YEAH, BUT I KNOW SOME PRETTY UNINFORMED PEOPLE ON THE LEGAL SIDE OF THE 26TH AMENDMENT

A California State Senator has an interesting idea:

Millions of California's teenagers would become the nation's first to vote under a proposed constitutional amendment introduced Monday by a 71-year-old state senator.

Sen. John Vasconcellos, D-Santa Clara, proposed the idea alongside three other lawmakers, saying the Internet, cellular phones, multichannel television and a diverse society makes today's teens better informed than generations of their predecessors.

Coming on the heels of an expected record low turnout among adults in the March 2 election, Vasconcellos would give 16-year-olds a half vote and 14-year-old a quarter vote in state elections beginning in 2006.

The idea, formally called "Training Wheels for Citizenship," first requires two-thirds approval by the Legislature to appear on this November's ballot.

The California suggestion comes 33 years after the United States lowered its voting age from 21 to 18, and amid a fledgling youth movement in the U.S. and other nations to lower the voting age. Supporters say Israel allows 17-year-olds to vote in local elections, while Austria and Germany allow 16-year-olds to vote in some local elections. A bill in California letting 17-year-olds vote in primary elections when they will be 18 years old for the general election has languished.

I kinda like this in principle. Now I have known a fair share of pre-18 types in my life who I thought were well-informed enough at the time to warrant being part of the electoral process. Also, since the Gropinator is raising student fees by a tune of 15-40% ("fees", a politically useful synonym for "college tax"), this is a policy that has a pretty direct effect on the 16 and 17yearolds of California today, dontcha think? (Depending on current student aid plans, some UC's and others have compensated students with fee increase grants, though who knows what future students will get)

On the other hand, you have to draw the line somewhere. We have a legal system that generally sets concrete limits on whether an alleged criminal is to be tried as an adult or as a minor. (Well, at least in California we have a semblance of that) Voting does require a level of maturity, just as understanding the full consequence of one's actions does. And we're not going to do a person-to-person civics test to screen out ignorant 14-17yearold voters; you might as well bring back poll taxes. So the line should be drawn somewhere.

Also, the "training wheels" program suggested by Vasconcellos seems a bit condescending. Disenfranchising a well-informed 17yearold is one thing, but to give proportional weight to votes based on age does not cast a positive light on the electoral process (and good thing they steered clear of using three-fifths as one of their vote values). One of the causes of voter apathy, voter fatigue, what have you, in America is the perception from individuals that "my vote doesn't count" (or, in Florida, "my vote doesn't count because Jeb is pretending that I'm a convicted felon"). Is saying to teenagers "your vote counts a quarter as much as anybody else's" sending a message that would conteract such views?

Once again, my view is that the best solution is for the line to be drawn somewhere. I say 17, instead of the current 18. Why? Because with the current system, most high school students do not get the opportunity to vote in any major elections until they reach college, because only a small percentage of them turn 18 in time. (I turned 18 in December of my senior year, missing the 1998 midterm elections by six weeks.) Lowering the voting age to 17 for state elections would allow most high school students to take part in at least one state election, and would give high schools a chance to provide meaningful, right-here right-now education on the democratic process, rather than the lackadaisical, "here, do whatever with it" government programs that are present in many public high schools, including my old one.

The final implication is that no matter what new system comes about, if any, lowering the state voting age could complicate the electoral process, because "youth" ballots would have to be well segregated from ballots that include national elections, so as not to mess with the United States Constitution. And if there's anything TFM opposes, it's unnecessarily messing with the Constitution!