Every citizen knows that when you turn 18, you receive a number of new rights and privileges. One of them is the right to register to vote. Nationally, there’s been a movement to allow people who are 17 at the time of a primary to vote in that primary as long as they turn 18 by the general election. Should our state also consider this?
Proposed amendment CACR 5 to the New Hampshire Constitution would extend the vote in primary elections to those 17-year-olds who will turn 18 by the general election. The amendment is tabled in the N.H. House, but I believe it’s worthy of adoption.
This amendment would change Article 11 of the first part of the state constitution. This article deals with elections and elective franchises. The key phrase in the amendment is, “Every inhabitant of the state of 17 years of age who will reach the age of 18 years prior to the general election shall have an equal right to vote in the primary election for that election.” What this means is that if you are 17-years-old by the day of the primaries, and you will turn 18 at the time of the general election, you would be eligible to vote in the primary election.
I would argue that voting in a primary should focus more on the right of association. Since you have the right to associate with a party, regardless of age, then you also should have a say in determining who will represent you at the time of the general election. Voting in a primary doesn’t determine who will represent everyone, but rather who your party wishes to put forward in the general election.
Further, New Hampshire has a semi-closed primary. This means that if you are registered with a political party, you can vote only in that party’s primary. It also means that if you’re unaffiliated with a party, you can also vote. However, whichever party’s ballot you choose, you’ll be considered affiliated with that party after your vote. I would find it difficult to believe that there would be a rash of 17-year-olds who would jump to the other party during a primary to create “mischief” and distort the numbers for the other party’s candidates.
Our federalist construct of government allows states sometimes to act as “laboratories of democracy,” where laws, policies or programs can be tested at the state level to see the response of the polity before potentially being adopted at the federal level. One or a few states can provide a litmus test to see if our citizens like an idea or not. Some examples of these laboratories are: death with dignity laws (eight states); allowing nonresidents the right to vote (three states); legalization of the recreational use of marijuana (nine states and Washington, D.C.); and allowing prisoners to vote (two states). And, 18 states allow 17-year-olds to vote in a primary, as long as they are 18 by the general election.
Opponents of CACR 5 look at the constitutional language that the proposed amendment would change. Article 11 reads, in part, “All elections are to be free, and every inhabitant of the state of 18 years of age and upwards shall have an equal right to vote in any election.” It’s simple, they say. You have to be 18 to vote; 18 is the age we, as a society, determine a person is an adult.
So, why change what’s been agreed upon by our elected officials? Why not stick with a clear, bright-line rule?
Just because something is simple, doesn’t mean it’s the best, most inclusive answer for our state. First, the language of Article 11 reads an 18-year-old can vote in “any” election, but it doesn’t necessarily say if a 17-year-old can vote in “some” elections.
Second, New Hampshire has first-in-the-nation primary status and that means we’re a lot more politically savvy than other states. It seems the norm in New Hampshire is that if you don’t “meet, greet or eat with the candidate, you don’t vote for him or her.”
We, as a state, have a steady diet of candidates who come into New Hampshire and excite the polity. A number of students are part of grassroots campaigns and are civically active. Giving 17-year-olds the right to vote in primaries helps foster civic virtue. Further, as a civics teacher for 25 years, it could easily help motivate students to be engaged if they could vote.
Expanding the franchise has been gradual in our country since the adoption of the U.S. Constitution in 1787. Our state hasn’t made any changes to Article 11 since 1984. What do the people of New Hampshire gain by passing this amendment? Voters.
(Dave Alcox is a civics teacher at Milford High School.)