Should the voting age be lowered?

Wolfe Tone

Should voting remain the exclusive right of "adults"? Can the ability to make an informed decision really be defined by a figure? If so what should this be?


For a very long time voting was for those 21 and over, or for married women, women over 32 etc etc. Over time these have come to be seen as outdated and redundant. I feel that the voting age being set at 18 is now redundant also. I feel that it should be lowered. When I was sixteen I was just as capable of making an informed and as responsible a decision of who to vote for as I am now. Should this blatant form of age discrimination continue?


While I accept(others may not) that a limit, or a line must be drawn somewhere, I feel 18 is not the figure.

I feel 15 would be an appropriate age to assume the awesome responsibility of voting.

Let the debate commence!



Anyway a poll can be put up?

The_Minister

I know very, very few 16-year olds with enough political knowledge to make an informed choice.

I know a few that would vote Sinn Fein 'because they have guns' (actual quote).

Most politically active 16-year-olds that I have met are the product of pushy parents jamming their political views down their children's throat - I know one girl whose family have a portrait of Michael Collins over the mantlepiece.

At 16 you are still living with and dependent on your parents - you don't have the autonomy to make your own choice.

Wolfe Tone

The_Minister wrote: »

I know very, very few 16-year olds with enough political knowledge to make an informed choice.

I know many people much older without enough political knowledge to make an informed choice. Does this knowledge fall upon one on their 18th birthday? Obviously not.

I know a few that would vote Sinn Fein 'because they have guns' (actual quote).

I know people who voted FF because "they have managed the economy well" (actual quote.) Idiocy is not age dependent.

Most politically active 16-year-olds that I have met are the product of pushy parents jamming their political views down their children's throat - I know one girl whose family have a portrait of Michael Collins over the mantlepiece.

At 16 you are still living with and dependent on your parents - you don't have the autonomy to make your own choice.

Many people still vote for who their parents voted for. Or the children of those whom their parents voted for.
Many people have had to either remain, or move back in with their parents for financial reasons. Should they not be allowed vote? Take for instance students. Often they are still financially dependent on their parents.

The_Minister

The_Minister wrote: »

I know very, very few 16-year olds with enough political knowledge to make an informed choice.

I know a few that would vote Sinn Fein 'because they have guns' (actual quote).

Most politically active 16-year-olds that I have met are the product of pushy parents jamming their political views down their children's throat - I know one girl whose family have a portrait of Michael Collins over the mantlepiece.

At 16 you are still living with and dependent on your parents - you don't have the autonomy to make your own choice.

Interesting. But do you not feel letting them vote from an early age would lead them being "more into" politics, if they felt their their say slightly mattered? We all make mistakes when we're younger, in fact it can't be much different than the old folk who continuously vote in the same party, year after year, "because it's what they know". They no longer educate themselves in the politics of the here and now, because they are comfortable in what they believe.
And I may be blunt here, what right does someone who is near their end (80-90+), have on deciding the future, of someone who is 17 and for all wants and purposes, an adult?
In this democracy (correct me if I'm wrong) if someone breaks the law at aged 16+ they are tried as an adult because they are responsible for their actions. IF they are responsible for their actions, shouldn't they also have the responsibility to vote?

Low Energy Eng

I think the age limit is fine as it is, any lower and it would turn into the cool thing to do to vote for so and so in schools.

I also strongly believe people should be made pay to vote, say €10-20, it'll make them actually think about who they're voting for and have an interest in who wins etc.

Low Energy Eng

Low Energy Eng wrote: »

I also strongly believe people should be made pay to vote, say €10-20, it'll make them actually think about who they're voting for and have an interest in who wins etc.

So the people that can barely afford food on the table should be barred from voting? Or should we throw more shame on them, by giving those that can prove they're below the poverty line a "voting voucher"

Mike 1972

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I feel 15 would be an appropriate age to assume the awesome responsibility of voting.

Its 15 in the Philippines IIRC dont know of anywhere with a lower age than that. The Libdems in the UK favoured 16 although its not part of the current Coalitions programme for Government

The_Minister wrote: »

I know very, very few 16-year olds with enough political knowledge to make an informed choice..

I know quite a few 85 year olds who listen to Joe Duffy.........

The_Minister wrote: »

At 16 you are still living with and dependent on your parents - you don't have the autonomy to make your own choice.

While I agree with the OP in principle I would concede that there is one potential flaw in the proposal.

Could parents not abuse their "right" to refuse their kids permission to leave the house on polling day ? (Unless kids get more savvy about being more discreet when it comes to their opinions/voting intentions)

Bottle_of_Smoke

I'd say lower it to 13. Not a joke I'm just too tired to explain why for now. See you guys tomorrow.

Flojo

Do you remember being 15? I remember jumping in shopping trolleys and getting pushed into bushes.. how on earth can a 15 year old make an informed choice in a election?

Mike 1972

Cant 16 year olds join the army ? If theyre old enough to (potentially) be sent off to fight for their country theyre old enough to have a say in who gets to send them off ?

Cant 17 year olds drive cars and become parents ?

If people could become engaged with the political process at a younger age maybe they would remain so and turnouts would rise again

Flojo wrote: »

Do you remember being 15? I remember jumping in shopping trolleys and getting pushed into bushes.. how on earth can a 15 year old make an informed choice in a election?

I remember when I was 15. I was quite interested in politics and I generally kept away from shopping trolleys..........................

Flojo

Mike 1972 wrote: »

I remember when I was 15. I was quite interested in politics..........................

Okay... *backs away slowly from the forum*

johnmcdnl

Low Energy Eng wrote: »

I think the age limit is fine as it is, any lower and it would turn into the cool thing to do to vote for so and so in schools.

I also strongly believe people should be made pay to vote, say €10-20, it'll make them actually think about who they're voting for and have an interest in who wins etc.

that is actually one of the worst suggestion for anything I have ever heard in my life... it's hard enough to get people out to vote as it is never mind charging people to vote... we'd have about a 2% if we were lucky

and what if it's the cool thing to do at school??????? are you saying we shouldn't make voting "cool" and instead we should alienate the youth of this country from the political system altogether?

I'm 18 now and tbh I'm sure I could have voted when I was 16 but I know that 16 is still way to young for a lot of young people... I was probably one of the few people that knew anything about the political system in my year when I was 16 so... when your 16 your generally more worried about where you can get a few cans or whatever and politics aren't really to important so reducing the voting age anymore isn't of any benefit really... 18 is a good age and it should be left at 18


but seriously your suggestion was such a stupid idea... if you'd sat and though about what'd happen for even 2 seconds you'd surely realise that was a really bad idea but anyways.....

nesf

I'd prefer to see it raised to 21 to be honest.

Mike 1972

Successive governments in this part of the world have a very poor record when it comes to addressing the needs/concerns of anyone under 35 since they know so few people in this age group bother to vote

Anything that would get people engaged with the political process from a young age would be very good for democracy.

Mind you the quality of the education system with regard to teaching how the country is governed would need some serious improvement. Most people have never even seen a copy of the constitution for petes sake.

Einhard

No, people of that age simply aren't mature enough to make the informed decisions necessary to exercise a responsible mandate. Granted, a lot of people over the age of 18 are in the same boat, but you have to draw a line somewhere, and 18 is a reasonable compromise.

Einhard

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Cant 16 year olds join the army ? If theyre old enough to (potentially) be sent off to fight for their country theyre old enough to have a say in who gets to send them off ?

Cant 17 year olds drive cars and become parents ?

If people could become engaged with the political process at a younger age maybe they would remain so and turnouts would rise again



I remember when I was 15. I was quite interested in politics and I generally kept away from shopping trolleys..........................

Sticking your dick in a young one, putting your foot on the pedal whilst looking at the road, and standing around banks with a gun in your hand aren't exactly hallmarks of the mature and enlightened. Most 18 year olds I know are barely aware enough to make an informed decision at that age, let alone earlier. The OP states that voting was a massive responsibility- granting the vote to anyone under the age of 18 seriously diminishes the gravity of casting a ballot.

Improbable

I don't think it should be lowered. If anything, it should be raised. I don't know whether any studies have been done on it but is there any evidence that 18 is a less arbitrary number than 17 or 19? What we really should be doing is trying to come up with a method to get more people to vote.

Mike 1972

Einhard wrote: »

Sticking your dick in a young one,

You were saying something about maturity and enlightenment ?

Einhard

I phrased that deliberately to illustrate how parenthood and sex is seen by the average, sexually active 16 year old. It was deliberatey worded for a purpose. Rgardless of whether you got that or not, my point still stands.

Gavin "shels"

Simple as, no!

Going to take my own example. Outta my group of friends male and female, between 18-20, 2 of us afaik our registered to vote and have bothered to vote. I'd take that number out of about 40 people, possibly more.

Mike 1972

No to reducing the age because sure they wouldnt vote anyway

If so whats the problem with reducing it ?

Gavin shels wrote: »

Outta my group of friends male and female, .

A nice representative sample youve got there.............

Gavin shels

Gavin shels wrote: »

Simple as, no!

Going to take my own example. Outta my group of friends male and female, between 18-20, 2 of us afaik our registered to vote and have bothered to vote. I'd take that number out of about 40 people, possibly more.

So, let me get this straight. Your reason for not wanting to lower the age is because of out of 40 of your mates aged 18-20, 2 have bothered to register to vote and have exercised that right...

Thats amazing logic and reason for not giving a vote to someone aged 16/17 who actually might want to get off their behind and partake in the political process. Really.

If you're old enough to pay tax, (everyone is given a pps no. when they're 16 iirc) you should also be entitled to a say in how it's spent.

Einhard

Papa Smut wrote: »

If you're old enough to pay tax, (everyone is given a pps no. when they're 16 iirc) you should also be entitled to a say in how it's spent.

That's an interesting point. But one could counter and argue that if one is old enough to pay tax, then one should be entitled to avail of all the services of the state. At the moment, there's quite a lot of things 16-18 year olds can't do without consent of a gaurdian or a parent.

FlutterinBantam

I feel it would be totally stupid to lower the voting age.

It would give idealists and dreamers and the Don Quixote types a fresh and eager canvas to hawk their propaganda and rhetoric on.

Rest assured they would be in like a flash.

The more extreme and far fetched, the more appealing it would be to these potential voters.


So you can put me down as a firm 'NO' on that one Sir.

PeterIanStaker

Instead of paying people to vote, how about fining people if they don't vote.

Now if your incapacitated or abroad and cant get to the polling station there could be leeway there, but if people can't be arsed voting and just instead sit on their holes complaining about how crap things are, without exercising their constititional and civil right to vote isn't that as bad as voting FF?

owenc

I think it should be risen rather than lowered, teenagers will just vote for who their parents say and in northern ireland they will just vote for their "side" which would mean that the votes would get all messed up instead of voting for the person they would think is best.

aDeener

definitely should be lowered. i was 17 starting college where government decisions were making a direct impact on me and my life and obviously i could not have a say in the matter.

ectoraige

The_Minister wrote: »

I know very, very few 16-year olds with enough political knowledge to make an informed choice.

As others have pointed out, many over 18s do not have enough political knowledge to make an informed choice either. Turnout among younger voters are lower everywhere, generally due to lower levels of interest in political issues. However, we should not deny suffrage to those who do have an interest in how their taxes are spent.

The_Minister wrote:

I know a few that would vote Sinn Fein 'because they have guns' (actual quote).

There are many adults who used that rationale over the years. There are also some who won't vote Sinn Fein anymore as they *don't* have the guns anymore.

The_Minister wrote:

Most politically active 16-year-olds that I have met are the product of pushy parents jamming their political views down their children's throat - I know one girl whose family have a portrait of Michael Collins over the mantlepiece.

Many people also have diametrically opposed views to their parents.

At 16 you are still living with and dependent on your parents - you don't have the autonomy to make your own choice.

Should we also deny the infirm, the incapacitated? Perhaps we shouldn't have allowed women the vote if they stayed at home, reliant on their husband? Perhaps there should be a minimum earnings threshold before people can vote?

johngalway

No. The voting age should be raised to 21.

JohnK

I think lowering the voting age would be a good thing and would get a lot of young people more interested in politics while also serving to sustain that interest as they get into their 20s.

When I was around 13/14 quite a few of my friends and I started getting interested in politics, the various parties and their positions on different issues however after two or three years that interest waned because we had no input into the political arena and our opinions were essentially worthless. When we finally were able to register and make our opinions heard only a handful of those initially interested even bothered because after years of their opinions being ignored they were disillusioned with the entire process. If their interest in politics was encouraged and they were able to take part in the process that’s directly influencing their futures I think they would be more likely to stick with it once they get to college and into the workforce.

johngalway

Might be an idea to stick a poll on this thread?

Wolfe Tone

johngalway wrote: »

Might be an idea to stick a poll on this thread?

I have no idea of how to do that. I tried when I was setting it up, but I could not see how.


Many of the reasons being raised against lowering the voting age are the very same as those that were used against Women under 32, those without property, unmarried women, people of certain religions.


They have become outdated, and so have the arguments against lowering the voting age. This blatant age discrimination was deemed unacceptable then, why not now?

PeterIanStaker

johngalway wrote: »

Might be an idea to stick a poll on this thread?

How old do you have to be to vote on it:D:D:D

conorhal

The American revolution and their demand democratic representation began with the chant of "No taxation without representation!"

As age is no qualifier for wisdom, then I think 'taxpayer' is as good a qualifier as any for representation, when you start paying tax you should be entitled to a vote on the elected representative that is tasked with spending your money. The vast majority of 15-18 year olds are not taxpayers, increasingly thanks to the recession, a growing number of 18-25yr olds aren't either of course, but you have to set the qualifying age somewhere, so 18 seems fair to me .

Eliot Rosewater

conorhal wrote: »

As age is no qualifier for wisdom, then I think 'taxpayer' is as good a qualifier as any for representation

The moment you go out and buy something in a shop you are a taxpayer, due to VAT.

Basing it on income tax could be disastrous. It would give the incumbent government the ability to deprive people of the vote, simply by abolishing their tax.

conorhal

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The moment you go out and buy something in a shop you are a taxpayer, due to VAT.

Basing it on income tax could be disastrous. It would give the incumbent government the ability to deprive people of the vote, simply by abolishing their tax.

I bloody wish, I'd happily surrender my democratic mandate!

That's not what I was arguing though. I was suggesting that at 18 you are no longer the legal responsibility of your parents, they don't have to support you any more (which is why you can get job seekers allowance and state support) and it's also the age at which you can participate full time in the jobs market and earn your own living (or choose to go to college, or both). So if contributing to the state qualifies you to have a say in it's running, 18 is the appropriate age.

Het-Field

It is a very difficult question to answer.

One of the major problems with politics is that there is no meritocracy about it at all. I wouldnt want an unqualified doctor, lawyer, commercial activist dealing with my affairs, however, we happily allow for publicans, undertakers, career politicians, and gombeen men run our social and economicaffairs from the top to the bottom. Nobody should be under any illusion that it is civil servants which execute policy. The Minister has the final say, and has always had the final say. Unfortunatly, the Minister is often less qualified then the high ranking civil servant, but is more bombastic, and willing to put the civil servant in their place.

The same applies to enfranchisement. It is difficult to select the accurate age at which one should be enfranchised. At very least there should be a semblence of academic achievement. This would at very least mean a child would be 15-16 when the enfranchisment is extended to them. However, it might also be considered more appropriate to enfranchise people after the leaving certificate as they have availed of all that school can offer them.

The state also regulates (or seeks to regulate) the behaviour of people up to the age of 18 (Alcohol Consumption, Full Rights to Drive Cars, Legal Attendance at certain restricted Films and Artistic Productions). Thus, it would be probative of the fact that 18 is generally considered an age of majority and responsibility. If that is taken as gospel, then 18 should be the voting age. If you are responsible to see what you want, drink what you want, and drive where you want, thens urely you can select who you want to represent you.

Thus, given the consistency in laws and the virtual consistancy in age in education, I believe 18 is the right way to go. It may not be perfect, but until the education system takes a hands on approach to Civics and political education, then I believe that we have to use age as the barometer, and as 18 is generally recognised as a big age, then I feel we should maintain the voting age as it is.

Riskymove

personally I think there are plenty of people over 18 who are unable to make informed decisions either!!

another issue that I have not read here about people of lets say 13 or 15 voting is the possibility of coercion......people could force their kids to vote

Wolfe Tone

Riskymove wrote: »

personally I think there are plenty of people over 18 who are unable to make informed decisions either!!

another issue that I have not read here about people of lets say 13 or 15 voting is the possibility of coercion......people could force their kids to vote

A husband could try to force a wife to vote one way. You will be alone and could vote one way and say another.

Het-Field

Riskymove wrote: »

personally I think there are plenty of people over 18 who are unable to make informed decisions either!!

another issue that I have not read here about people of lets say 13 or 15 voting is the possibility of coercion......people could force their kids to vote

As The Minister said at the top of the thread, we are already in a place where parents coerce their children to vote. It is not physical coercion, it is simply by osmosis. I recall my mum saying that "Fine Gael would screw ya into the ground". I was 5 at the time, and recall hating Alan Dukes when i saw a picture of him in Montessori School.

Eliot Rosewater

My Mammy always votes the way I tell her to.

owenc

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

My Mammy always votes the way I tell her to.

Lucky you.

johngalway

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

How old do you have to be to vote on it:D:D:D

Since this isn't a democracy anyhow, age would be irrelevant.

...It should be coin operated

Riskymove

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

A husband could try to force a wife to vote one way.

which is part of the previous thinking as to why women could not vote.....modern thinking has moved on....but the issue of parental influence over a 13 year old would still stand as an argument I'd say

Nozebleed

yeah 15 would be great...and maybe you could text your vote in. like the X-factor.

Wolfe Tone

Riskymove wrote: »

which is part of the previous thinking as to why women could not vote.....modern thinking has moved on....but the issue of parental influence over a 13 year old would still stand as an argument I'd say

I think that has moved on. In the privacy of th polling booth you can vote anyway you wish.

Riskymove

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I think that has moved on. In the privacy of th polling booth you can vote anyway you wish.

simplistic

could a 13 year old, under threat, act so relaxed and simply vote differently?

also 13 year olds may have no political interest what so ever and just happily vote the way others tell them

Riddickcule

I'm 16 and I feel I have enough political knowledge to vote. It's not about age really it's about knowledge, too many people don't know basic politics, like distincting left wing- right wing etc.

Too many people have no interest in politics at all,especially at my age...silly reasons aswell, corruption, its boring all that malark.

But sure Whoever has the knowledge can register the vote, so only those 16 year olds with political know-how will actually bother voting.

Wolfe Tone

Riskymove wrote: »

simplistic

could a 13 year old, under threat, act so relaxed and simply vote differently?

also 13 year olds may have no political interest what so ever and just happily vote the way others tell them

Could a 33yo woman, under threat do the same? A 50 year old man?

Many 50 year olds have zero political interest and do what others say or don't bother voting at all.

When I was 15 and 16, or 13 I had a large political interest. What about me, and others like me?

mailforkev

If the voting age had to change then I'd be hoping it would be upwards too.

It's bad enough that I have to share the equality of my vote with some skanger who votes Shinner because he blames "the government" for all manner of things that he should be personally responsible for, let alone having a few thousand more teenagers being thrown into the mix.

You should get a small tax credit for your vote too, fairer than making people pay.

Het-Field

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Could a 33yo woman, under threat do the same? A 50 year old man?

Many 50 year olds have zero political interest and do what others say or don't bother voting at all.

When I was 15 and 16, or 13 I had a large political interest. What about me, and others like me?

Sadly, the politically aware 15/16 years olds are the exception rather the the rule. Given the limited role of Town Councils and County Councils, I would be open to extending the enfranchisement to younger peoplein those spheres. On the other hand, I believe that the purported goal of national government is not something which should be handed out lightly, and I would wager for every politically informed 15/16 year old, there is 10 uninformed people, who are open to manipulation, or cult voting. Obviously this is also an argument which could be levelled at many people, however, many of these people have contributed through the taxation system, have increased the overall wealth of society, or have created children which will be productive members of society. I know there are those which have not contributed, however, it may constured that their voices must be heard to ensure that any welfare traps which they may have fallen into may be alleviated by solid policy, or political activism.