California Lawmakers Want Voting Age Lowered to 14

Mitth`raw`nuruodo · Post by **Mitth`raw`nuruodo** » 2004-03-09 11:13pm

California Lawmakers Want Voting Age Lowered to 14
Mon Mar 8, 2004 09:58 PM ET

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Four Democratic California lawmakers on Monday proposed giving teenagers as young as 14 the right to vote in a move that would make the often trailblazing state the first in the nation to do so.
Under the proposal, youths under the current legal voting age of 18 would be able to cast ballots in state and local elections only, although their vote would not have full weight that an adult vote would.

For example, a vote cast by a 14 or 15-year-old would be counted as a quarter of a vote, and a vote by a 16 or 17-year-old would be counted as half a vote.

Lawmakers say giving teenagers partial votes would get them interested in the election process and would not violate the U.S. Constitution as long as it only applied to state ballots.

"We believe it's time to open up the franchise to young Californians at the age of 14, let them register and vote and be seriously included in the process," said Democratic State Senator John Vasconcellos.

Sue North, chief of staff for Vasconcellos, said that if the proposal passes, it would be the first time any state would have amended its constitution to allow high school students to vote.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-03-09 11:16pm

Nitpick: High school students can already vote, assuming they're seniors. But other than that, I think this rocks.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-03-09 11:16pm

I'd point out that the next stage after this involves four dudes riding horses in the sky as it turns to fire and the world starts ending.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-09 11:17pm

Wow. Talk about a desperate attempt by liberal lawmakers to continue their supremacy in the state. I never thought they could be this open about their attempt to form an unbreakable legacy.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2004-03-09 11:19pm

Master of Ossus wrote:Wow. Talk about a desperate attempt by liberal lawmakers to continue their supremacy in the state. I never thought they could be this open about their attempt to form an unbreakable legacy.

Yes, because as we all know that unlike senior citizens, teens vote in droves.

Rakuseki · Post by **Rakuseki** » 2004-03-09 11:22pm

I think this is kind of retarded myself. Quarter and half votes? If you're going to give someone the vote, give them a full vote or nothing at all.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-03-09 11:22pm

I like this idea; it has the potential to get people hooked on the idea of voting at a younger age. In my book, anything that gets more voters into the booths is a good thing.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-09 11:22pm

Wicked Pilot wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:Wow. Talk about a desperate attempt by liberal lawmakers to continue their supremacy in the state. I never thought they could be this open about their attempt to form an unbreakable legacy.
Yes, because as we all know that unlike senior citizens, teens vote in droves.

I'm aware that the teenage voting patterns are extremely poor, but adding hundreds of thousands of additional voters who are so heavily liberal is a transparent effort to continue democratic hegemony in California. This really is nothing but a pathetic ploy to even further increase the democratic hold on CA, akin in all respects to gerrymandering but perhaps even more under-handed.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2004-03-09 11:24pm

14 year olds are quarter votes? 16 year olds are half votes?

So blacks are still worth 3/5 votes?

I think an opinion is still an opinion, no matter what age it's from. Possibly uninformed yes, but it's still an opinion from a person.

That said, I don't see how bringing possibly uninformed teens into the voting process will help with anything.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2004-03-09 11:24pm

Shinova wrote:14 year olds are quarter votes? 16 year olds are half votes?

So blacks are still worth 3/5 votes?

I think an opinion is still an opinion, no matter what age it's from. Possibly uninformed yes, but it's still an opinion from a person.

That said, I don't see how bringing possibly uninformed teens into the voting process will help with anything.

Whoops, wrong analogy. About the blacks.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-03-09 11:26pm

Shinova: I agree. Gods know we have alot of ignorant voters AS IT IS.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2004-03-09 11:30pm

Master of Ossus wrote:I'm aware that the teenage voting patterns are extremely poor, but adding hundreds of thousands of additional voters who are so heavily liberal is a transparent effort to continue democratic hegemony in California. This really is nothing but a pathetic ploy to even further increase the democratic hold on CA, akin in all respects to gerrymandering but perhaps even more under-handed.

Are you saying they are mostly liberal because that has been your personal experience, or do you have some kind of study showing that to be the case? Most people I knew in high school were conservative, but then again I'm from Louisiana.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-03-09 11:30pm

Huh. Good luck on that, California. It will never happen, of course.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2004-03-09 11:31pm

kojikun wrote:Nitpick: High school students can already vote, assuming they're seniors. But other than that, I think this rocks.

In California you can't vote until you are 18, no matter your academic status. You might be thinking of giving blood

I think this is a bad idea and a desperate ploy by a party to get every advantage it can against the opposition.

Besides, kids don't know what it takes to run a state.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-09 11:46pm

Wicked Pilot wrote: Are you saying they are mostly liberal because that has been your personal experience, or do you have some kind of study showing that to be the case? Most people I knew in high school were conservative, but then again I'm from Louisiana.

Statistics have consistently shown that the youngest voters are also the most liberal ones. That's part of why Dean so aggressively courted the youth movement--their liberal tendencies meshed more closely with his than any other group, since he was probably the most liberal of the mainstream candidates.

In 1996, voters between the ages of 18 and 29 supported Democrat Bill Clinton over GOP challenger Bob Dole by almost 20% (53 percent to 34 percent, IIRC). Youths were Clinton's strongest age group.

In November, a Gallup poll found that younger voters identify themselves as more "liberal" on social and economic issues than over-30 voters. They were also significantly more likely than older voters to support the democrats on issues like gay marriage, tax issues, and (strangely enough) Social Security.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-03-09 11:47pm

Apparently California lawmakers have never met any 14-year olds.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-03-10 12:20am

The Kernel wrote:I like this idea; it has the potential to get people hooked on the idea of voting at a younger age. In my book, anything that gets more voters into the booths is a good thing.

I'd prefer to keep the uninformed miscreants' voting rights restricted to TRL.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-10 12:22am

kojikun wrote:Nitpick: High school students can already vote, assuming they're seniors.

I have a number of problems with what I understand of this bill, though I confess I have not been able to find the text of it.

1. If you're not old enough to be tried as an adult for felonies you allegedly commit, I don't think you're old enough to vote, yet.
2. Giving the vote to MIDDLE SCHOOL kids is HIGHLY suspect. There are lots of uninformed voters in the adult world, but realistically the average eighth grader is not, IMO, CAPABLE of understanding the significance of various issues that may be placed on the ballot.
3. Giving the youth movement the ability to vote creates the potential for problems involving parents' rights. There is, IMO, a high probability that children and their parents disagree substantially over certain parenting issues, and that children are by and large either incapable of understanding the long-term benefits of their parents' views, or that they are willing to willfully ignore these benefits in favor of short-term gain. While it's possible that certain parents are ignorant as to their childrens' points of view, every adult was once a child and had to go through reasonable facsimiles of what their children experience. By contrast, only the least responsible 15 year olds have had to raise a child, and even then their experience is almost certainly limited to a few early years of development that are far removed from later and significantly different stages of parenthood.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-03-10 12:24am

Joe wrote:Apparently California lawmakers have never met any 14-year olds.

I agree. This is moronic.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-10 12:26am

I am of the opinion that the vote and other citizen's privledges should be proportional to their responsibility to the State; and since me and every other American male (and it should include females too) who turns 18 most register for the draft...

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-10 12:26am

Joe wrote:Apparently California lawmakers have never met any 14-year olds.

Either that, or their knowledge of the demographic is limited entirely to the fact that a 14 year old is more likely to vote for a democratic candidate than his 30 year old older brother.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-03-10 12:27am

A better idea might be to make voting mandatory, with violators punished with a moderate fine.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-10 12:34am

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:A better idea might be to make voting mandatory, with violators punished with a moderate fine.

I disagree with that, too. Voting is a right, but it's not a responsibility. Also, there are already significant problems getting things like absentee ballots out in time, and these processing problems should not mandate fines. If you required everyone to REGISTER on their 18th birthday or within a few months of taking up residency, that would be one thing, but to fine people who can't make it to the polls, even if they're out of state/county at the time, does not strike me as being a reasonable solution to the problem of low voter turnout.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-03-10 02:46am

So, theoritically speaking, how would the passage of this affect the age of consensual sex in California? (Not that the 11 year old "mothers" there are paying it any heed anyway).

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-03-10 04:56am

I don't think 14 year olds no shit about anything to be allowed to vote. Granted, I'm sure there are some 14 year olds more intelligent than some moron who's out there who doesn't know how the fuck to punch a chad, but really, it just strikes me as irresponsible. What 14 year old even thinks about issues at all?