The Economist Of Lowering The Voting Age

Have you ever wondered if the voting age could be lowered? Well there is a huge Controversy on it. Why? Because many young adults, or teenagers, live and have the same responsibility as an adult would .In many peoples opinion, it should be lowered .Many people think the same way, young voices matter.

Imagine a time where teenagers are allowed to vote on important positions or issues that could possibly define our nation’s future. The average teenager may seem responsible, but would they be able to handle the responsibility of deciding our nation’s fate in the world as well as their own. In the article, “ Takoma Park 16-year-old savors his history making moment at the polls,” Annys Shin, who writes in depth about the historical event as well as shares valued opinions of those who participated in the making of this event, exclaims that the, “ Montgomery County community [was] the nation’s first to lower the voting age from 18 to 16.” This seems to be a test to determine if the nation should lower the voting age completely. However, this test shows varying results, but majority seem to shed some light on the fact that teenagers simply should not take part in voting. The average teenagers seem too young to be mature about issues, are uninterested in what major decisions are made by the government, and are simply being used by their parentals for an extra person support their own beliefs.

Did you know over 54% of Americans voted yes to voting ages being changed down to 13? Would you be able to fathom walking into your local voting station, and seeing a mother signing her son into the polls for him to be able to vote. What would you think? I know what I would think, why is this borderline premature child voting? who let this child vote? Like come on this kid doesn’t even know who the candidates are? Do you think the voting age should be lowered? In this argumentative paper I will give you facts from both the opposition and my side of things, and YOU the reader, can make your decision at the end of this essay.

The 26th amendment was also important because it lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 years of age. There was a long debate going on about the age during World War II when Franklin D. Roosevelt was president and during the Vietnam War. The debate was over having men being drafted at a young age and not being able to vote. In 1943, Georgia was the first to lower voting age to 18. Dwight D. Eisenhower publicly voted for this law in 1945. Match 10, 1971, the U.S. senate voted unanimously in favor and by March 23 the states the states ratified it and President Richard M. Nixon signed it into law in July of that

Several previous polls have proven that younger voters tend to vote dramatically less than older voters. The article also sudgests we allow 16 year old voters to take voting impact away from that of much older voters. When in reality the older voters have much more life experience and could make a better, more well founded decision than that of a 16 year

In the article “Takoma Park 16-year-old Savors his History-Making Moment at the Polls,” written by Annys Shin, the author focuses on whether or not lowering the voting age from 18 is a good idea towards politics, by looking at the benefits and the disadvantages of both sides. In 2013, the city of Takoma Park was the first to lower the voting age to 16 and change the 26th Amendment in their municipal. Ben Miller and other 16- and 17-year-olds were capable of stepping into a booth and casting their vote at the Takoma Park Community Center. Allowing this age group to cast a vote will lead more teenagers to vote than their older peers, it will get them into the habit of voting for the rest of their lives, and it will also increase their personal

In the last federal election only 43 per cent of people under age 34 cast ballots, compared to 65 per cent of older voters. If social media isn’t getting young voters than the question continues of what will. Many do believe it is the schools system that didn’t encourage political movement throughout early childhood. In addition it has been proven that if something is not nurtured at a young age, the chances of it ever being put into action is doubted. Many of the families whose parents voted, the children followed and their children. Therefore, creating a clear pattern if young people didn’t start early the likely hood of them ever starting depends on their demand for change. “It used to be that researchers expected that, as young people got older, they would show up in higher numbers at the ballot box — but the ‘Life Cycle Effect’, as it’s been called, looks like it’s starting to fade. The voters that are not showing up now are not likely to show up later, either. That has dire implications for our

The opponents of this campaign argue that these teenagers are not old enough to vote and they will not make informed decisions. Counter augments follow that lowering

An article written by a man named Daniel M. Shea brought up points regarding why there is lower turnout among young voters than those of older age groups. The author of the article is the director the Goldfarb Center of Public Affairs and Civic Engagement and a professor of government at Colby College. The main theme of the article is that there are a lot of reasons why young adults are politically apathetic and the author’s bias is that voter apathy is something that should be thought of as a concerning thing to citizens of the U.S.

America’s voting age requirement is 18. As a result, teenagers often feel disenfranchised by the political system, turning away from political involvement and civic engagement. Unable to participate in the political system, shut out from the democratic process, teenagers today are just opting out, neglecting current events until they’re older and can “actually make a difference,”

A proposal has been presented to increase voter turnout by lowering the minimum voting age from eighteen to seventeen years old. The younger voters will be able to vote on local offices but not national level offices. Allowing seventeen year olds to vote would not be fair because they would only be able to vote for local offices not the national offices. If the voting age is going to be reduced to seventeen why not allow them to vote for the national level issues such as president. This change in the minimum voting age would not be effective because the voters would rather vote for national issues as opposed to local candidates which they are not able to do. The change in voting age is very unnecessary because there are not many eighteen year

Lowering the voting age by two years could have positive results . Many countries have already done so, and America should follow.

For example, Ben Miller, 16 year old Takoma Park City resident, believes that this opportunity to vote is in fact a “valuable privilege” bust as well admitted that “he has no burning issue motivating him”. If Miller, were to vote at an appropriate age, he would be able to experience the real world and view the outside issues that occur. Takoma Park officials had as well been dealing with low voter turnout, which eventually led to council member Tim Male questioning “How to get more voter turnout?”, which led to lowering the voting age. What official failed to notice, is that as long as there is no virtual punishment for not casting a vote, citizens will continue to neglect

¨by the time you are 16 you can drive pay taxes and in some states be held responsible for adult crimes, so shouldn't you be allowed to vote? (smith,6)¨. the first reason this is good is because it would increase the amount of voters. this is true because the article says ¨ 16 and 17 year olds are at a prime age to vote because they are still at school in their homes and have roots in their communities but when they turn 18 and go off to college they are more focused on school and not voting and politics. the second reason this is good is because it is giving to presidents a better chance of winning. today's youth live under the laws they pay taxes and they can be charged for adult crimes, so they should also have the right to vote.

Just like most ideas, there are reasonable doubts along with valid points. In this case, one article is pushing towards keeping the voting age at 18, while the other is focused on lowering the voting age. It looks to me that the over-all objective is to increase voter participation. Which makes sense on both sides, the more people who vote, the greater the chance of chosing the right potential canidate. But, everything must have some sort of structure and rules. Therefore there is reason and importance to the specific rule that states you must be 18 or older to vote.