With Election Day nearing, many seniors of age anticipate their first voting experience more
and more as each day passes. And for those 16- and 17-year-olds that barely don’t make the cut, a
chance to vote for the president is four years away, and many of them wonder why the cutoff age
is what it is. Voting is one of the most powerful rights citizens have, and that’s why there’s an age
restriction. There of course needs to be a cutoff age to ensure voters cast their ballot with thought
and maturity, but contrary to the status quo, 17 or perhaps even 16 might be a more appropriate age
to start instead of 18.

The voting age for all elections should be lowered because it can be done without ruining the
country. By requiring what a 2008 New York Times Op-Ed piece titled “You’re 16, you’re Beautiful
and you’re a Voter” by Anya Kamenetz, a writer for Fast Company magazine, calls an “early voting
permit”, 16 and 17-year-olds would need to be informed voters before showing up at the polls. The
Op-Ed said the permit would require teens to complete a basic civics course, which could help to
enlighten them on such matters as the different candidates’ political standpoints.

Of course this raises the question as to why it is so important for younger teens to have the
ability to vote. After all, we have been managing as a country pretty well without 16 and 17-year-old
voters, no matter how well-informed they might be.

Although lowering the voting age could unleash a stampede of delinquent, immature kids into
booths across the nation, it is unlikely because only those thoroughly invested will take the initiative
to cast their ballot. Voting lines can be tedious, and in order to put up with that, voters must be
patient and determined. As the National Youth Rights Association (NYRA) says on their website,
16-year-olds wouldn’t go through the effort to vote if only to write Mickey Mouse or Brittney
Spears on the ballot. Although there can be a disparity between 16-year-olds and 18-year-olds in
terms of maturity, there are plenty of able-bodied 16- and 17-year-olds who are more mature than
some 21-year-olds.

The aforementioned New York Times Op-Ed piece said, “The more we treat teenagers
as adults, the more they rise to our expectations.” Even if teens are somewhat immature as a
whole (an over-generalization to begin with), over time the younger generation can begin to
be socially responsible upon receiving more civic freedom.

The opinion piece said, “From a developmental and vocational point of view, the late
teens are the right starting point for young people to think seriously about their futures. Government
can help this process by bestowing rights along with responsibilities.” How is each
successive generation supposed to improve without being given new opportunities to show
responsibility and maturity?

Also, it is a tax-payer’s right to be able to vote. It might seem melodramatic to quote
early U.S. colonists chanting, “No taxation without representation,” but 16-year-olds could,
and often do, hold jobs and pay taxes on their income without the ability to vote. In fact, according
to NYRA, 80 percent of high school students work before graduating, and if 16-yearolds
pay taxes to the government, why shouldn’t they be able to vote for government officials?

Who knows how many sophomores and juniors would actually go through the possible
trouble of receiving a so-called “early voting permit,” but our guess is many would. And
who’s to say they shouldn’t have a valid say in our country’s affairs? Besides, in today’s era of
technology and the ability to gratify curiosity within seconds almost anywhere using a Smartphone
(or for many now at New Trier, an iPad), our generation has the potential to be one of
the most well-informed yet.

If well-informed voting is emphasized at a younger age, there’s a higher chance more voters will make good decisions while fulfilling their duty as citizens.