by Lexi Matthews ‘18

Most 16 year-olds have spent the past decade of their lives sitting in classrooms, living under their parents’ roofs, never having to pay bills to ensure they have running water, heat, or electricity. Issues like social security, health insurance, and international relations are usually overshadowed by their focus on education, developing careers, and taking their first baby-steps into the real world. Should the responsibility of voting be piled onto teens as well?

In November, voters will choose the next leader of the country based on who they believe has the best views on ISIS, Wall Street, Medicare, and the refugee crisis, some of the most hotly debated topics of the 2016 presidential election. This political complexity, difficult enough for most adults, only amplifies for teens possessing no experience in these fields; those under 18 cannot legally own a gun or serve in active duty, and very few pay income tax or have their own health insurance. Asking them to make decisions based on these topics they have no knowledge of is like asking an American to vote in China’s next election.

Supporters of a lower voting age claim that our trust in teens to drive shows that they are responsible enough to vote. However, teens have proven relentlessly that this trust has been misplaced; 86 percent of all motor vehicle accidents involve a driver aged 16-19. More than that, this analogy does not explain the whole issue. While those involved in an accident may feel the aftershock of a teen’s driving ineptitude, thousands of teens voting recklessly on issues they do not grasp could threaten the future of our entire nation.

With uninformed teens entering voting booths—which most are, as Gallup finds only 24 percent of 12-17 year-olds actively follow the news—deceitful practices in politics will only further increase. Candidates will likely prey on the young minds’ misunderstandings and impressionability to make flashier, less achievable promises they are certain to fall for, and our country will reach a new level of turmoil.

Even if teens suddenly became ultra-informed, their right to vote would likely have little impact. Less than half of all 18-25 year-olds vote each year, and the projected number of 16 year-old voters would be even less than that. When uselessness seems to be the best-case outcome of lowering the voting age, we should leave it be.