OLD ENOUGH TO ADVOCATE

Old Enough to Advocate

The voting age should lower to 16 for local and state elections

Voting is a privilege, not a right. the time to educate themselves. Do 16 year-olds deserve the To measure whether this local opportunity? engagement makes for a more

While the 26th amendment productive and inclusive democratic approved lowering the voting society, the results of such elections age to 18 in response to the could be compared to the preferred outcry “old enough to fight, choice of the younger demographic. old enough to vote,” today it is In a 2019 poll conducted by brought into question whether The Hill, 84% of registered voters 16-year-olds should be allowed opposed allowing 16-year-olds the same responsibility. Advocates to vote. Opponents often cite of such argue that the increased immaturity as a reason why the spread of technology has led to voting age should not be 16. a dissemination of information, According to social scientists giving students the opportunity Tak Wing Chan and Matthew to build their political viewpoints. Clayton, 16-year-olds would not Additionally, lowering the voting be able to make reasonable age would force political candidates to consider how their decisions affect the younger demographic.

Vote16 USA is a national campaign that supports efforts to give 16- and 17-year-olds voting rights at the state and local level. Allowing 16-year-olds to vote at these levels could serve as a ‘testing ground’ to determine whether they are responsible enough to vote in the national election. Because it is easier to both make an impact and see the changes brought within the community, students may be more interested in future elections, and; therefore, take

political decisions as “research in neuroscience suggests that the brain, specifically the prefrontal cortex, is still undergoing major reconstruction and development during the teenage years.” Another potential issue with 16- and 17-year-old voters is the massive spread of disinformation through social media and the lack of civic education. Nevertheless, a solution to this could be media literacy and civics classes weaved into the curriculum as early as eighth or ninth grade.

From organizing Black Lives Matter rallies to phone banking for campaigns, students have found several ways to stay politically engaged. By already advocating for big issues, they have shown their ability to stay informed, and should therefore be allowed to vote in local and state elections as a trial deciding whether they can maturely vote in the national election.

ILLUSTRATION // Rachel Kwon

DEMOCRACY

ILLUSTRATION // Faith Wu

Two Words Better Taken Out

“Under God” should be taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance by Stuti Gupta

Thirteen stripes, 50 stars, one of upholding patriotism. The pledge nation–“under God”. The should continue to be recited Pledge of Allegiance was during the e-school year because officially accepted by the United of the attempt towards in-person States (U.S.) in 1942. In 1943, the ‘normalcy’ it brings. Supreme Court stated that per the In keeping with the connection First Amendment, students cannot that the pledge brings in uniting be forced to say the pledge. all backgrounds, the words “under With virtual schooling, it is God”, added by President Dwight brought into question whether D. Eisenhower, should be taken the pledge should continue to be out. Eisenhower fell in support recited online, or even at all when of adding the two words after we return. While the original intent attending one of Reverend George of the pledge was to commemorate Docherty’s services, who thought America’s discovery, the meaning acceptance of Christianity is vital has shifted to instill a sense of to an ideal American life. In patriotism and connection between addition to ignoring the diversity immigrants and the U.S. Because of religious beliefs present in the of this and the introduction of U.S., the inclusion of such violates patriotism instilled in students who the separation of church and state. may not have much exposure to Though the Supreme Court has not more concrete patriotic acts, the yet ruled on the constitutionality DEMOCRACY pledge should be said daily; however, it should not be mandatory of staff or students. Moreover, choosing not to recite it should not be taken as an act of disrespect, especially because there are many other ways of this phrase, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that the pledge is not discriminatory. While the nation stands as one, “under God” continuously stands as a divide between the people.

Drawing Fair Lines

Amendment 1is an ineffective solution to gerrymandering by Christina Lu

Gerrymandering started in 1812 as the manipulation of electoral districts to gain a political advantage in the election, and it’s still practiced today, in 2020. Currently, partisan legislators in the General Assembly are in charge of drawing district maps. Whoever has the majority in the state government changes boundaries to secure more seats for their political party in legislative bodies such as the House of Representatives.

The resulting districts often blatantly misrepresent the true views of the population. Some voters become political minorities in their districts despite being part of the state’s majority, and are discouraged by the knowledge that their voices don’t make a difference.

Nonetheless, there’s hope - an amendment to change gerrymandering is on the ballot. Amendment 1 will give the job of drawing districts to a 16-member commission composed of both citizens and legislators. It’s already been passed in two consecutive legislative sessions, so the only step left is for Virginia’s citizens to vote on it in the General Election on Nov. 3. If passed, this commission will be deciding the maps in 2021.

However, the selection process for commissioners raises concerns about how well Amendment 1 addresses the problem. The eight legislators on the commission will be chosen by party leaders, and the eight citizens will be handpicked by retired judges. If politicians impose their agendas on their selections - which they almost certainly will - this commission won’t actually be nonpartisan or independent. Despite the good intentions behind Amendment 1, it’s only reform in disguise, and the status quo will remain unchanged. Politicians will still be choosing their voters, and votes will still be weighted unevenly. A transparent, independent, and diverse citizen-led commission that doesn’t involve lawmakers is the only way to ensure fair representation of Virginia’s voters.