What happens when Democrats lose an election they’ve been sure they’ve been going to win? Time to rearrange the entirety of the American electoral system! Democrats are seeking to broaden voting rights too, correctly, just about everyone — until they get their desired final result.
The new hotness is lowering the voting age to 16 years earlier — as proposed in the House bill HR 1, the For the People Act of 2019.
I’ve written in these pages about the arbitrary components of maturity in America: 18 to be a part of the military, 21 to drink, nevertheless for many who get accused of in opposition to the regulation, you could be tried as a grownup at 13. We shouldn’t add another layer of arbitrariness by giving 16-year-olds the correct to vote.
Asked about the proposal in March, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said it’s “important to capture people when they’re in high school.” Telling language. But extreme schoolers don’t tend to be the most civic-minded people. Nor do they want to be “captured.”
The Grabien info website online compiled tweets from people responding to Pelosi’s assertion by recounting the insane points they did after they’ve been 16. One occasion: “When I was 16, I sucked a drinking glass to my face for 10 minutes and gave my lower face a giant hickey that took 3 weeks to heal.”
“Voting is a responsibility,” we inform our kids. Gather knowledge, make the biggest willpower. “Cool,” the American teen replies, “right after I inhale this Tide Pod.”
Eighteen is the correct line of demarcation for maturity. It’s the age most people finish high school and start planning to keep on their very personal. It’s the time we’re in a position to start trusting most youngsters to lay off the Tide (that’s a tragic commentary on American modernity, nevertheless, we’re the place).
In March, Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) argued for the change, saying: “Those who have a stake in our democracy will also have a say in our democracy.”
But that’s just about everybody, in every single place. And that’s why the argument isn’t stopping with just 16-year-olds.
Letting inmates vote whereas nonetheless in jail is another Democratic brainstorm. I agree that ex-prisoners, who’ve served their time, ought to have their rights restored. But these which were distant from society and stripped of their simplest citizenship rights? No, they shouldn’t nonetheless have the talent to choose the nation’s leaders.
“But why stop at citizens anyway?” asks the Left. A 2018 opinion piece by Gustavo Arellano in the Los Angeles Times was headlined: “Let noncitizens vote. What’s the worst that could happen?”
Wrote Arellano: “Conservatives need to calm down. Noncitizen voting already is happening in some Maryland towns, and democracy there is still alive. Giving them access to the ballot box is a great gesture — it lets more people hold government accountable, adds a shot of vitality to our democracy, blah, blah, blah.”
Yep, that “blah, blah, blah” line appeared in a major newspaper.
But yadda, yadda, yadda, why even prohibit it from noncitizens dwelling in America? We can open our ballot containers to residents of the world! If we did, Russian interference in the 2016 election wouldn’t even be that massive of a deal.
In March, French writer Clémence Michallon, writing in The Independent, made just this identify. US protection impacts people in numerous nations, she argued, so why shouldn’t they get to kind American democratic outcomes?
The Left misplaced its collective ideas over the election of President Trump. Voters ought to decisively reject liberals’ makes a try to subvert our system, born of their election trauma.
No, we shouldn’t let 16-year-olds or prisoners or non-citizens vote. The tips shouldn’t be modified just on account of the Democrats misplaced.
One obligation that comes with dwelling under a democratic system is having to accept that usually, you lose.
Scrapping the longest-running democratic experiment in historic previous over one loss is a step too far. If you want to help 16-year-olds to be part of the course of, start by exhibiting them how to cope with electoral loss.