I’ve long thought that we should lower the voting age to 16, so thanks to Mike deJong for raising it in the BC Liberal leadership campaign. I speak from some experience, as I voted shortly after I turned 17 in the Ontario provincial election. I was a frosh in residence at Western and no one called me on it so I just voted like everyone else.
But let’s face it: the list of ills in our democracy is much longer than that a minor amendment to the voting age. We can let them vote, but why would they want to? The big problem of our day is that the people do not trust politicians, and they feel that the political system does not translate the will of the people into action. That is why voter turnout is down. So give 16-year-olds the vote, but also give them a reason to vote.
At a time when the public is engaged by the sheer deception over the HST, and another election lie from 2001, the promise not to sell BC Rail, democracy needs to be on the table. We need to be talking about ways to boost accountability, and root out crony capitalism, whether that be actual corruption (as in BC Rail) and the day-to-day influence of large corporations (who do not vote but seem to have no problem making “democracy” work for them). We need to think about what a more democratic society should look like and how our legislatures facilitate that democratic intercourse, rather than the highly centralized power of the PMO or Premier’s office.
Democracy is an evolving set of institutions, including legislatures and eligibility to vote representatives to those legislatures. But how those legislatures function (or do not) is of as much importance as who gets to vote. Electing a representative means little in our world of caucus solidarity – if our “representatives” do not get to speak their mind freely, we might as well just have a presidential-style election for premier. In BC, the legislature has only been sitting a few months of the year, so having a representative means even less than it used to.
At least, the evolving institutional framework has now brought forth a referendum on the HST, one small victory against despotism. Referenda are a rather crude form of democracy (as ballot initiatives in the US have demonstrated), but do have their place. But there are also participatory budgets, constituent assemblies, and other democratic engagement models to experiment with, some of which BC already has experience with.
As for the voting age, eligibility to vote was never clean cut: there have always been rules restricting suffrage. In the British tradition, the “vote” in the earliest Parliaments was with the nobility, who steadily wrested power from the king. That shifted to male property owners, then to all men, and to women. Periodically, religion has popped as a means for disqualification, so at times Catholics, Jews and others were banned from voting in England.
In Canada, women have only had the vote for less than 100 years, First Nations people for half that. The voting age was lowered to 18 forty years ago from 21. So lowering it to 16 is just one more step in the progress of democracy. Yet, every time that march has sought to take another step, the same patronizing arguments have been made in opposition. The most common complaint is 16-year-olds are too stupid/ignorant/inexperienced to vote. Substitute First Nations, blacks, Jews or women into that sentence, and have the rough history of arguments against suffrage.
True, teenage brains are flooded with hormones and they may lack real-life experience. But kids today are sophisticated and more prone to be idealistic that we can change things that are wrong with the world or our province. Because we teach them, so why deny them voice? Besides, it is their future that we are polluting, and they have a right to be angry about that at the ballot box. Even if you think 16 year-olds too dim, then I suggest we invest more in public education.
Lowering the voting age would, in fact, provide a great opportunity it would be to teach newly eligible voters about real issues during an election campaign, at school and at home. Just as 16-year-olds need a voice on climate change, they will have valid perspectives on the HST, fish farms and corruption. It would be great to see how 16 year olds would respond to reading David Basi’s personal memos.
But given the tragic state of our political system, it would be foolish to think that allowing 16 year-olds to vote is a panacea for voter participation. They may just get cynical faster — as long as politicians keep pulling betrayals like the HST and BC Rail. In the spirit of democracy I’d like to see Mike de Jong or any other Liberal candidate call for a full public inquiry into the corruption of the BC Rail affair (I’m betting the rot goes much deeper than just BC Rail).
If we want more democratic engagement we need institutions that are themselves more democratic. That is, we need a 21st century democracy, not a small tweak to the 19th century version. Younger voting ages should be part of that reform, but they are not the solution to an ailing system.
Keith Reynolds // Dec 17, 2010 at 8:04 am
I think it is a great idea. The 16 year olds would bring a more thoughtful perspective to voting than most of us.
Every high school in the province would hold assemblies for the students to discuss and debate the issues. I would hope students would be asked to represent different sides and present ideas on why their choice of party would be good for young people and the province. For them, voting would become a much more social way to participate than is true for most of us.
But why stop there? What if we had legislation that said every work place in the province had to provide a two hour paid period for their employees to discuss the election two weeks before election day? Employers, who would have their own assemblies, would be forbidden to participate and the working people would choose someone to chair the meeting. Parties would be allowed to submit a short summary of their policy and working people would discuss the election together.
Assemblies could be held for people not at work. People on EI and social assistance, for exampe, would be paid $30 ($15 an hour) plus travel costs to discuss the issues. Child care should be provided. Once again, they would choose their own chairs and government employees would be kept away.
I hope people would discuss the real issues that affected them rather than the horse race issues we are fed by the media.
I think the results would be glorious.
Pedro Mora // Jan 10, 2011 at 4:48 pm
Now is the Time for a Non-Violent Revolution!
Many scientists are warning us that if we continue pursuing economic growth and widespread selfish consumerism, life on earth will continue to suffer unnecessarily.
We also know that unsustainable depletion and maldistribution of resources is mainly the product of ineffective government regulations.
What is less understood now, is that the current “Monarchic-Representative-Democracy”, type of Canadian Government, is the source of ineffective social and environmental legislation. Citizens’ apathy and acquiescence empowers this political system.
Once we realize that too much political power in the hands of a few politicians will inherently continue to corrupt, we must look, beyond changing parties, into an alternative form of governance.
Here is a suggestion. Thanks to the internet, we have now more information than ever before. We also have now the best computer technology to participate on “Initiative, Referendum, and recall”. We have now the tools to govern ourselves. What we need is the collective will to shift from “Monarchic Representative Democracy” to “Citizens Direct Democracy”
Consider a political change starting with the following Constitutional framework, including in simple and concise language the following articles:
We The Sovereign Citizens
1.a) Adopt a constitution which establishes the territory now known as the Province of British Columbia, as a new State united to Canada.
1.b) Adopt, by referendum, the name of this new political state.
2.- Adopt The Canadian Charter of Human Rights, as an overriding legislation to safeguard minority’s human rights.
Legislative Power to the People
3.a) Establish a clear understanding that the collective citizen’s initiative and legislation, to govern this new political state, is the supreme authority.
3.b) Declare independence from the Monarchy and it’s Governors; from the legislative authority of Members of the Canadian Parliament; from the legislative authority of the BC Members of the Legislative Assembly; and from the city councilors’ authority to create By-Laws.
4. All legislation shall be initiated exclusively by citizens and supported by the majority of citizens, via perpetual, computerized polling system.
Computerized Polling System
5.a ) Adopt a computerized mechanisms to facilitate Initiative, referendum and recall.
5.b) The electoral agency must ensure that the polling system is secure, transparent, verifiable, and easily accessible . It shall be sufficiently available to all citizens, through public libraries and other electoral offices across the State.
Member of the Political Assembly “MPA”
6.a) From a list of candidates, submitted by citizens from and for each riding, on an official, computerized, perpetual electoral system, the candidate with the most votes shall be the “MPA”.
6.b ) The MPA’s duty shall be limited to facilitate and implement legislation as decided by the majority of voters, and to supervise the executions of the citizens’ mandate by government employees.
6.c) MPAs shall have “No Term of Office”. The position shall last as long as the majority of citizens maintain support for that MPA.
6.d) The financial remuneration to all MPAs shall be no more, no less than the average salary of a public employees of the State, plus reasonable remuneration for job related expenses.
6.e) Financial remuneration shall continue for a predetermined, reasonable length of time, after a DPA losses majority of public support.
Ministers of State, “MS”
7.a) All MPAs shall select, from the Assembly, a Premier, or Minister of State, “MS”.
7.b) The Premier shall facilitate the Legislation proceedings on the Assemble, and represent the State, nationally and internationally.
8.a) All MPAs, shall vote to appoint all Ministers of State: Education, Health, Housing, Transportation, Communications, Social Services, Security and Order, Forest-Lands-Minerals, Energy, etc.
8.b) All MSs shall govern the bureaucratic operations of each Ministry.
8.c) All MSs shall be subject to recall.
Independent Agencies
9.a) All DPAs, shall vote to appoint Chief Officers for Independent Agencies which need to be free from political influence: Solicitor General, Chief Electoral Officer, Chief Information Officer, etc.
9.b) All appointments shall be subject to recall.
National and International commitments and agreements
10.- National and International commitments, immigration, defense, and trade agreements shall be accepted, rejected, or cancelled by the majority of sovereign citizens on an on-going referendum.