Voting age Bill defeated

RicePat

The Seanad has rejected Senator Warfield's Bill to extend voting rights to 16 and 17 year olds for local and European elections.

Technically theyve kicked it down the road for 9 months but the National Youth Council is saying that this means legislation probably wont be through in time for the 2019 elections and amounts to a rejection.

This seems to be (another) U-turn from Fianna Fail and Fine Gael (FF made lowering the voting age a pre-election pledge while FG voted in favour of it in the EP)

What do others think? I'm all for lowering the age to 16. Get young people more involved in politics, not to mention the fact that the government is happy enough to tax them, just not give them a say in how that tax is spent.

jimmycrackcorm

I don't think any 16 year old is interested in voting for anything other than which xbox game is best

RicePat

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't think any 16 year old is interested in voting for anything other than which xbox game is best

You should go along to an Ogra Sinn Fein, or Ogra Fianna Fail or Ogra anything meeting. There are a lot of politically engaged young people and a lot of wasters aged 18 and over who dont even bother to register.

MightyMandarin

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't think any 16 year old is interested in voting for anything other than which xbox game is best

This type of **** is what drives me insane and has done for years.

Sure, the majority of teenagers or young adults haven't a clue and don't really care about politics, but neither does the majority of adults either.

Even though I'm of legal voting age, I knew more about politics and current affairs than my parents or most of my teachers did when I was 16, yet I wasn't allowed to vote as the Govt. didn't think I was able to make such an important decision for myself, despite the fact I knew of people who went into the voting booths and put a big fat '1' beside a FF or FG candidate on the ballot paper, just because that's what they've done for years and hadn't a clue what was in their party's manifesto.

How is it at all fair that people like them get to vote, yet young people like my younger-self can't, just because we're not 18. It's ridiculous.

If we're competent enough to drive a car or consent to sex, we're competent enough to have our voice heard in elections.

Elemonator

I don't agree with it. Even at 18, you are very open to being easily politically swayed and it can be used for the wrong reasons.

Sinn Fein have a brilliant youth connection to be accurate.

MightyMandarin

Elemonator wrote: »

I don't agree with it. Even at 18, you are very open to being easily politically swayed and it can be used for the wrong reasons.

Sinn Fein have a brilliant youth connection to be accurate.

People of all sorts of ages believe Hillary Clinton ran a paedophile ring out of a Washington DC pizza parlour or at 63 (Danny Healy Rae's age) believe that God controls the weather.

Being easily swayed and believing nonsense is not an age thing.

RicePat

Elemonator wrote: »

I don't agree with it. Even at 18, you are very open to being easily politically swayed and it can be used for the wrong reasons.

Sinn Fein have a brilliant youth connection to be accurate.

Seems more like your issue here is with a specific party rather than extending the franchise.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Lower it to 17 then.

RicePat

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The ridin' or drivin' wouldnt be the main issue for me. More so that there are a lot of politically astute 16 and 17 year olds out there who are more than capable of making an informed choice and I think deserve the opportunity to do so. Then you have the hypocrisy where the government deems them old enough to tax their labour but not old enough to have some small say in how that taxation is spent.

LuckyLloyd

Elemonator wrote: »

I don't agree with it. Even at 18, you are very open to being easily politically swayed and it can be used for the wrong reasons.

Sinn Fein have a brilliant youth connection to be accurate.

That's the real reason it's been stalled anyway. SF rising in the polls.

MightyMandarin

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That's the real reason it's been stalled anyway. SF rising in the polls.

I don't know if it is for sure, but if it is that's an absolute disgrace. I'm no SF supporter but that's deliberate suppression of opposition parties.

RicePat

MightyMandarin wrote: »

I don't know if it is for sure, but if it is that's an absolute disgrace. I'm no SF supporter but that's deliberate suppression of opposition parties.

Damn all other reason to delay it for an arbitrary 9 months (just long enough to make it unlikely to get passed in time for the 2019 EU and Local elections) when both FF and FG agree to it and have voted in favour of it in the past.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

How many +18yr olds would you say are politically astute?

If, like my own father who's a dutch citizen, they are a foreigner, they can choose to retain their own citizenship or take up Irish citizenship, one allowing them to vote in Ireland and one in their home country, but not both.

What's wrong with that system?

pawrick

I'd prefer a small test on the subject before each vote. e.g. go in to the booth, get 7 multiple choice questions, pass 5 and your vote is counted. Far too many voters are clueless + many vote along family of political lines without checking what is actually going on. This affects people of all ages. The information is there for people to research a topic but some people continue to claim ignorance through lazyness, a clueless 50 year old is as bad a a clueless 16 year old when the decision could impact everyone.

RicePat

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I would say enough to justify giving them the vote. Perhaps if you get people involved younger they wont be so quick to disassociate themselves from the system once they hit 18

There's no comparison between an Irish citizen and a someone working here who retains their citizenship and voting rights in their home country

RicePat

pawrick wrote: »

I'd prefer a small test on the subject before each vote. e.g. go in to the booth, get 7 multiple choice questions, pass 5 and your vote is counted. Far too many voters are clueless + many vote along family of political lines without checking what is actually going on. This affects people of all ages. The information is there for people to research a topic but some people continue to claim ignorance through lazyness, a clueless 50 year old is as bad a a clueless 16 year old when the decision could impact everyone.

I sound like a fascist when I say it but I would be highly in favour of a system like this

doolox

Such literacy and competence tests were used in the US deep South to deny votes to racial minorities who, through no fault of their own, were not able to read or write well enough to pass a test.

Similar blockages were done on nationalist voters in Northern Ireland, also on property qualifications where some people got more votes than others.

MightyMandarin

doolox wrote: »

Such literacy and competence tests were used in the US deep South to deny votes to racial minorities who, through no fault of their own, were not able to read or write well enough to pass a test.

Similar blockages were done on nationalist voters in Northern Ireland, also on property qualifications where some people got more votes than others.

More importantly though, it's a fundamental breach of one of the pillars of democracy: the right to vote.

Note it's called the "right", not "permit, assuming you know some stuff about politics".

I'm all for complaining about idiots who show up in the polling booth, but I'll never advocate for them to be denied the right to cast their vote, just because they're ill- or misinformed.

blanch152

RicePat wrote: »

The ridin' or drivin' wouldnt be the main issue for me. More so that there are a lot of politically astute 16 and 17 year olds out there who are more than capable of making an informed choice and I think deserve the opportunity to do so. Then you have the hypocrisy where the government deems them old enough to tax their labour but not old enough to have some small say in how that taxation is spent.

They can't drive.

They can't have sex.

They can't drink.

They can't buy a Lotto ticket.

They can't smoke a cigarette.

They can't get married.

Many tattoo parlours won't let them get a tattoo.

Yet you believe they are OK to vote. It seems from your other posts it is because you believe people incapable of the above are more susceptible to vote for certain parties? If that is so, what does that imply?

RicePat

blanch152 wrote: »

They can't drive.

They can't have sex.

They can't drink.

They can't buy a Lotto ticket.

They can't smoke a cigarette.

They can't get married.

Many tattoo parlours won't let them get a tattoo.

Yet you believe they are OK to vote. It seems from your other posts it is because you believe people incapable of the above are more susceptible to vote for certain parties? If that is so, what does that imply?

In my very first resposne on this topic I literally said that this applies to people of all political persuasions

You should go along to an Ogra Sinn Fein, or Ogra Fianna Fail or Ogra anything meeting. There are a lot of politically engaged young people and a lot of wasters aged 18 and over who dont even bother to register.

In the north they can have sex, should they be able to vote?

In America you cant drink until youre 21. Should the voting age be raised?

There used to be different ages of consent for straight and gay intercourse, should we have different voting ages based on sexuality?

We can argue over these arbitrary numbers all day, they are different issues. The fact is 16 year olds can work and be taxed on their earnings, I think they should be entitled to a say in how those taxes are spent.

In response to those who think 16 year olds are too stupid to have a political opinion I'd urge them to actually speak to some 16 year olds, you might be surprised as to how politically astute many of them are. No doubt there are many who arent, but then again there isnt much incentive to be if they cant even vote.

KyussBeeshop

I've not really considered this line of argument a whole lot before.

It's undeniable that 16 year olds have their own levels of political interests, particularly with how schools are run, and with their close future with college.

Given this, and given how different sections of society (as adults) already seem to base their votes solely on selfish political interests (as opposed to intelligent/principled decision making), I don't see any reason not to extend voting rights to the age of 16 - which is a critical transitionary time for teenagers, as they prepare to become adults and go to college and/or work.

It's not about intelligence or knowledge regarding politics - we all know a not-insignificant degree of the adult population has fúck all of that, or is so selfish in their political support that it's a close proxy for that - it's about this particular section of society, being able to directly represent their own interests/concerns, and being at a stage where it's reasonable to view them as being cognizant of and competent at this (e.g. as it is now, no teenager has any direct political influence on their education - I wonder how long things would last, such as e.g. the waste of time that is mandatory Irish education, if students actually had a direct political say - that's not even on any politicians agenda today).

Each stage of maturing into adulthood, moulds people into different worldviews and roles - someone who is in school or college will not yet be subject to many of the workforce-conforming worldviews that can taint peoples perception of politics - so I think this is valuable as well, to encourage peoples individual political participation/development, at a stage when they are not under greater pressure to mould into a corporatised/business-friendly perspective of society/politics - this may greatly influence their political maturation/views, long into adulthood.

Billy86

How many 16 or 17 year olds with no interest in or knowledge of politics would go to the hassle to vote? Looking at the US election and Brexit, I couldn't see it being any higher (my guess would be significantly lower) than those 18 and over. Also, if we're using that argument we would require a competency test to show you actually have a clue how clued in those who intend to vote are.

AnGaelach

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

How many 18-24 year olds are "politically astute" when most of them don't vote? How many people who vote along historic voting patterns are "politically astute"? I daresay most people in this country aren't politically astute. Politics doesn't interfere with their day-to-day lives in most scenarios. They wouldn't be able to tell you about what electoral method we use, they wouldn't be able to tell you how many TDs there are or how many Seandoirí the Taoiseach can appoint.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

And we're not talking about letting 16 year olds vote in Dáil or Presidential elections, are we? If I recall, the bill was for Local and European elections... Which EU citizens can vote in.

There's also the fact Irish citizens are Irish citizens, so comparing the rights of an Irish citizen to the rights of a non-Irish citizen doesn't make sense. If anything, you should be comparing the Irish citizen (16) paying tax with the Irish citizen (18+) paying tax and differentiating between their rights.