[Constitutional Convention][2][26 Jan 2013] Reducing the voting age to 17

CrabRevolution · 26-01-2013 10:36PM

I'm 19 and almost none of my friends the same age and older are registered to vote or bother to anyway. I myself voted in the fiscal compact referendum, but didnt bother with the childrens rights one.

The only people visibly active and interested in politics my age are college political types and youth wings of parties. The terms 'annoying' and 'best avoided' would sum up anyone I know's opinions of them.

The only change lowering the voting age would make would be lowering the age at which the vast majority of young people can vote but dont.

Cookie_Monster · 27-01-2013 05:19AM

dlofnep wrote: »

No, because the body is not physically mature enough at 16 to handle alcohol as much as an 18 year old is.

Yet the mind is mature enough to vote?

Annasopra · 27-01-2013 09:31AM

Sponge Bob wrote: »

I would consider it for local elections only. Currently a TD must be 18, do we want 17 year old TDs , if the answer to the latter is yes then by all means extend the franchise to 17 year olds but I believe it is pointless.

No

You have to be 21 to be a TD. This is only about voting

Annasopra · 27-01-2013 09:39AM

amen wrote: »

The age of 18 is currently fine. Its a defining moment when you are meant to become a responsible adult capable of caring for yourself.

If you reduce the voting age to 17 then you need to also consider reducing the minimum legal age for marriage (without parents agreement) to 17, the legal age to drink to 17, the ability to enter and sign legally binding contracts to 17 (loans, property deals etc.) and controversially the age of consent from 18 to 17.

After all if you are responsible enough to vote them you are certainly responsible enough for all of the above.

Has anyone thought about the impact on schools, social welfare etc if you reduce the voting age to 17 and then have to make corresponding changes to all of the other ages?

What happens to the definition of a child if you can vote at 17 ?

How would redefining a child as someone 0-17 comply with international treaties?

I don't see why you have to change all corresponding ages at all.

Annasopra · 27-01-2013 09:47AM

Interesting research from Austria

http://homepage.univie.ac.at/markus.wagner/Paper_Votingat16.pdf

I'd be in favour of voting at 16 as per NYCI

www.voteat16.ie/

PhotogTom · 27-01-2013 10:21AM

I'm not a huge conspiracy theorist but I have to say the issues I've seen this constitutional convention take up seem like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic to me! Who cares about the voting age when we need real reform of the way we are governed. Lets stop the parish pump politics, TD's who can't focus on national issues, school teachers dominating the elected class, the over representative number of TD's, etc, etc.
I truly think the entire system needs to be re-thought or to paraphrase Einstein "we'll keep doing the same things and get the same results".

carpejugulum · 27-01-2013 12:19PM

COYW wrote: »

As others have said, what are the pros of reducing the voting age? Is it case of changing something for the sake of changing something? I see no reason to change the age at all.

1, freedom of choice
2, to balance the rapid ageing of population

oscarBravo wrote: »

My Danish girlfriend pays tax here. Should she get to vote?

Yes, foreign income tax payers resident and paying for a set number of years (3?) should be able to vote as well.

amen wrote: »

and controversially the age of consent from 18 to 17.

Nothing controversial about this. It should be 15.

phantom_lord · 27-01-2013 01:03PM

CrabRevolution wrote: »

The only people visibly active and interested in politics my age are college political types and youth wings of parties. The terms 'annoying' and 'best avoided' would sum up anyone I know's opinions of them.

That doesn't change with age.

Annasopra · 27-01-2013 01:18PM

The convention can be followed at #ccven and @consconv on Twitter

Results from change the voting age

52 in favour 47 against 1 abstention

The majority then voted in favour of 16 but I can't determine the figures properly

https://twitter.com/IrishTLR/status/295517339556913152/photo/1

expectationlost · 27-01-2013 06:53PM

is there a list of invited speakers on this subject?

RangeR · 27-01-2013 06:55PM

expectationlost wrote: »

is there a list of invited speakers on this subject?

This was well publicised and documented on constitution.ie/convention/

expectationlost · 27-01-2013 07:01PM

RangeR wrote: »

This was well publicised and documented on constitution.ie/convention/

i just looked where?

expectationlost · 27-01-2013 07:05PM

i love to see the difference in voting between the politicians and the ordinary citizens

RangeR · 27-01-2013 07:15PM

expectationlost wrote: »

i love to see the difference in voting between the politicians and the ordinary citizens

There was no differentiation. Rank was left at the door. You would be surprised how open the 33 are... In mind and in voice.

expectationlost · 27-01-2013 07:19PM

RangeR wrote: »

There was no differentiation. Rank was left at the door. You would be surprised how open the 33 are... In mind and in voice.

i'd still like to see the difference in the votes, it was very close.

RangeR · 27-01-2013 07:31PM

expectationlost wrote: »

i'd still like to see the difference in the votes, it was very close.

Fair enough. But those stats don't exist. They are secret ballots, to the individual. I don't know how anyone else voted. Having said that, the best I can do is tell you that the 33 and 66 had very similar mindsets on round table talks. To be honest, the process would suffer without the 33 and their knowledge.

It should be noted that, although the public see, on camera, mainly the 33 asking questions, it's not like that when the cameras are off. There are frank, open discussions and the 33 don't rule the round tables.

expectationlost · 27-01-2013 07:35PM

RangeR wrote: »

Fair enough. But those stats don't exist. They are secret ballots, to the individual. I don't know how anyone else voted. Having said that, the best I can do is tell you that the 33 and 66 had very similar mindsets on round table talks.

obviously not if the vote was nearly 50-50

Podgerz · 27-01-2013 07:37PM

While I am very open to the idea of lowering the voting age my big problem would be a person aged 16 would have the ability to change the country (potentially) but at the same time be answerable to their parents and the law regarding drinking, driving and having sex. I would think voting would be of more importance and so should be left at the age it is currently, but I have no major qualms about it otherwise, anything to raise an interest in politics at a younger age is only a good thing i suppose.

This post summed up : Meh; im not too bothered either way :P; But if i was to vote tomorrow, i would lower it

RangeR · 27-01-2013 07:47PM

expectationlost wrote: »

obviously not if the vote was nearly 50-50

True. But you cannot take those results on their own merit. There is an entire narrative that needs to go with it to explain those results. For example, I votedto reduce the age but only under certain conditions. Some of them being

1. Political education needs to be ramped up, all the way to leaving cert.
2. MUST have a trial run with absolute quantitative analyses, probably with reform of the register to show age groupings.

Without these conditions, I do not agree with dropping the age. So, it's not black and white.

Cookie_Monster · 27-01-2013 09:05PM

Podgerz wrote: »

While I am very open to the idea of lowering the voting age my big problem would be a person aged 16 would have the ability to change the country (potentially) but at the same time be answerable to their parents and the law regarding drinking, driving and having sex.

It's an interesting concept to think about, taken to the extreme children could be told by their parents to vote a certain way without issue as they are still under the parents control (legally) vote rigging anyone?

oscarBravo · 27-01-2013 09:25PM

carpejugulum wrote: »

Yes, foreign income tax payers resident and paying for a set number of years (3?) should be able to vote as well.

What's so magical about income tax that it should be the primary qualifier for voting rights? What about all the VAT she paid before she started paying income tax?

Nothing controversial about this. It should be 15.

Why not 12? Or 8?

Blisterman · 27-01-2013 10:27PM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

It's an interesting concept to think about, taken to the extreme children could be told by their parents to vote a certain way without issue as they are still under the parents control (legally) vote rigging anyone?

It would still be a private ballot, so I don't see how this is an issue.

RangeR · 28-01-2013 09:40AM

I was dismayed that one political party published a press release the day before the Convention met. I made my opinion known to Tom during the final private session, voting in the Steering Group.

Sinn Féin, you should be ashamed of yourself. I believe all other parties were on radio silence until after the event. Open to correction on that.

I suggested to Tom that this sort of passive aggressive influence be stopped for future sessions. I don't know how realistic this can be achieved.

Annasopra · 28-01-2013 09:59AM

RangeR wrote: »

I was dismayed that one political party published a press release the day before the Convention met. I made my opinion known to Tom during the final private session, voting in the Steering Group.

Sinn Féin, you should be ashamed of yourself. I believe all other parties were on radio silence until after the event. Open to correction on that.

I suggested to Tom that this sort of passive aggressive influence be stopped for future sessions. I don't know how realistic this can be achieved.

But none of the Sinn Fein reps turned up on the Saturday - did they?

RangeR · 28-01-2013 10:12AM

mango salsa wrote: »

But none of the Sinn Fein reps turned up on the Saturday - did they?

The three primaries [Gerry, Mary and Martin] did not attend. They sent replacements instead.

I've heard no reason for this change.

expectationlost · 29-01-2013 06:27AM

RangeR wrote: »

I was dismayed that one political party published a press release the day before the Convention met. I made my opinion known to Tom during the final private session, voting in the Steering Group.

Sinn Féin, you should be ashamed of yourself. I believe all other parties were on radio silence until after the event. Open to correction on that.

I suggested to Tom that this sort of passive aggressive influence be stopped for future sessions. I don't know how realistic this can be achieved.

? i was about to ask what they party policy from all party's was on this issues, i know labour are very bullish on it, any parties more quiet on it, therefore against it? do you suggest that this might influence sinn fein supporters in the assembly somehow unaware of the party policy.

helpfully they've said what way they voted http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/25519 i'll have to do a list and check how all the other politicians voted, and whoever else said which way they voted.

expectationlost · 29-01-2013 10:04AM

RangeR wrote: »

True. But you cannot take those results on their own merit. There is an entire narrative that needs to go with it to explain those results. For example, I votedto reduce the age but only under certain conditions. Some of them being

1. Political education needs to be ramped up, all the way to leaving cert.
2. MUST have a trial run with absolute quantitative analyses, probably with reform of the register to show age groupings.

Without these conditions, I do not agree with dropping the age. So, it's not black and white.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7I2oV13Uz2I

the social care representative might seem to go off the point a bit as he mentions our history of not looking after children but i think he has point that its naieve to think that everything will go swimmingly with this.

RangeR · 29-01-2013 10:12AM

expectationlost wrote: »

the social care representative might seem to go ff the point a bit as he mentions our history of not looking after children but i think he has point that its naieve to think that everything will go swimmingly with this.

The boy did well. However, the sheer amount of data he spoke about could have been reduced by about 50%, relaxed and STILL got his point across.

I'll be honest, I didn't take in everything he said. However, his points were discussed in round table.

expectationlost · 29-01-2013 10:31AM

the nyci reps , just your average 16 - 17 years olds.... not

so 16 year old can work full time but how many do in ireland looked at the cso.ie can't find that figure.

Sponge Bob · 29-01-2013 10:37AM

Thanks as always for your updates RangeR, I'm sure I speak for many who have read your threads on the Convention in saying.... Well Done!

[Constitutional Convention][2][26 Jan 2013] Reducing the voting age to 17

Comments