Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Over 100 Congressional Democrats Vote To Lower Voting Age to 16

Over 100 Congressional Democrats Vote To Lower Voting Age to 16

The amendment failed. This time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVSEEhWuxtk&feature=youtu.be

The left has an historical ability to appeal to the young. Given that polls and studies show that the majority of people outgrow their wide-eyed, ill-conceived leftist idealism, the left is ramping up its attempts to sell its shiny, empty promises to our nation’s youth.

In keeping with their decades-long attempts to shore up a permanent Democrat majority, the House voted Thursday on a measure to lower the voting age to 16.

The amendment to HR1, introduced by freshman Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), was rejected, but 125 Democrats—and one Republican, Rep. Michael Burgess (TX)—voted for it.

In making her case for her proposed amendment, Pressley argued that high school students are leading the charge on gun control and therefore deserve the right to vote.

Roll Call reported earlier this week:

In presenting her amendment at House Rules to lower the voting age to 16, freshman Rep. Ayanna S. Pressley argued that high schoolers have taken a leading role in pressing for new gun control laws and deserve greater participation in their democracy.

“They are organizing, mobilizing and calling us to action,” the Massachusetts Democrat told the panel Tuesday.

Or something.

Republicans, excluding Burgess, saw this as a move to try to garner more Democrat votes.

The Washington Examiner reports:

Republicans disagreed and said Democrats were really trying to create more people who are likely to vote for Democrats.

“I’m of the opinion that we shouldn’t arbitrarily lower the voting age just because right now, I believe Democrats think they’ll gain more votes,” said Rep. Rodney Davis, R-Ill. “I believe it will institutionalize a Democrat majority here in this House of Representatives.”

Rep. Mark Green, R-Tenn., said on the floor about Pressley’s language, “I think this is foolish.”

Republicans also argued the Constitution effectively sets a minimum voting age of 18, by saying the rights of people that age and older can’t be denied. That language, found in the 26th Amendment, doesn’t prohibit Congress from setting a lower voting age.

While this measure failed, HR1 passed along party lines Friday morning, 234-193.  This bill aims to limit money in politics and force presidents to release their tax returns. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who called the enormous voting rights and election reform bill “a parade of horrible,” said Thursday that he will not be bringing the bill to the Senate floor.

The Daily Caller reports:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell held a press conference Thursday to step up his attacks against HR1, the massive election reform bill currently being debated in the House, as a “turkey” and a “parade of horrible,” warning Democrats that supporting the bill will help Republicans win in 2020.

McConnell was defiant when asked why he wouldn’t bring HR1 to the Senate floor. “Because I get to decide what we vote on,” was his response.

Pressley retweeted the following:

Apparently, Democrats recognize that their socialist agenda, including the ill-advised Green New Deal, won’t win over many adult voters, so we can expect further attempts to lower the voting age, among other problematic proposals.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

thalesofmiletus | March 8, 2019 at 3:07 pm

Raise the voting age to 30.

Net tax-paying males without felonies over 30, voting in proportion to the amount of tax they pay.

    Anchovy in reply to BillyHW. | March 8, 2019 at 3:46 pm

    One vote for every $1,000 you pay in taxes.

      so us disabled vets living on VA payment (per contracts we signed…) don’t get to vote?
      think before you type.

        Anchovy in reply to dmacleo. | March 8, 2019 at 5:53 pm

        I guess I didn’t make that clear. Everyone should get one vote. The people who are actually going to pay for government should have more say in how that money that they pay gets spent.

        amwick in reply to dmacleo. | March 8, 2019 at 6:43 pm

        So, as long as we are being creative, I think Veterans should get extra votes, how about one per year of service? Something like that.

    CDR D in reply to BillyHW. | March 8, 2019 at 6:03 pm

    Exception for active duty military and veterans.

    txvet2 in reply to BillyHW. | March 9, 2019 at 12:43 am

    Or we could go back to the beginning, when it was limited to property-owning males.

      alaskabob in reply to txvet2. | March 9, 2019 at 1:00 pm

      Which is exactly what was considered as part of “the pursuit of happiness”. Land/property ownership was far easier to obtain in colonial America than England. Too many people have no “skin in the game” such as paying no taxes. We already let functional two year olds into Congress.

amatuerwrangler | March 8, 2019 at 3:36 pm

I wonder if they realize that this bill –theoretically– would enlarge the group of lawful voters who are denied the ability to purchase or possess a handgun. These voters might just decide to vote for legislators who will pass a law to allow that. Or maybe in legal actions attacking such laws it will tip the balance when an even larger group of disenfranchised citizens denied their constitutional right to keep and bear arms can be shown. (Now its just the 18 to 21-year olds.)

Weren’t we all fonts of knowledge, contemplation and self-restraint at 16?

But why stop at 16? Include middle school students, too. Go for it.

Good grief. These democrats are too stupid to breath…

Did anyone explain to the (D)olts that the vote would neither change nor repeal the XXVI amendment?

Colonel Travis | March 8, 2019 at 4:46 pm

When the (D) party gets back full power, and it will, America is screwed.

    That’s probably when the hot civil war starts. The Dems will be so giddy with power they will be unable to constrain themselves from going full Bolshevik.

we really need to solidify the age of adulthood.
presently can vote, serve in military (can sign up at 17 as long as entry date after 18 bday)at age of 18.
buy beer at age 21.
in this state buy cigarettes ate age 21.
in this and other states rent a car at age 25. let me tell you, when 19 and just had operation in germany and came home on leave to heal then getting stuck in jfk this item really sucks, had friends drive from CT to drive me from jfk to newark to get flight home…
solidify the age of adulthood.
18.
simple.

    alaskabob in reply to dmacleo. | March 9, 2019 at 1:07 pm

    Go full Robert Heinlein….military service guarantees full citizenship. Only citizens (and not “civilians”) can vote. If we had to come out of a major internal conflict with the Bolshevik Left, Heinlein’s views would be worth looking at…just as they are now in branches such as Marines.

    Citizenship is being cheapened solely for power grabs.

Stupid has nothing to do with at – at least not on the part of the left. The stupidity lies on the right of center: think boehner, ryan, mcconnell, mccain, krystol, romney and the like.

Albigensian | March 8, 2019 at 5:50 pm

And if you really wanted to capture that 16-year-old vote, what would you support: free high-end cellphones for all, with a fat data package?

The disconnect is trying to lower the voting age even as the apparent age boundary when most Americans transition from an extended adolescence to adulthood continues to increase.

Lower the voting age but raise the age for purchasing a firearm? The goal is clear.

Gotta get the 16 yr olds while they still know everything.

Don’t forget eric “the contemptible” holder wants the next democratic majorities to raise the SC number another 5 judges to pack more fascists voting to enslave America.

Democrats are fascists, start calling them what they are and quit sugar coating the overthrowing of our government by calling them anything else.

Democrats are getting pretty desperate if they want to lower the voting age to 16. I suppose that when they lose, as Hillary blamed women Republican voters on their husbands, the Democrats will blame Parents on influencing their children.

Democrats are getting pretty desperate if they want to lower the voting age to 16. I suppose that when they lose, as Hillary blamed women Republican voters on their husbands, the Democrats will blame Parents on influencing their children.

Only non-criminal, adult, US citizens should have a vote. The government defines childhood up to 26 years of age for social security benefits so the minimum voting age should be 27.

Massachusetts sends another dimwitted leftist to Congress.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend