Social 30-1
We did a class discussion today where everyone was given two Post It notes to write out their answers to two of the following questions:
- Should the voting age be lowered?
- Should voting be mandatory?
- Should everyone over the age of 18 be allowed to vote?
- Is the first past the post system democratic?
Next, I split you into four groups to summarize some of the viewpoints in the classroom, and then we had a whole class discussion about the issues related to these questions. I think that it was a really great discussion period. I would like to extend the classroom discussion to here on the blog. Here is your homework assignment: I would like you to post your answer to any one (or two or three) of the discussion questions that we did in class. I'd like you to also include the initials of your first and last name after your post (for example, "K.G. in Social 30-1"). I'd also like you to comment on someone else's post. This is for double homework check marks. You must post and respond to someone else's post before Tuesday of next week (remember you have a long weekend; the next time that I see you it will be December). Please be civil in your posting. Please remember that your American-Canadian Political Systems Comparison Charts are due on Wednesday, December 2nd.
Social 10-1
I finished up the PowerPoint presentation called "Globalization and Sustainability" today. I will be sending this to you by e-mail this afternoon. I also did a homework check on some previous PowerPoint presentations as well. Your Chapter 14 Key Terms and Questions are due on Tuesday. Enjoy your long weekend!
44 comments:
I believe that voting should not be mandatory. Yes there is a problem with voter apathy, however mandatory voting will create more problems than apathy. If the government decides that a particular group of people should not be allowed to vote, this can lead to discrimination. For example if disabled people cannot vote, other members of society may start to see them as having limited power and therefore being below them. It allows elitist values to enter society and creating marginalized groups is far worse than voter apathy.
A.O. in Social 30-1
I don't think that the voting age should be lowered. The younger population tend to know very little about political policies. There is usually more voter apathy in younger populations. Plus those who choose to vote would only be voting for the person that their parents or their friends vote for. This would result in the candiate with the most popularity being elected. Not necessarily the candidate with the best policy.
A.O. in Social 30-1
The voting age should not be lowered because most (not all) young people do not know alot about politics. Looking at university program requirements, I'm not sure all provinces require Social 30 to graduate high school. Also young people may vote for the candidate that is the most attractive and not the one that is best for our country.
I think everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed to vote because it is a right. When we start taking rights away from specific groups of people, it will lead to elitist values and would eventually ruin our Canadian reputation of a non-discriminatory nation.
Y.Y Social 30-1
I think the voting age should be lowered to 16. The voter apathy rate is very high anyways, 64.7% in 2006, and those below a certain age that believe they should have the right to vote due to their political awareness should be allowed to do so; different people mature at different rates. Those that do not care about voting because they are uninformed would not vote anyways, as they don't now already.
RP, Social 30-1
A comment on RP for double homework check marks:
You have a point that informed youth have a chance to vote, but would the uninformed vote for a celebrity or an attractive candidate? In my opinion, voting blindly is a more serious issue than voter apathy.
Y.Y Social 30-1 (Again, for double homework check points :D)
@ RP and Y.Y
I agree with RP when it comes to different people maturing at different rates. However, Y.Y's point is also true. If uninformed voting is a problem whether or not the voting age is 16 or 18, then there is a problem with the current system. It is true that all citizens have a right to vote, but we also have a responsibility to vote well. If, by lowering the voting age, we can include some people who are well-informed, then I am all for it. At the same time, however, there needs to be a mechanism to detect and educate uninformed voters. In my opinion, voters should have to undergo some sort of registration, kind of like getting a driver's license, or knowledge test, like placing the candidates on a political spectrum, before they can fill in their ballot. All citizens should have the right to vote, but they must demonstrate their capability first.
A.T. in Social 30-1
Voting should not be mandatory, especially with the first past the post system. Mandatory voting will bring in many votes of those who are uneducated about the political system and the candidates for which they are voting. These voters can vote randomly, skewing the results. These voters would also be easily influenced by their peers or bribed and may vote for candidates and parties whom they do not truly support. Though voter apathy is a problem that must be solved, mandatory voting is not the way to do it, as it will cause distorted results.
I do not understand the viewpoint of A.O. as mandatory voting would force those with disabilities to vote, which may in fact cause greater recognition of the issues of the disabled.
-M.L. from Social 30-1
I do not think that voting should be mandatory. Voter apathy is a huge problem with today's society. If people who did not care about voting or politics in general had to vote, then there would be a lot of random voting as people would just vote because they had to, not because they felt strongly that one party should be in power. Also, just as people have the right to vote, I believe that people should have the right not to vote as well.
-E.T. from Social 30-1
Everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed to vote as the main point of democracy is to get everyones voice heard. If everyone over 18 is allowed to vote then the government of the country is better represented
For double marks
At E.T.
I agree with E.T. because if people have the right to vote they also have the right not to. As democracy represents freedom people should have the freedom to decide whether they want to vote ore not
NR Social 30-1
Everyone over the age of 18 should have the opportunity to vote. The ability to vote should not be based on gender, race, salary, or health. As long as they are over the age of 18, they should be able to vote. We live in a democracy, everyone is qualified as equal. Someone who is male and earns more than $50 000 should not have anymore opportunity to take part in elections than a homeless man on the street.
The justification of setting the voting at 18 will reduce conflicts with problems such as drinking age, or the age you can join the military etc.
for double homework marks
I disagree with R.P, the voting age should not be lowered to 16. At 16 you are not subject to many of the responsibilities etc as someone who is not a minor. Thus not having an very legitimate reasoning for voting for a specific candidate. Also reducing the age to 16, discrepancies with drinking age, driving age, and even joining the army age would have to be dealt with.
S.W
@R.P. (for double homework marks)
I do not agree that the voting age should be lowered. Yes, people mature at different rates, but as there are many people who may be younger and mature enough to vote, there are just as many who are not mature enough. Also, voting may become quite skewed if younger people were allowed to vote, because many are biased by what parents, teachers and other significant others may have taught them.
E.T. from Social 30-1
Everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed to vote if they a citizen of the country. The basic function of a democratic society is to allow all citizens to have a say in how their government is run. Every person who is in a different situation (for example, someone who is handicapped) has a different perspective on how society should be run and they should be allowed to voice this opinion as a result.
At R.P.:
I disagree that the voting age should be lowered to 16 years. Until age 18, or beyond for many people, most individuals are fairly uninformed about what their political views are and are less likely to make an informed vote. Furthermore, until a person is a legal adult at age 18, they have significantly fewer responsibilities and should have less say in the affairs of the government as a result. Younger people are also more likely to have a skewed opinion that is more strongly influenced by their parents' views.
S.K. in Social Studies 30-1
Should the voting age be lowered?
I think it shouldn't be lowered, it should be raised. Right now, kids really don't care about politics (except for the handful of nerds). If you ask a class of university students, probably only half or less may want to actually go out and vote.
So since everyones complaining about how low our voter turnout is, we should just let the people that actually 'care' about politics aka the older people that actually pay REAL tax chose. That would be a more accurate presentation of how the society wants itself to be ran and the voter turnout would probably be higher because we shrink the population that is allowed to vote.
Reply to R.P.
This would only temporarily solve the problem. If we lower the voting age to 16, after a couple years people wont appreciate their privilege and the apathy rate would go back to what it was. What your saying is when the apathy rate returns the this rate, we should lower it to 14? It would be stupid to let kids that age to vote anyways. They'd just vote for the 'cool' candidate rather then the 'useful' one.
Should the voting age be lowered?
I think it shouldn't be lowered, it should be raised. Right now, kids really don't care about politics (except for the handful of nerds). If you ask a class of university students, probably only half or less may want to actually go out and vote.
So since everyones complaining about how low our voter turnout is, we should just let the people that actually 'care' about politics aka the older people that actually pay REAL tax chose. That would be a more accurate presentation of how the society wants itself to be ran and the voter turnout would probably be higher because we shrink the population that is allowed to vote.
Reply to R.P.
This would only temporarily solve the problem. If we lower the voting age to 16, after a couple years people wont appreciate their privilege and the apathy rate would go back to what it was. What your saying is when the apathy rate returns the this rate, we should lower it to 14? It would be stupid to let kids that age to vote anyways. They'd just vote for the 'cool' candidate rather then the 'useful' one.
S.L. Social 30-1
Double post... forgot my initials
Voting should be mandatory because it will solve the problem of low voter turn out and it may also solve the problem of voter apathy. If voting is mandatory people will make an effort to become informed and it will also make politicians word their platforms in a way that is more accessible to the general adult population.
@AO
I disagree with your belief that mandatory voting will lead elitist values in society. It would have the exact opposite effect as it is encouraging everyone to vote rather than discouraging or discriminating a particular group.
H.N. from Social Studies 30-1
I do not believe that the voting age should be lowered. We already live in a society where voter apathy is already high enough with those who are older than 18; what is the point of adding another group of apathetic voters into the mix? Also, in the case of voters younger than 18, there would be a influx of voters who do not have their ideals and beliefs solidified, which would lead to uninformed choices on who to lead the country.
@ H.N
I disagree with making voting mandatory. Making voting mandatory takes away the right of free choice; it's not a free vote if you cannot choose whether to vote or not. Some people choose not to vote because none of the candidates appeal to their beliefs. By taking away this simple yet important right, you are asking for an increase of dissatisfaction and unrest with any government supporting it.
E.K. from Social 30-1
Everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed to vote. People today are very sensitive when involves discrimination against a particular group. While it is true that some people are incapable of voting, like those who are mentally disabled, we should not take their rights away from them. It would cause civil unrest and people would question our system of government. It would also silence the need of that particular group of people, which is not what democracy is about.
Response to H.N
I disagree with your view on making voting mandatory. While it is true that voter apathy is a problem in a non mandatory system, people should also have the freedom to not vote. We should focus on educating people about participating in elections, because it is their responsibility as a citizen.
S.L from Social 30-1
not the s.l above
For the other half of the homework check:
Should everyone over the age of 18 be allowed to vote?/Should voting be mandatory?
In my opinion, all legal citizens of the age of majority in a liberal democracy have the right to vote. This includes prisoners (if they were already a citizen), disabled, and uninformed people. However, the right to vote cannot be confused as the right to vote poorly or the right to vote randomly. People are given rights, but are given responsibilities as well. Is it just to say that a person who fills out a ballot randomly is not canceling out another person's well-informed vote, and thus infringing upon that person's right? The natural state of democracy is that if one does not contribute, one must accept the decisions handed down. So if you reject your right to vote in a liberal democracy by not voting or poor voting, then you must submit to the people who do. Democracy is the type of dictatorship where everybody has the chance to be one. Therefore, the role of citizens in a democracy is to prevent others from doing so. To do this, one must be prepared, informed, mature, and willing to participate. Voting should not be made mandatory, for the fear of spoiled ballots and random voting, but also should not be freely open, for the same fears. Citizens must demonstrate an understanding of the right of and capability to vote before they are allowed to do so.
A.T. in Social 30-1
P.S. - @ S.L., I feel that your usage of "nerds" was uncalled for.
I believe that everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed to vote. If you were to take away the rights of one group of people, it would give people the idea that voter rights can be taken away. Also, the people who decide to take away voter rights are objective. It is only in their view that the rights of others should be taken away. Groups being objective would make the situation hard to control since every group has a point of view. Taking away voter rights would spiral out of control and most likely result in negative consequences.
@ A.O
I agree with your position on lowering the voting age. I don't think many young people would take the chance to vote. Young people most likely would not go out to vote and if they did would not make very informed choices.
T.O from Social 30-1
In reply to S.W.
I agree with your opinion. In a democracy we are all equal under the law and should be equal in terms of having the right to vote. Plus you have raised a valid issue. If the voting age was to change (to be lowered specifically) this would pave a path for other age limits to be lowered. People would demand the age for purchasing alcohol and cigarettes to be lowered as well. Soon after, the driving age would be lowered as well. Do we really want 12 year old kids driving without an adult?
A.O. in Social 30-1
Should Voting Be Mandatory?
There are a couple viewpoints on this. If voting is mandatory, then there will be a dramatic voter turn out, but their is also the rist of a greater number of spoiled ballots. If voting is not mandatory, then there might be a decreased chance of spoiled ballots because if people go and vote, they would go because they want to and not because they are forced to go. I think that voting should not be mandatory because we have a right as citizens of canada to vote, so we should be able to choose if we want to or not.
B.P. in Social 30-1
I agree with E.T. that the voting age should not be lowered because younger people do not have a good enough developed oppinion to choose their leader that they believe in, so they might believe in what their parents teach them. They dont know enough or understand what is going on in the world.
B.P. in Social 30-1
In reply to E.T.
I agree with your opinion. The voting age should not be lowered because younger people are influenced by what their parents teach them. Children do not know enough or understand what is going on in the world to develop their own opinion.
B.P. in Social 30-1
The first past the post system is not democratic. Many people's viewpoints will not be expressed in this system. This would be because they live in an area dominated by a particular ideology. For example, if they lived in an area where most people voted conservative and they voted liberal, their views would not be expressed for a conservative candidate would be elected. A system of preferential or proportional representation would be a way to have each person's vote have more of an impact. Having a second election to determine the majority government would prevent the negative aspect of these two systems from taking effect, for often in these systems it is difficult to have a majority government.
@BP
The percentage of spoiled ballots, even if everyone was allowed to vote, is much lower than the percentage of people who vote now. Also, a democracy where a large percent of the population does not contribute is not really a democracy.
N.L. in Social 30-1
I do not believe that everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed to vote. Some people should not have the right to vote until they earn it. For example, for someone who just moved to Canada doesn't know how our country is run and the differences between political parties yet. So they should not be allowed to vote in the election becuase they are il-informed.
In responce to E.T.
I agree with what they said. The voting age should not be lowered. Also I believe that people become more independant around the age of 18 and therefore are not inlfuenced by their parents anymore and believe in what they want to believe in.
P.L. social 30-1
I believe that everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed to vote. This is because this is a right that all people should have, regardless of their mental state of health or intellect. Everyone has this right under universal suffrage, which people fought for a long period of time. All human beings have this right, and under no circumstances should this right be taken away from them. Whether they chose to vote or not, is up to themselves.
In response to R.P., I agree with you that voter turnout is very low and that allowing a larger demographic the right to vote at the age of 16 would increase voter turnout. However, how many of these 16 year olds have the unbiased mentality of a 18 year old that would not skew the results of the election? I agree that some people of the younger generation are very well informed of the current politics. However it would be a valid point that a majority of the younger generation are not well informed. Most 16 year olds in Alberta have not taken Social 30 yet, where most of the learning of politics and society occurs. Those who think they are well informed, are most likely biased because they've probably become informed from their parents. Therefore the voting age should not be lowered.
A.L. in Social 30-1
I believe that the voting age should not lowered. Young voters tend to be less educated and more easily influenced. In addition, the young voters are less informed about politics, as a result, they may choose the party that does not favor the interest of the nation. Therefore, the voting age should not be lowered.
F.K. in Social 30-1
I agree with F.K. and I don't think the voting age should be lower. The younger teens lack the knowledge and experience to make educated votes and they need to spend more time to learn about political issues and different parties.
I think everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed to vote because democracy is all about equality. No one should be allowed to take away anyone's right, even the people with mental disabilities.
C.W. in Social 30-1
I think that the first past the post system is not democratic because it does not accurately represent the will of the people. Parties that have their supporters concentrated in close areas are overly represented, while parties that have supporters diluted across the country are often times under represented. Many voters across the country are simply not represented in the system.
In reply to E.T
I agree with E.T that voting should not be mandatory. People in a democracy should be able to choose whether they want to vote or not. Those who do not have a strong view towards politics should not be force to vote. Voting should be reserved only for those that feel strongly about an issue.
Y.L Social 30-1
@E.T.
I agree that voting should not be mandatory, but at the same time, people need to realize that voting is the force that drives the principles of democracy. Without voting, it is no longer a democratic state since the power no longer reside in the people. Furthermore, voting is a primary method that is applied to all democracies as a way of getting things done. Incentive should be applied and to those who does not vote, punishment should be enforced.
F.K. Social 30-1
Should Voting Be Mandatory?
I think that the in canada everyone has the right to vote but also the right to not vote. Democracy is all about choice so why shouldn't we be allowed to choose whether we vote or not? People who vote will be people that appreciate the prillage. Personally when i'm of legal age i'd like to think that i'd always go vote, but just because i don't agree with people who don't vote, doesn't mean i feel that they should be forced to vote. "I may not agree with what you say but i will defent to the death your right to say it"-Voltaire.
To me that's the only valid arguement, because i feel that spoiled ballets occur alot whether voting in mandatory or not, and there are people who vote today yet aren't informed.
H.S. in social 30-1
in response to F.K. on lowering voting age
I think that the voting age should be lowered. I'm not determining to what age, but it should be lowered by a couple of years, because i have confidence in youth like ourselves all over Canada. I don't feel that we are uninformed over on political issues. The voting age should be lowered because there are youth like ourselves that may be more informed then some adults who vote. The fact that we may be less mature because we still live with our parents or don't have a career just means we have a different view point then adults. By that logic the voting age should be raised because most people go into university or collage and don't start a career till maybe 25. We can represent a different side to an issue that maybe the elderly can't see. It is obvious that we have many opposing views to our parent's views, and I don't see why just because we have different opinions that our opinions can't matter too.
As for choosing what's best for the nation. We are part of the nation too. So I feel that at maybe 16 or 17 we have an understanding of what is good and bad. I believe that at any age, everyone can see the need to find a way to benefit society, and most people not matter what age wants a better Nation.
H.S. in Social 30-1
I believe that voting should be manditory due to the fact that most of the people who dont vote are just lazy. For people who do not have knowledge, or really care about our government there should be a blank box, although there would be more spoiled ballets, at least more people would end up voting, since they had too. and start to care about our government and who they are voting for.
For the second half, i agree with F.K. that the voting age should not be lowered, although there is some people under 18 that know alot about politics and would have a valuable say in our government, most of us are to immature and dont really understand quite everything there is to know about who our government should be, i feel we would make dumb choices on account of what we would like and not what would do best for our country.
I do not think that voting should be mandatory. By forcing people to go out and vote would cause more problems like voter apathy. By making voting mandatory, you would be taking away the freedom of choosing whether to vote or not. Those who have a lack of interest about politics should not be forced to vote. If you as an individual chooses not to participate in an election, that is solely their decision. Democracy is a system where people have the choice and opportunity to participate in the politics of a country. To make use of the opportunity citizens must be able to express their potential to vote.
C.W. in Social 30-1
E.B. K.Gilchrist, ... this is for the comment that doesnt have initials i forgot to add mine.
I agree with A.T. when it comes to uninformed voting. Citizens have a responsibility to vote but with well educated decisions. I agree that they must be a method of determining whether or not a citizen is capable of voting like a test. This would eliminate citizens with voter apathy and those who are misinformed. All citizens do have the right to vote, but they should not abuse this freedom.
C.W. in Social 30-1
Annoying, my comment seems to have refused to publish. Oh well, here goes another try...
Q:Should the voting age be lowered?
A: To wish the lowering of the voting age, i would need a plausible reason to do so. If there appears to be no need to change the status quo, then it will remain the status quo (as anyone who has lost the affirmative of a policy debate will tell you). On top of this, even if there is a need for change, the solution has to be concurrent with the problem; the change must fit the need. Of all the problems there are currently with voting, i feel that lowering the voting age would not solve anything (purely speculation.)
And in response...
AL: You clearly contradict yourself in your post and your response. In the former you state everyone should be able to vote. In the latter you state only those above the age of 18 should be. Which is it?
HS(right to vote): Yes, everyone (or everyone that would seem to count according to voting laws.) has the right to vote, but people often forget that with every right comes a civic duty or responsibility. As citizens, it is our duty to ensure that the government follows the will of the people, but how can it possibly do this if people refuse to vote? Were voting mandatory, the government would surely be a representation (or as close as possible under our FPTP system) of the people. Clearly one would argue that it is undemocratic to force people to do anything, such as vote, but clearly anyone making this argument forgets that they follow laws just like anyone else. These laws were not their own choice, but the choice of the people. If you don't like the laws, you have to vote so that you can change them. A law is only a law if it is enforced, and it's only enforced if the people so choose. Democracy is only democracy if it is by the people, and it's only "by the people" if "the people" vote.
I believe that everyone over the age of 18 should have the right to vote as long as they are a legal citizen in Canada. We are all people no matter our race or disabilities. Disagreeing with some opinions in class who didn't think that prisioneers or people with disabilities should vote because when you start making rules about who can or cannot vote based on different abilities becomes so confusing, when do you draw the line?
Commenting on R.P I disagree with lowering the voting age to 16. If the government lowers the voting age, people will want to start lowering drinking age, and soon you'll see 16 year olds at bars.
T/A
And i forgot my initials...
for the comment posted at 9:40 PM on Nov 30. 2009
J.M. in Social 30-1
Should the voting age be lowered?
I believe that it should be lowered but to a certain degree. It serves no purpose for citizens to be given the right to vote that don't understand the concepts but waistful to let informed citizens not have a say.
The comment above states that the voting age should be lowered only if there is a plausible reason. What better reason is there than trying to include more people with making decisions about their futures. With all the voter apathy, why not expand the spectrum. Sometimes change has to be tested. Doing nothing is just as bad as making the wrong decision; the only difference is the amount of time it takes until negative consequences settle in.
E.B Social 30-1
Oh and by the way, why do we have to write 30-1. If the assignment went to the 30-1 class, why must we restate it?
Oh and I was refering to the super long comment above; not directly above.
I valiantly try to fight the urge to respond but lose out. The Devil's Advocate has been unleashed.
In response to E.B.
Of course, this is perhaps the only reason to change. But my main point was, that given the need to change, the solution must be "a fit," so to speak. By arbitrarily changing the voting age, we're conceding that voter apathy has reached an epidemic proportion, at least enough to threaten the democratic system. Were this the case, our only solution is to allow some seventeen year olds to vote? This seems pathetic at best. It also drags up the question of how far we lower the voting age.
Really, I have no issue with the lowering of the voting age, it just seems that when one wishes to take on such a grandiose problem, the solution would have to be capacious enough to encompass every facet of the problem. And until such a solution exists, change is only opening opportunity to worsen matters.
Sure, you could argue that we would have to test things, but one must remember that it is our very society that is the subject here. Few would subject their loved ones to potentially life threatening tests, in the medical sense, so how would it differ to use our entire societal structure as a guinea pig?
J.M. in Social 30-1
The voting age should not be lowered. In order for such drastic changes as lowering the voting age in a democratic society to come about, a whole system of bureaucracy would have to be implemented (ex: referendum for fluoride in water supply). With the controversy arising from this issue, just imagine all the referendums and ballots that would have to be cast just to vote upon the issue before any action is taken.
@ A.O
In reply to the comment made about the “younger population knowing very little about political policies,” I find this rather hypocritical and ironic. As we are all peers in this course, such a comment about teenage ignorance would indicate that what we are learning in this social studies course is impractical. I think it is best to be objective when dealing with such issues as age and the right to vote. I do agree with the voting age remaining at its status quo of 18, however, would a lowered voting age not allow for the younger population to voice their concerns on pending issues such as tuition fees and health care? Although we may be of the younger demographic, these issues do pertain to us as much as they do generations prior.
KL in Social 30-1
@ A.O.
I agree with you that mandatory voting would cause problems; the uninformed should not vote and those unable to can decide for themselves with regard to their voting capabilities.
RP, Social 30-1
Post a Comment