D.C., may allow 16-year-olds to vote for president

[Tahuyaman]

Correct me if Im wrong, Is it not true that states can lower it to 17 for state elections but not for federal elections, the article clearly states they want to lower the age to 16 for the next Presidential Election

What ever you do, don't use the 26th amendment as a means to defend your position on this.

[pragmatic]

Letting 17 year olds vote in no way violates the amendment. If they allow it, are they infringing on the right of people over 18 to vote? No, they aren't, they pass the logic gate.

Let's start with this:

What was the minimum legal age to vote before the 26th Amendment??



(by your logic it was "wherever a state want to set it"...)

[pjohns]

It will END the Rethuglican Party!LMFAO!

You are just as bad as those who refer to the Democratic Party as "the DemonRATic Party"...

[pjohns]

It says the Feds or States cannot deny that right to vote on the basis of age for anyone over 18. I don't see the confusion here.

As an analogy: A state may not set a minimum wage beneath the bar set by the federal government; but some states have a minimum wage higher than the one granted by the federal government...

[William]

Most 16 year old kids don't have the experience to develop a firm understanding of the issues addressed by presidential candidates. Most 18 year olds are marginally better informed.


Many adults can't even tell you who the VP of the United States is. I've seen young adults, college students, say that WWII was a war between the United States and Mexico or Canada.


We don't need to dumb down the voting pool any further.

I guess that depends on the person and the education system.

I will be 17 next birthday, but I am still 16, and I know how the Westminster system of government operates - the role of the Monarch, the Prime Minister, and the Parliament. And most of my mates know the same stuff. I also have a fair idea of the platforms of the Conservative and Labour parties, and I have discussed loads of stuff with grownups here for the past three years. Many people here have complimented me on my mature posts, and some even doubted I was a teenager cos of those posts. I'm not trying to big note myself, but I am pointing out that many 16 year olds can be just as sensible as 40 year olds, even though we may not know as much. Just cos we are not legally adults doesn't mean we can't act like grownups.

[Newpublius]

Let's start with this:

What was the minimum legal age to vote before the 26th Amendment??



(by your logic it was "wherever a state want to set it"...)

Yes, prior to the Amendment, most states had set the age to 21.

In Oregon v Mitchell the case that was hatched pre-26th Amendment the Supreme Court which said that the Amendment to the VRA in 1970 was unconstitutional as applied to state elections. Congress did not have the right to regulate the minimum age in State and local elections, but only in federal elections. The losing four didn't think Congress had the power to set it for federal elections and that ultimately ONLY states could set voter qualifications.

And of course prior to the amendment to the VRA, a handful of states had lowered their voting age to 18. By 1968, several states had lowered the voting age below 21 years: Alaska and Hawaii's minimum age was 20, Kentucky's was 19, and Georgia's was 18 They could have done 17 then, they could do 17 now. The Amendment doesn't stop them from doing that, it only stops them from disenfranchising people 18 and over.

[Newpublius]

As an analogy: A state may not set a minimum wage beneath the bar set by the federal government; but some states have a minimum wage higher than the one granted by the federal government...

That's half true. Let me explain. You are correct, the federal minimum wage is the floor, a state exercising concurrent jurisdiction may set a wage higher.

For instance, federal minimum wage is $8 and NJ state wage is $10 and I pay you $9/hr I have violated a state law. I have not however violated the federal law. If I pay you $7 per hour, I violate both the state and the federal law.

There are currently two states with lower minimum wages though. GA and WY both of which are at $5.15 (wiki source so if you see better let me know).

Now this does not take precedence over the federal minimum wage law, however, if I pay you now $6 per hour, I still violate the federal law, but I don't violate the state law. If I pay you $4/hr I violate BOTH the federal and state laws!

Little nuance.

[Dr. Who]

That's half true. Let me explain. You are correct, the federal minimum wage is the floor, a state exercising concurrent jurisdiction may set a wage higher.

For instance, federal minimum wage is $8 and NJ state wage is $10 and I pay you $9/hr I have violated a state law. I have not however violated the federal law. If I pay you $7 per hour, I violate both the state and the federal law.

There are currently two states with lower minimum wages though. GA and WY both of which are at $5.15 (wiki source so if you see better let me know).

Now this does not take precedence over the federal minimum wage law, however, if I pay you now $6 per hour, I still violate the federal law, but I don't violate the state law. If I pay you $4/hr I violate BOTH the federal and state laws!

Little nuance.

Isn't age also a factor? You can pay a teen less than minimum wage in certain circumstances.

[Newpublius]

Isn't age also a factor? You can pay a teen less than minimum wage in certain circumstances.

Age can be and obviously there are waiters and waitresses too.

[Peter1469]

Isn't age also a factor? You can pay a teen less than minimum wage in certain circumstances.

In some states, yes.