What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Lowering the Federal Voting Age to 16 (1 Viewer)

Apropos of nothing, since I wanted to gush, my 18 year old son, who I’ve referenced in the past as adopted from Colombia, just was able to identify/label and explain every amendment to the constitution. I was kind of amazed.

im ashamed to say I only knew the big ones.

We were playing Alexa Jeopardy and one question precipated this exercise.

 
My dad isn’t eligible for the draft, should he lose the right to vote? Women never were eligiible for the draft, do they not deserve the right to vote? 
I'm sure your dad had some specific reason for that.  I'm talking in general.

As far as women in the draft that's coming soon.  The courts have found (finally, it's been obvious since women were allowed into combat roles) that, on 14th amendment grounds, women need to be treated equal to men and become eligible for the draft. Small article.

 
I'm sure your dad had some specific reason for that.  I'm talking in general.

As far as women in the draft that's coming soon.  The courts have found (finally, it's been obvious since women were allowed into combat roles) that, on 14th amendment grounds, women need to be treated equal to men and become eligible for the draft. Small article.
My dad is 70 years old. I haven’t even been eligible for 10 years myself. 

 
I'm on board ONLY if we add yearly civics and current events classes back into middle and high schools so these kids actually know how tf our government works. The small bit they learn in "social studies" today isn't cutting it.
They never went away. 

 
There’s 16year olds that do calculus and balance work with varsity sports and student government and part time jobs, etc. They are plenty of teens mature enough to vote if they want. Maturity, responsibility and competence are ot a requirements to vote in this county anyway. That is irrelevant. 
but can't change the tire on a car, balance a check book, decline texting and driving .......... or handle a shotgun

the bolded is true however, age limits are set on things as a guideline to maturity .... think marriage license, voting, etc. Me? I think drivers licenses should change to 18 too, voting to 21 ........ if these people can't handle other things with maturity, responsibility etc?  anyway, my opinion ....... 

 
but can't change the tire on a car, balance a check book, decline texting and driving .......... or handle a shotgun

the bolded is true however, age limits are set on things as a guideline to maturity .... think marriage license, voting, etc. Me? I think drivers licenses should change to 18 too, voting to 21 ........ if these people can't handle other things with maturity, responsibility etc?  anyway, my opinion ....... 
I get and it most of world agrees with you. I know I’m arguing the minority opinion here but it’s somethibh I’ve thought a lot abound being a high school teacher. Based on my experiences with adults and teens, I really don’t see that big of a difference in the skills required to be a voter. It’s a difference of opinion, that’s all. 

 
Since when was the draft back in place? We have a military draft again? News to me. 
I assume he means registering for selective service. I honestly don’t think there is a logical argument against 16 and 17 year olds being allowed to vote. The crowd against is against based on their gut feel. That’s fine and that’s how the majority feel, but the age of 18 is arbitrary.

 
I assume he means registering for selective service. I honestly don’t think there is a logical argument against 16 and 17 year olds being allowed to vote. The crowd against is against based on their gut feel. That’s fine and that’s how the majority feel, but the age of 18 is arbitrary.
The crowd against it feels that since 16 yr olds have been fed and clothed their whole life they will end up on welfare if they vote, but two years later they are all obviously self sufficient by then so it’s fine. 

If they are old enough to work and pay taxes one could argue they are being taxed without representation, which is unconstitutional. 

 
Many laws and commerce practices are not supportive in viewing minors capable of making responsible judgments and actions without parental consent or guidance.

Most states require a person to be 18 to drink. I think federal law requires a person to be 18 to smoke tobacco. About half the states require some form of parental notification/involvement in an abortion decision. A minor joining the military needs parental consent.

In business hotels will not rent rooms to minors without parents booking/paying for the room. Rental car companies will not rent cars to minors without parental consent.

The trend for many states has been to raise the school dropout age to 17 or 18 to keep minors in school. Over half the states now require that the minor stay in school till then.

 
Apropos of nothing, since I wanted to gush, my 18 year old son, who I’ve referenced in the past as adopted from Colombia, just was able to identify/label and explain every amendment to the constitution. I was kind of amazed.

im ashamed to say I only knew the big ones.

We were playing Alexa Jeopardy and one question precipated this exercise.
My 14 year old 8th grade daughter just finished learning about all the amendments. She has a very robust social studies class and at this rate would be a very educated and we'll informed voter at 16.

I still say leave it at 18 though.

 
The crowd against it feels that since 16 yr olds have been fed and clothed their whole life they will end up on welfare if they vote, but two years later they are all obviously self sufficient by then so it’s fine. 

If they are old enough to work and pay taxes one could argue they are being taxed without representation, which is unconstitutional. 
Hmm. That last part is a good point.

 
actually I think it needs raised to 21 years old ..... these kids are not grown up enough to handle a lot of things, voting is a responsibility and I don't think today's 16-21 years old can handle it to be honest
meh....there's a lot of grown adults that clearly aren't responsible enough to handle it to.  21 is a purely arbitrary line you've chosen to draw using that standard.

 
I assume he means registering for selective service. I honestly don’t think there is a logical argument against 16 and 17 year olds being allowed to vote. The crowd against is against based on their gut feel. That’s fine and that’s how the majority feel, but the age of 18 is arbitrary.
Any age is going to arbitrary, and we'll always be able to identify people on the younger side of the cut-off who are sharper than most and people on the older side of the cut-off who are duller than most.  You're going to have to live with a little messiness no matter where we decide to draw this line as a society.  Our job is to come up with an arbitrary line that generates the "right" balance of Type I and Type II errors, and different people of reason and good will can easily disagree on where that line ought to be drawn.  

If you don't think there is a logical argument against moving the line to 16, ask yourself whether there is a logical argument against moving the cut-off to 14.  Or 21.  If you see the logic against either of those moves, then you should have no problem seeing the argument against moving it to 16.  All you're doing is applying the exact same arguments to a slightly different population.

 
If they are old enough to work and pay taxes one could argue they are being taxed without representation, which is unconstitutional. 
There's nothing unconstitutional about taxation without representation.  When I was 12, my detasseling earnings were taxed despite not being able to vote.  Non-naturalized immigrants pay taxes and can't vote.  Ex-felons pay taxes but can't vote in many states (this last one is controversial as a matter of policy and fairness, but it's explicitly allowed by the 13th amendment).  

Edit: And that's just income taxes.  Foreign tourists pay sales taxes, for example, and they have no voice in our government.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Any age is going to arbitrary, and we'll always be able to identify people on the younger side of the cut-off who are sharper than most and people on the older side of the cut-off who are duller than most.  You're going to have to live with a little messiness no matter where we decide to draw this line as a society.  Our job is to come up with an arbitrary line that generates the "right" balance of Type I and Type II errors, and different people of reason and good will can easily disagree on where that line ought to be drawn.  

If you don't think there is a logical argument against moving the line to 16, ask yourself whether there is a logical argument against moving the cut-off to 14.  Or 21.  If you see the logic against either of those moves, then you should have no problem seeing the argument against moving it to 16.  All you're doing is applying the exact same arguments to a slightly different population.
I agree any age is arbitrary. My question is can we find an arbitrary age that is more inclusive of our citizens. I think we can.

 
meh....there's a lot of grown adults that clearly aren't responsible enough to handle it to.  21 is a purely arbitrary line you've chosen to draw using that standard.
isn't that true with every age limit ?

people 25 aren't capable of having a marriage license or driving a car and we allow them ........... some people at 15 can do both and we don't

 
meh....there's a lot of grown adults that clearly aren't responsible enough to handle it to.  21 is a purely arbitrary line you've chosen to draw using that standard.
isn't that true with every age limit ?

people 25 aren't capable of having a marriage license or driving a car and we allow them ........... some people at 15 can do both and we don't
That's my point.  I'm not making a responsibility argument based on an age.  You are.  :shrug:  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hell no. When you have not been in the workforce and people are shoving socialism down your throat, you are too naïve to understand the disaster that comes with it. You think, hey I get free stuff. 

 
Hell no. When you have not been in the workforce and people are shoving socialism down your throat, you are too naïve to understand the disaster that comes with it. You think, hey I get free stuff. 
16 and 17 are of age to work so that hurts your argument. We don't require adults to have a job to vote. 

 
Hell no. When you have not been in the workforce and people are shoving socialism down your throat, you are too naïve to understand the disaster that comes with it. You think, hey I get free stuff. 
I noticed that the ones who oppose voting at 16 are 90% Republican. I'm trying to figure out why that is.

 
Ex-felons pay taxes but can't vote in many states (this last one is controversial as a matter of policy and fairness, but it's explicitly allowed by the 13th amendment).  
The 13th Amendment allows involuntary servitude for felons, but doesn't say anything about voting. (The 15th Amendment says stuff about voting, but not about being a felon.)

 
There’s 16year olds that do calculus and balance work with varsity sports and student government and part time jobs, etc.
I was pretty good at calculus and sports when I was 16, but I would have been a terrible voter. I pretty much just copied and repeated whatever my parents believed. I suspect that's the case with most 16-year-olds.

I think 18 is about the right year to allow voting.

I do think felons should be able to vote. I also think Washing D.C. should have two Senators and a House Representative. I think Puerto Rico should also have two Senators and however many Representatives and Electoral College votes its population warrants.

But 16-year-olds, in my subjective judgment, have less life experience than voters should have. I'm not locked into that position, but that's my initial instinct.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was pretty good at calculus and sports when I was 16, but I would have been a terrible voter. I pretty much just copied and repeated whatever my parents believed. I suspect that's the case with most 16-year-olds.

I think 18 is about the right year to allow voting.

I do think felons should be able to vote. I also think Washing D.C. should have two Senators and a House Representative. I think Puerto Rico should also have two Senators and however many Representatives and Electoral College votes its population warrants.

But 16-year-olds, in my subjective judgment, have less life experience than voters should have. I'm not locked into that position, but that's my initial instinct.
Why do you think it’s so terrible for a 16 year old voter to just copy his parents?

 
I was pretty good at calculus and sports when I was 16, but I would have been a terrible voter. I pretty much just copied and repeated whatever my parents believed. I suspect that's the case with most 16-year-olds.

I think 18 is about the right year to allow voting.

I do think felons should be able to vote. I also think Washing D.C. should have two Senators and a House Representative. I think Puerto Rico should also have two Senators and however many Representatives and Electoral College votes its population warrants.

But 16-year-olds, in my subjective judgment, have less life experience than voters should have. I'm not locked into that position, but that's my initial instinct.




 
I 100% agree with bolded. 

As for 16 year old voters parroting their parents. I am sure many would. Many 18-year-olds parrot their parents as well. Many voters of other ages parrot what MSNBC or FOX or Breitbart or some Twitter group says. I don't think parroting or concern for a lack of unique thought is any kind of rule out. A seventeen year old who can understand physics or perform calc problems has the skills to be a good voter. They may not exercise those skills but they have them. 

 
This exchange got me thinking. What is the correlation of political views between parents to 16-year-olds today and how do we think that's trended over the decades? We all have anecdotes but I wonder what really happens.
It is interesting. Many young people do parrot their parents but I also think a lot of young people try very hard to not be like their parents. 

 
Hell no. When you have not been in the workforce and people are shoving socialism down your throat, you are too naïve to understand the disaster that comes with it. You think, hey I get free stuff. 
:lol:   This isn't unique to a particular age.

 
Why do you think it’s so terrible for a 16 year old voter to just copy his parents?
I don't think I want to effectively give people more votes just because they're parents. An argument could be made that a family of five (with three children) should get five times as many votes as a single adult, but I don't think I'm on board with that argument. I haven't given it a ton of thought...

 
I don't think I want to effectively give people more votes just because they're parents. An argument could be made that a family of five (with three children) should get five times as many votes as a single adult, but I don't think I'm on board with that argument. I haven't given it a ton of thought...
That’s exactly the argument I was going to make.

 
The crowd against it feels that since 16 yr olds have been fed and clothed their whole life they will end up on welfare if they vote, but two years later they are all obviously self sufficient by then so it’s fine. 

If they are old enough to work and pay taxes one could argue they are being taxed without representation, which is unconstitutional. 
I don't believe that very many 16 year olds are "tax payers".  I am pretty sure that they are "tax deductions"

Every 16 year old that I know has mom or dad  fill out their W-4 and just about all of them list "Tax Exempt" or "Student"as their withholding.

If it's not done on their W-4, the parents sure take care of it on any tax return that they may fill out prior to April 15th.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm still kinda waiting for a reason tied to age. Everything so far can be applied to most age groups. Which i find kind of comical.  

 
What's the reason tied to being 10?
What's the reason for being tied to 16 as the age at which people can drive?  What's the reason for being tied to 16 (or 17 or 18 or whatever depending on the state) as the age of consent?  What's the reason for being tied 21 as the age where drinking is okay?  What's the reason for being tied to 18 as the age at which you can enter into binding contracts?

 
What's the reason for being tied to 16 as the age at which people can drive?  What's the reason for being tied to 16 (or 17 or 18 or whatever depending on the state) as the age of consent?  What's the reason for being tied 21 as the age where drinking is okay?  What's the reason for being tied to 18 as the age at which you can enter into binding contracts?
I suspect for driving it's a factor of physical ability.  They need to be tall enough to see over the steering wheel, reach the pedals, have the motor skills necessary etc.  Age of consent seems to have always been based on biological/physiological/psychological reasons based in science.  Oddly enough the two examples closest to voting are the last two and all I can offer is a big :shrug:  on those.  They seem just as arbitrary.

 
I suspect for driving it's a factor of physical ability.  They need to be tall enough to see over the steering wheel, reach the pedals, have the motor skills necessary etc.  Age of consent seems to have always been based on biological/physiological/psychological reasons based in science.  Oddly enough the two examples closest to voting are the last two and all I can offer is a big :shrug:  on those.  They seem just as arbitrary.
They're definitely arbitrary, and there's nothing wrong with that.

 
They're definitely arbitrary, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Sorry, I guess I don't understand the your point as it pertains to my question above.  The arguments thus far in this thread for not lowering the voting age are arguments that can easily be made for other ages.  So I was asking why age was used if that's true.  And then I come to this.  I have no idea what point it is you guys are trying to make.  There may even be different points.  I'm not sure.

 
Maybe you could start by explaining why this part matters.
I don't know that it does.  I'm trying to understand them myself.  To me, it doesn't matter if you're an immature 16 year old or an immature 30 year old, or a 25 year old living at home echoing mom and dad's talking points or a 10 year old doing the same.

 
I don't know that it does.  I'm trying to understand them myself.  To me, it doesn't matter if you're an immature 16 year old or an immature 30 year old, or a 25 year old living at home echoing mom and dad's talking points or a 10 year old doing the same.
Do you think that the population of 10 year-olds is meaningfully different from the population of 30 year-olds when it comes to maturity?

 
Hell, most teenagers and young adults are brain damaged until they're at least 21, and for some older, so no, I don't think 16 year old's should vote.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top