Thirteen-year-old children should have the right to vote.
"Let Children Vote. Even 13-Year-Olds."
by Laurence Pevsner
There’s no such thing as children’s suffrage. But there should be.
Most adult Americans would laugh at the idea of a 13-year-old walking into a polling booth.
But that’s a familiar attitude in the history of American voting rights.
The first state to grant women's suffrage was Wyoming - and it started as a joke, too. Edward M. Lee, the territory's secretary, wrote: “During the session, amid the greatest hilarity, and . . . in the full expectation of a gubernatorial veto, an act was passed Enfranchising the Women of Wyoming.” The veto never came. A century later, this inauspicious start came full circle when women were included in the Civil Rights Act as part of yet another lawmaker's joke.
Still, serious arguments against children's suffrage abound. Eighteen to 21-year-olds already vote in dismal numbers - why should we give the vote to people even younger, who probably care less? Even if they do care to vote, children don't have the intellectual capacity or the life experience to understand complex issues. Supposing you did stick them in a polling booth, they’re likely to vote exactly as their parents tell them to - essentially giving parents double, triple, or quadruple the votes.
But we’ve heard these arguments before.
The Washington Post © 2016 The Washington Post. All rights reserved. Used under license.
Question
Use the passage to answer the question.
Which is the central claim of this passage?
(1 point)
Responses
Thirteen-year-old children should have the right to vote.
Thirteen-year-old children should have the right to vote.
Women’s suffrage was a controversial idea.
Women’s suffrage was a controversial idea.
Women were rightfully included in the Civil Rights Act.
Women were rightfully included in the Civil Rights Act.
Young people need to vote in higher numbers.
1 answer
1 answer