Lowering the voting age to 1 is not a serious or supported proposal in any research or political debate. The current serious discussions focus on lowering the voting age to 16, which is argued as developmentally appropriate and beneficial for democratic participation. Here are the main reasons why lower voting ages such as 16 are considered:
- At age 16, individuals have developed sufficient "cold cognition" skills required for informed and thoughtful voting decisions, comparable to adults.
- Lowering the voting age to 16 can increase voter turnout and help young people develop a lifelong habit of voting because they participate earlier when still in school and under civic education.
- Youth have responsibilities, contribute to society, and are subject to laws and consequences, so they deserve political representation and a voice in laws affecting them.
- Lower voting ages would make youth interests more visible in politics, encouraging politicians to address their concerns on education, environment, and social issues, leading to stronger and more inclusive democracies.
However, there is no credible advocacy or rationale for voting at age 1, as children at that age lack any cognitive ability or awareness to make voting decisions. In summary, discussions about lowering the voting age focus on ages like 16 for valid developmental and civic reasons, but lowering it to 1 is not grounded in any serious argument or evidence. Voting requires a minimum level of maturity and understanding that infants do not possess. Thus, the voting age should not be lowered to 1. If you want, information on the arguments for lowering the voting age to 16 can be provided in detail.