeping the age at 18. Don't worry, I'm not running off to lobby Congress to pass a new law, just thought it would make for an interesting non-partisan discussion.

 

[Tarheel]

I voted no.

I think there should be a minimum intelligence requirement though.
How about a test on current affairs and the US Constitution.

 

[Smurf]

... lol

In Canada we're currently debating a bill to lower the voting age to 16.

 

[Moonbear]

I voted no.
I think there should be a minimum intelligence requirement though.
How about a test on current affairs and the US Constitution.

That was a quick reply!

Such tests have been deemed unconstitutional. Look up Jim Crow laws.

 

[Moonbear]

... lol
In Canada we're currently debating a bill to lower the voting age to 16.

Really? Based on what reasoning? It might be helpful to this debate to know why people are considering lowering the voting age in Canada, and whether similar arguments would make sense in the US. (And since you always find a way to be troublesome with my poll choices, even when they seem entirely straightforward on a simple question, if you think the voting age should be lowered, that would be a "no" vote...it shouldn't be raised. )

 

[Smurf]

Really? Based on what reasoning?

Oh you know, freedom, taxation without representation, all that crap.

It was actually defeated in Parliament last june. But the people lobbying the bill will be proposing it again next government.
http://www.vote16.ca/en/index.htm

The UK is also pursuing this possibility.
http://www.votesat16.org.uk/index.php?PHPSESSID=1eda1b5655da898e64d33537b36413e2

 

[mattmns]

When are "kids" mature? Meaning what age would we raise it to, and why that age?For adult males living at home (ages 18-24) the percentage has gone from 54% (1970) to 55% (2002). The same study for females found 41% (1970) to 46% (2002) ( http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0193723.html )

 

[Smurf]

While on the topic of Voting. I think I'll take this opportunity to post this:

http://voluntaryist.com/articles/001a.php

 

[Moonbear]

When are "kids" mature? Meaning what age would we raise it to, and why that age?


For adult males living at home (ages 18-24) the percentage has gone from 54% (1970) to 55% (2002). The same study for females found 41% (1970) to 46% (2002) ( http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0193723.html )

I wish they had broken the data down into smaller age groupings.

I think I'd want to see some real poll data on how "kids" vote relative to their parents. You'll expect some degree of agreement, simply because people do incorporate what they've learned from their parents into their own views too, but there should come a point where the percentage of those voting differently from their parents would increase to indicate they are making independent decisions. I guess one could compare the data to an older population, say 30 year-olds, to see when the percentages of those voting differently from their parents began to reflect adult, independent voting patterns (you could also use poll data of "if you were old enough, who would you vote for" among various ages of children to see when the change starts to happen).

Since I didn't state it outright before, I voted unsure in the poll. I could be underestimating the maturity of 18 year-olds. Alternatively, if we raised the age, would that also be sending the message that you don't have to grow up and pay attention to the world around you quite yet, and just shift the problem to a later age group?

 

[Skyhunter]

If they are old enough to go to war they are old enough to have a voice in the decision.

 

[Evo]

If they are old enough to go to war they are old enough to have a voice in the decision.

That was the argument for lowering the voting age to 18. I think 18 is too young to go to war.

Young kids rarely take the time to understand what is really going on (the highly intelligent and knowledgeable youth at PF not included).

During the last election the local radio station was driving around giving out concert tickets to kids if they would register to vote and of course the DJ's were on air telling them who to vote for. Not that older people aren't any less likely to be herded like sheep to the polls by what ever organization they belong to. Unions tell their members who to vote for.

 

[Skyhunter]

That was the argument for lowering the voting age to 18. I think 18 is too young to go to war.
Young kids rarely take the time to understand what is really going on (the highly intelligent and knowledgeable youth at PF not included).
During the last election the local radio station was driving around giving out concert tickets to kids if they would register to vote and of course the DJ's were on air telling them who to vote for. Not that older people aren't any less likely to be herded like sheep to the polls by what ever organization they belong to. Unions tell their members who to vote for.

I think 118 is to young to go to war.

Our whole system of sufferage, in the words of Heinlen is like "adding zeros."

 

[Moonbear]

If they are old enough to go to war they are old enough to have a voice in the decision.

I guess you missed this paragraph in the OP:

Now that I've set up the general question, I'd like to put one restriction on the discussion. Discuss the merits of raising the voting age or keeping the status quo only as they apply to the maturity, independence, education, etc., of people in that age grouping, and not with regard to whether they are permitted or required to do other things at that age. For example, "If they can be sent to war at that age, they should vote," would not be a valid argument in this debate: make the assumption that whatever we set the voting age at, all related responsibilities that require that level of maturity would also be subject to revision as well.

 

[BobG]

I have to admit my 'no' was influenced by how things were when I was in high school. By senior year, I think most were pretty aware of what was going on politically on a national level - considering that was the year Nixon resigned because of Watergate, that might not have been the typical level of political awareness for high school students. Still, seniors taking Problems of Democracy (not a required course) had to have an awareness of current events to pass the course - in fact, I was a little miffed that Time magazine articles were used for homework assignments, since our family subscribed to Newsweek. On a local level, I knew the candidates well enough to have an opinion of them, but local tax initiatives and other ballot issues took me by surprise.

Among my kids, two voted for the opposite presidential candidate and one voted the same as I did. Since Kerry was the first Democratic Presidential candidate I voted for, it's hard to say whether that supports or weakens your position. Of the two living at home (or at least within a mile of home), one knew more than just the Presidential candidate, while the one clueless about any of the candidates other than the Presidential election understood the State amendment about the electoral votes (that's typical - in 2000, she was clueless about what each candidate stood for, but was very interested in the post-election process, itself). Neither really paid much attention to the local ballot initiatives.

Looking at people overall, I think interest in the topic has more to do with the variations in political awareness than maturity. There's a pretty large segment of the population whose only source political knowledge are 30 second campaign ads and a lot of those folks should be pretty mature.

 

[Just some guy]

No way, if anything it should be lowered to 16. 16 year olds (at least in Britain) have the right to consexual sex, abortions, marriage, the ability to serve in the armed forces, smoke, pay income tax and be tried as an adult in a court of law. With adult responsibilities comes adult priviledges - most important of which is having a say in how the political figures in our society shape our nation's future.

 

[Moonbear]

No way, if anything it should be lowered to 16. 16 year olds (at least in Britain) have the right to consexual sex, abortions, marriage, the ability to serve in the armed forces, smoke, pay income tax and be tried as an adult in a court of law. With adult responsibilities comes adult priviledges - most important of which is having a say in how the political figures in our society shape our nation's future.

And do you think they are already mature enough to handle those responsibilities? Again, I want to see arguments based on whether they are actually able to handle such responsibility by 18, not whether other laws expect them to do so.

 

[Just some guy]

And do you think they are already mature enough to handle those responsibilities? Again, I want to see arguments based on whether they are actually able to handle such responsibility by 18, not whether other laws expect them to do so.

Of course, otherwise society wouldn't expect them to do so.

Let's be completely honest, you either define 16 year olds as adults or children (not in a patronising sense mind) - if the former then they should have voting rights and if the latter they should have none of the rights and responsibilities I mentioned in my previous post. I'm sure there are plenty of young budding entrapreneurs or people in full-time employment who would love to not pay any income tax on their earnings.

 

[Moonbear]

Of course, otherwise society wouldn't expect them to do so.
Let's be completely honest, you either define 16 year olds as adults or children (not in a patronising sense mind) - if the former then they should have voting rights and if the latter they should have none of the rights and responsibilities I mentioned in my previous post. I'm sure there are plenty of young budding entrapreneurs or people in full-time employment who would love to not pay any income tax on their earnings.

In the US, we have different ages for different responsibilities, so it seems society hasn't come to quite the same consensus here. Here, you can drive at 17, vote, serve in the military, gamble, and smoke at 18, and consume alcohol at 21. Does this mean 16 year-olds in the US are less mature or responsible than in GB? Maybe it does...different societies and cultures exert different pressures on when people are expected to be responsible adults, and I suppose they could live up or down to that. Actually, that was my motivation for asking, because I think our culture may have changed enough that the age at which people are acting with sufficient maturity to take on such responsibilities is a bit older than 18 now, whereas I think there was a time when 16 year olds would have easily been mature enough to handle such responsibility...they started practicing that responsibility much earlier.

 

[Skyhunter]

I guess you missed this paragraph in the OP:

I admit I was answering the title and had not read the OP or the thread when I posted.

No, I do not think we should raise the age of suffrage. I think suffrage should be earned. Age does not equal maturity, wisdom, knowledge, or judgement.

 

[Gokul43201]

I think the voters should write down the name of the candidate/issue they are voting for (rather than punch or select from a list). Spelling errors and illegible handwriting serve as automatic disqualifiers !

 

[Smurf]

16 year-olds in the US are less mature or responsible than in GB?

You actually have to ask that question?

 

[Art]

The UK are also considering lowering the voting age to 16. It will be debated by parliament next week.
The main reasoning is that there has been very low turnouts in recent elections and so they are looking to engage people at an earlier age to get them interested in politics in the hope that this interest will follow through into later years. Personally I'd be inclined to let them vote. If nothing else it would bring some badly needed diversity into politics.

 

[Pengwuino]

I don't see what separates an 18 year old and say, a 21 or 24 year old sometimes. It would take some serious convincing as to how 24 year olds are in general, sufficiently more mature then 18 year olds.

 

[moose]

I don't see what separates an 18 year old and say, a 21 or 24 year old sometimes. It would take some serious convincing as to how 24 year olds are in general, sufficiently more mature then 18 year olds.

Really?

Between the ages of 14 and 16 people seem to change a lot maturity wise...

 

[Pengwuino]

Really?
Between the ages of 14 and 16 people seem to change a lot maturity wise...

That is true but even the people I knew at 16 shouldn't have been trusted to mop a floor...

I probalby wouldn't oppose it if something like this were up in the air... 16 year olds aren't going to vote anyways, who are we kidding haha. I mean hell, back in my high school, you didn't even have government until 12th grade.

 

[sid_galt]

I don't see what separates an 18 year old and say, a 21 or 24 year old sometimes. It would take some serious convincing as to how 24 year olds are in general, sufficiently more mature then 18 year olds.

A dose of reality, that is what separates an 18 year old from a 21 year old.

You see, a 21 year old has already gone through college and likely taken a job, one of the most life changing experiences.

 

[Pengwuino]

You see, a 21 year old has already gone through college and likely taken a job, one of the most life changing experiences.

Few 21 year olds are already done with college... The people I know with jobs and this "reality check" crap... I am sorry but i did not see any magical changes in them. I still don't see how many of them are allowed to even have responsibilities. Your bachelors degree is not a degree in responsibility unfortunately.

 

[MaxS]

you're assuming that all 21 year olds went to college and are living off their parents...

there are plenty of people right here in this country that have been on their own their entire lives.

 

[Pengwuino]

you're assuming that all 21 year olds went to college and are living off their parents...

I'm assuming "a 21 year old has already gone through college" meant that these particular people graduated with a degree...

But i guess i am wrong.

 

[MaxS]

I'm assuming "a 21 year old has already gone through college" meant that these particular people graduated with a degree...
But i guess i am wrong.

I wasn't talking to just you I was referring to the thread in general.

BUT as far as your post goes, my point still stands.. you're ignoring a large portion of the population by calling 21 yr olds immature while talking about college students.

 

[Pengwuino]

Well I have known a few mature 16 year olds but I wouldn't be making such a broad change based on a few mature people. I dunno... whatever, i don't care anymore, this thread has lost my interest, lower it to 10 for all i care, no one will vote anyways, this is America! land of the free, home of the lazy.

 

[Skyhunter]

Age doesn't make a difference.

Democracy should be more active. If people don't want to participate they can opt out. Those who do want to participate should earn their suffrage.

Voting should be a duty, not an option. Abstention is still participation. If one does not feel qualified to make a decision one can abstain.

If people were engaged and active on local, regional, and national levels, the nation, and therefore the world, would be so much better off.

If the Democrats get control, things will be different. Different people getting the money.

Why?

Because the majority of people are not involved enough in exercising democracy. Human nature is self interested. The entities, corporate and otherwise, that have the greatest opportunity to fulfill that human self interest have a distinct advantage.

The interest of the whole is in the interest of the self.

Politicians should be motivated by service, not profit. If this principle was primary to gaining the right of suffrage, the people electing our representatives would be engaged and active in the political process. They would have a greater ability to recognize others of like principles and support them.

I am not talking about an elite group, I am talking about the average American voter. By earning suffrage through service, and continuing that service by responsibly exercising their suffrage would do ever so much more to help democracy than requiring a person to take a certain number of trips around the sun.

Information technology is at a point where democracy can be practiced at a level never before seen.

The future can be wonderful.

Or not.

I wonder which way we will go when the pendulum swings back this time?

 

[Pengwuino]

I don't think the average American has the time or patience to play politics. No matter how manyc onveniences we have, no matter how many time saving things we get... we seem to have the ability to create even more things to do. We'll never have any time for politics...

 

[Skyhunter]

I don't think the average American has the time or patience to play politics. No matter how manyc onveniences we have, no matter how many time saving things we get... we seem to have the ability to create even more things to do. We'll never have any time for politics...

Then we shouldn't practice it.

 

[Anttech]

"Man is by nature a political animal."

--Aristotle