Glenn Reynolds: College Students Are Showing We Need to Raise The Voting Age
Our friend Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit has written a new column for USA Today which is well worth reading.
After Yale, Mizzou, raise the voting age — to 25
In 1971, the United States ratified the 26th Amendment, lowering the voting age from 21 to 18. In retrospect, that may have been a mistake.
The idea, in those Vietnam years, was that 18-year-olds, being old enough to be drafted, to marry and to serve on juries, deserved a vote. It seemed plausible at the time, and I myself have argued in the past that we should set the drinking age at 18 for the same reasons.
But now I’m starting to reconsider. To be a voter, one must be able to participate in adult political discussions. It’s necessary to be able to listen to opposing arguments and even — as I’m doing right here in this column — to change your mind in response to new evidence.
But now the evidence suggests that, whatever one might say about the 18-year-olds of 1971, the 18-year-olds of today aren’t up to that task. And even the 21-year-olds aren’t looking so good.
Consider Yale University, where a disagreement over what to do about — theoretically — offensive Halloween costumes devolved into a screaming fit by a Yale senior (old enough to vote, thanks to the 26th Amendment), who assaulted a professor with a profane tirade because the professor’s failure to agree with her made her feel . . . unsafe.
Comments
I have to agree with this.
I think it depends on whether you are functioning as an adult or not.
If you are still on your parents’ health insurance… you’re a child, and should not be allowed to vote.
If you’re providing your own health insurance, then you should.
After all, wasn’t “they’re children” the reasoning for letting people up to age 25 to stay on their parents insurance?
Clearly, someone who is demanding that others pay for her life choices it not mature enough to vote. She needs to be re-parented.
Washington DC wants to LOWER the voting age to 16.
Yes, 18 year olds are old enough to serve in the military and possibly be killed, and are still required to register with Selective Service. But let’s not forget that that those young people that do serve are well trained, highly supervised and required to follow orders. They’re generally not permitted to make demands on or force their will upon their leaders. We don’t trust privates to develop strategy. We don’t allow privates to give orders to Battalion Commanders or ships’ Captains. Why, as a society, are we allowing children to have such a great influence on public policy?