WHAT’S NEW?

Seven co-introducers champion bill to lower voting age, Washington Post editorial board comes out in favor, and we’ve just begun.

After the nationwide “March For Our Lives” demonstrations, and the public discourse that followed, NPR’s Michel Martin reflects on the proposal to give teens a say at the ballot box.

Psychologist Laurence Steinberg argues for lowering the voting age in an interview with Wisconsin Public Radio’s Rob Ferrett.

A column in the Badger Herald argues that by lowering the voting age to 16, we can “more readily ensure that we have an electorate that will vote for their entire lives,” as young people develop the habit of voting at 16.

“Young leaders who are looking to make a meaningful change in our society are limited by one small thing. They do not have the right to vote.”

“Young people who are smart enough and engaged enough to shape the debate about gun violence are smart enough and engaged enough to vote,” writes John Nichols for The Nation.

In the New York Times, psychologist Laurence Steinberg explains research on hot and cold cognition, and why it supports lowering the voting age to 16.

This Washington Post piece argues in favor of lowering the voting age by focusing on research on the “trickle up” effect, which shows that allowing 16-year-olds to vote can increase turnout for both youth and their parents.

Pod Save America’s Jon Lovett makes a powerful and comprehensive case for lowering the voting age. “You are young but it is time you get in the habit of democracy. You are young but voting isn’t for other people. It’s for you. It has to be.”

This Bloomberg column argues that if we allow more sophisticated political action from high school students, like organizing marches and lobbying legislators, we should also allow them to vote.