Allowing parents to vote on behalf of their children

Children are clearly citizens, but because they cannot vote, they lack a voice in the political process. Although a strong case has been made that lowering the voting age would be beneficial (see Henry Milner's, The Internet Generation), for obvious reasons there needs to be a minimum voting age. Therefore, it has been suggested that parents should be able to cast votes on behalf of their children because otherwise children are disenfranchised. See this article in the Globe and Mail.

Bananaman tends to agree that extending the franchise to children is justified by an equal rights argument. This post will consider whether it is also justified from a social justice perspective.

Elections are about the future. There are both short-term and long-term consequences to electoral outcomes. All of us have a stake in the short-term consequences of elections, but younger people actually have a greater stake in the long-term consequences of elections. Maximizing the voice of those with the most at stake in elections potentially can redirect some of our political debate toward long-term goals and, perhaps, create incentives for politicians to look beyond the next election cycle.

We live in a society where school levies are often defeated and public education is chronically underfunded. Much of our infrastructure is crumbling. The cheapest energy options in the short-term are probably the most catastrophic for the planet in the long term.

The simple math is that the older you are, the less likely you are to be affected by the long-term consequences of poor policy choices. Should we restrict the vote for the elderly? Perhaps. (This will be the subject of a future blog post). From a social justice perspective, we should do everything possible to enhance the voice of those with the most at stake. Allowing parents to vote on behalf of their children is an interesting approach for accomplishing this.

The idea does raise two important concerns: one logistic and one philosophic.

First, as a practical matter, this would be complicated. If a child has two parents, which one should cast his or her vote? If parents disagree politically, would it be possible to have each cast one half vote? How would children without legal guardians be represented? Managing the voter rolls in a scenario where proxy votes are allowed would be challenging, and opportunities for voter fraud would increase. In addition, voter turnout remains low in the United States. If parents fail to register to vote, they disenfranchise not only themselves but also their children.

Second, would parents (or guardians) truly cast votes in the interests of their children, or would they cast votes based upon their own interests? Although one might assume that these interests would generally coincide, it cannot be taken for granted that this is the case. It would always be the adults who are casting the extra votes. The equal rights argument is weakened if the end result is that the interests of parents are magnified at the expense of the interests of childless adults.

This idea is not fully ripe, but it definitely deserves further consideration. Three bananas!