Personal tools
 
Views

See Debatepedia's Global Climate Change Debate Series with the UN Foundation's The People Speak. Press release.

Debate:Minimum Voting Age of 16 from 18

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search
[Digg]
[reddit]
[Delicious]
[Facebook]
[Edit]

Should the minimum voting age be reduced to 16, or remain at 18?

This article is based on a Debatabase entry written by Debbie Newman. Because this document can be modified by any registered user of this site, its contents should be cited with care.

Contents

[Edit]

Background and Context of Debate:

At present in the UK for General, local and European elections, as well as referenda, you must be 18 to vote. This topic has been written from a UK perspective, but the arguments can easily be adapted to apply to the situation in other countries too.

[Edit]
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]

Argument #1

[Add New]
[Edit]

Yes

At 16 a person can get married and have children. If we allow them this responsibility, we should also recognise that they are mature enough to vote.

[Add New]
[Edit]

No

  • 16 year-olds are too inexperienced as citizens and individuals to vote. A 16 year old usually lives with his or her parents. They do not have to worry taxes, health care, or even car payments and other household bills. Usually a 16 year old is not aware on the political parties, and politicans. That is how you get a igorant leader into power, is by letting a age of people participate in who you elect to run your country, provice/state, or community. A 16 year old might be only intrested in a new skate park, or community centre in the area that is being built.
  • 16 year-old voters will cause politicians to make populist pitches to get votes. Realizing that 16 year olds are vulnerable to populist pitches, politicians will make petty and fake promises to them, simply because this is what will win votes.
  • 16 year-olds should not be given the right to vote if we don't trust them to responsibly drink. For example you can have sex at 16, but you cannot drink until you are 18. Should we give the vote to people who we do not recognise as mature enough to drink or to see The Blair Witch Project?


[Edit]
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Argument #2

[Add New]
[Edit]

Yes

One of the important original reasons behind democracy was "no taxation without representation". At 16 you can get a job and pay taxes and it is undemocratic that you have no say in who sets those taxes. Areas such as the minimum wage and benefits also affect you directly and you should have a say in these policies.

[Add New]
[Edit]

No

Policies on nursery education affect 4-year-olds, but it does mean that we give them a vote! We must trust mature adults to vote on the behalf of children.

[Edit]
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Argument #3

[Add New]
[Edit]

Yes

In today’s society 16-year-olds are more mature than ever before and there is no significant gap between an 18-year-old and a 16-year-old’s ability to vote; the distinction is arbitrary.

[Add New]
[Edit]

No

That the fact that more young people are smoking, drinking and having sex earlier than before does not mean that they are more mature. 16-year-olds are still children mentally and much development happens in the next two years. If anything, the voting age should be increased to 21 to ensure full maturity.

[Edit]
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Argument #4

[Add New]
[Edit]

Yes

Within limitations, the wider pool of voters we have, the better it is for democracy, as it increases representation.

[Add New]
[Edit]

No

It is sentimental to argue that everyone should have the vote. With this argument, why not 14-year-olds? The fact is that you must have limits and while some 16-year-olds probably are mature enough to vote, the status quo protects against the majority who are not.

[Edit]
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section up]

Argument #5

[Add New]
[Edit]

Yes

Many 18-year-olds do not make informed decisions. In fact many 40-year-olds do not make informed decisions and this does not mean we deny them the vote.

[Add New]
[Edit]

No

Most 16-year-olds would either vote the way their parents voted, or deliberately vote the other way to be rebellious. They would not consider all the issues and make an informed decision.

[Edit]

References:

[Edit]

Motions:

  • This house would reduce the voting age to 16
  • This house would give representation to the young
  • This house believes that if you’re old enough to get married then you’re old enough to vote
[Edit]

In legislation, policy, and the real world:

[Edit]

See also on Debatepedia:

[Edit]

External links and resources:

[Edit]

Books:

.