Against a minimum voting age

Bibliographic Data

ID12609792
AuthorsPhilip Cook, Philip S Cook (0000-0002-2902-2030, University of Leicester, corresponding author)
Year2013
Volume16
Issue3
Pages439-458
Publication date2013-06-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueCritical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1369-8230 • E-ISSN: 1743-8772
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/13698230.2013.795707
OpenAlexW1991309595
LanguageEN
Citations received26
References cited30

A minimum voting age is defended as the most effective and least disrespectful means of ensuring all members of an electorate are sufficiently competent to vote. Whilst it may be reasonable to require competency from voters, a minimum voting age should be rejected because its view of competence is unreasonably controversial, it is incapable of defining a clear threshold of sufficiency and an alternative test is available which treats children more respectfully. This alternative is a procedural test for minimum electoral competence. A procedural test for minimum electoral competence also succeeds in fulfilling adults’ duties to promote children’s rational and moral engagement with democracy. A minimum voting age should therefore be rejected, all things considered. A procedural test for minimum literacy and independent voting is the most justified means to ensure competency from voters and to promote the democratic agency of children

Agency (philosophy · Bullet voting · Cardinal voting systems · Competence (human resources · Democracy · Disapproval voting · Political science · Politics · Social science · Sociology · Test (biology · Voting · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Law · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Political Theology and Sovereignty · Psychology · Social Psychology