Not sure if this is a proper way to say this or a proper place to put this, but here goes... To all Americans on EC... I just wanted to say good luck on your elections tomorrow, as we all know just how much hangs in the balance this time around. I'm not at all religious, but nevertheless you have my prayers. See you on the other side.
Gah, I wish I could vote for this reason. Good luck ADULT Americans! haha. ... Lucky Canadians and their understanding..
I don't really think there is anything unjust about children not being able to vote. It stinks, but there needs to be some sort of cut-off age and adulthood is a pretty good one. I heard a story today about a grad student whose parents offered to let her stay with them only if she signed a pledge saying she'd vote for Romney...and that'd happen more if minors were voting! Regardless, this election effects the youth too, so you are right about the whole good luck to them thing !
Missed it by that much, why couldn't you have me a year earlier mom???!!! Jk and good luck all you voters out there
I disagree, because I think that age does not determine competence. It is not fair that I get to vote, but there exist 16-year-old kids who can recite more from the Constitution than I can and who can cite more case law, while there are people my age who can't even tell you what the five rights outlined in the First Amendment are, and who can't cite any case law whatsoever. Every time I vote, I am literally thinking of the children, and not in a sappy way. I'm thinking as an advocate for youth, and I believe it's my singular duty to vote with their interests in mind. In the past eight years, a sizeable minority of adults have shown themselves to be grossly incompetent on political issues, and that brings their stewardship into question.
So should we let 5 years olds vote if they can do all those things you described? Or we could impose tests to keep stupid, uninformed people from voting, would that be fair?
Yes, I do believe that competency tests would be a good idea. I think it's unlikely that a five year old could pass that test, but if one could, fine. But I'm more interested in the fact that eliminating the voting age and replacing it with a competency test would have the desirable effects of allowing studious young people to vote while at the same time eliminating that right for people who don't know how the government works and who are in any case unfit to impose suffering on everyone else. And while I'm aware that tests for voting in the past have been problematic, that was because the tests were specifically designed to to exploit structural inequalities in the school system to disenfranchise the poor and racial minorities. There are also concerns about objectiveness and how to make a test non-partisan. Those concerns are valid, but they can be thoughtfully addressed. But whatever we do, we really should keep people from voting who don't know what the separation of powers is, and who think the three branches of government are "local, state, federal."
Give it orally. Actually, people with disabilities were among the first I considered when thinking about this position. A lot of stuff has to be fixed before an idea like this could be viable, but I don't think it's impossible. Regardless of what one thinks about competency tests, I think we should give due consideration to lowering the voting age, by whatever mechanism, to 16.
My grandpa voted ages ago. Most likely for Romney tho he won't say it. My grandma was filling hers in today while at the ocmputer. When I asked what she was doing she showed me that she jsut voting for whoever had the best civil/equal rights records. lol
Thanks, lazyboy! The elections turned out really great for us, imo. Three more states have marriage equality, MN refused to put discrimination in our constitution, President Obama won, and lots of other great victories. The pro-discrimination side is becoming less and less mainstream and acceptable. Soon they'll be regarded like the KKK. That day can't come soon enough.
i still don't like it. Selective disenfranchisement is too much of a slippery slope and too inherently corruptible. Keeping it universal at least precludes the selectivity being misused or misapplied.
I've been watching closely. I agree, the nay-sayers will eventually dwindle away, but man... I was sincerely surprised that Romney got so close to winning at all. There's a long way to go for you guys yet I think.