YOUTH PERSPECTIVE / Transferring teen clout to the voting booth
Published 4:00 am, Sunday, April 17, 2005
Should youth have the right to vote? That was the question former state Sen. John Vasconcellos, D-Santa Clara, was pondering before he introduced legislation in March 2004 to lower the voting age for state and local elections in California. Originally, his bill would have given 14- and 15-year-olds one-quarter of a vote and 16- and 17-year-olds one-half of a vote. It was later amended to lower the voting age to 16. Vasconcellos abandoned the bill when it was one vote short of passage in the final committee.
Since then, the Berkeley chapter of the National Youth Rights Association (NYRA-Berkeley) has been working hard to find a new sponsor for similar legislation. Teenagers are ready to have a say in policies that directly affect their lives.
Elected officials have an obligation to serve their constituencies. However, youth are currently a voiceless constituency. Limiting the vote to those 18 and older ensures that officials do not have any obligation to serve the country's youth.
It must be recognized that interests of teenagers are distinct from the interests of parents and others who now profess to represent the interests of youth. Voting-age discrimination against youth stems from the myth that youth are not capable of making intelligent and informed decisions. This might be a valid argument if applied to all people, but it isn't. The government does not deprive alcoholics, neurotics and psychotics of the right to vote. And rarely is a mentally ill person denied the right to vote. If these people have the right to vote, why shouldn't youth?
Teens contribute to society, yet their opinions are not represented in politics. According to a 2001 report by Interep Marketing, teenagers pay an estimated $9.7 billion per year in sales taxes, yet they have no representation. This is taxation without representation, an important injustice that our Founding Fathers fought to correct.
Some say youth are turned off by politics. While this may or may not be true, it may stem from the fact that they don't have the right to vote. In 1971, the voting age was lowered to 18 because 18- to 20-year-olds were going to war without the right to vote, which was a double standard. But politicians whom youth can't vote for today can send teens to war tomorrow.
Another double standard exists today: Youth can be tried as adults in courtrooms, but aren't allowed to vote on policies that affect them. If youth are given the same responsibilities as adults, they should be provided with the same rights.
When youth have been given the right to vote, studies have shown that it has increased adult voter turnout as well. In a 1996 program called Kids Voting USA that allowed youth to vote on fake ballots at actual polling stations, 5 percent to 10 percent of those adults surveyed said Kids Voting was a big factor in their decision to vote. The study concluded that 600,000 adults were encouraged to vote because of the program.
In Baltimore, youth were given the right to vote in the local primary in 2003, because they were eligible to vote in the general election. Thirty-six percent of residents over 18 voted, while 35 percent of those 16 and 17 voted, nearly identical turnouts. If youth were given voting rights, they would show up at the polls.
Youth have been denied voting rights for too long. NYRA-Berkeley has been working with the Berkeley City Council to draft a proposal to lower Berkeley's voting age, pending approval from the Berkeley Youth Commission. If passed by the Youth Commission, the item will appear on the May 10 agenda of the Berkeley City Council. As Margaret Mead once said, "Never doubt that a small group of people can change the world -- indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."