Amendment XXVI—Voting Age Lowered to Eighteen—Ratified On 23 March 1971
Read Time:3 Minute, 5 Second
Most people probably think of this amendment as being a product of the 1960’s, but the first proposal to lower the voting age to eighteen was made in 1941 by Senator Harvey Kilgore (D-WV). Although the idea was well received, being supported by First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, nothing was done. In 1943, Kentucky, and in 1955 Georgia, passed state bills to go to eighteen. President Eisenhower endorsed the move in his 1954 State of the Union address, and with the onset of the Vietnam War, Congress and the states saw public opinion turning in favor of the move.
The war’s influence rested on the idea the anyone old enough to be drafted ought to be able to vote. A common slogan of the time was “Old enough to fight, old enough to vote”, which actually dated back to the lowering of the draft age from 21 to 18 at the onset of World War II. Throughout the 1960’s several studies on voting reinforced the concept, and when Senator Ted Kennedy proposed an amendment to the 1965 Voting Rights Act to make 18 the national voting age, Richard Nixon signed the extension on 22 June 1970.
Two states, Texas and Oregon, filed suit in objection, and in October of 1970*, the case Oregon v. Mitchell came before the U.S. Supreme Court. In the December ruling, it was decided that, while states could set an age of 21 for state and local elections, they were required to follow the Voting Rights Act for federal races. This resulted in states that had not lowered the age internally to keep separate voter lists for local and federal elections. The effort this required helped break down opposition to the subsequent amendment.
There were further objections, of course. One objection was that young people had fewer responsibilities than in the past and were, therefore, less capable of making sound decisions. Columnist James Kilpatrick considered the amendment of the Voting Rights Act and the dual voter rolls to be a form of coercion of the states**. Polls showed that the older people were, the less they approved of the measure. A Gallup Poll showed these figures: 50 & over: 52%; 30-49: 57%; 21-29: 73% and 18-20: 84%.***
The wording of the Twenty-sixth is similar to that of the Fifteenth and the Nineteenth, with the word “age” being the qualifying criterion and the specification of that age as eighteen. The amendment simply declares that,
“The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.”
The Twenty-sixth Amendment holds the record for the fastest ratification of any Constitutional amendment: 100 days, or 3 months and 8 days****.
Of course, the primary effect of the Twenty-sixth Amendment was to add nearly 18.5 million people to the ranks of eligible voters. Since the Nineteenth Amendment gave just over 28 million women full suffrage, this is the second largest single increase in potential voters in the history of the country.
*At this time, Kentucky, Georgia, Alaska, and Hawaii had lowered their voting ages for state and local elections to 18.
** Kilpatrick, James J., “The States are being Extorted into Ratifying the Twenty-sixth Amendment”, in Amendment XXVI Lowering the Voting Age, ed. Engdahl, Sylvia (New York: Greenhaven Press, 2010), 123-127.
***Gallup, George, “The Majority of Americans Favor the Twenty-sixth Amendment”, ibid, 128-130
****By contrast, the Twenty-seventh Amendment took 202 years, 7 months and 10 days to ratify.
Next – Epilogue: Where We Are and What To Do
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
The most hard to ignore argument was strengthened during the Vietnam war . The feeling that a generation had no choice but to be cannon fodder for a generation that thought WWII and Korea were the best times ever and wanted to re-live them vicariously. I can’t tell you how many times I heard “There’s a war on!” in excited tones.
The idea that the government could send you into the jaws of death but wouldn’t let you have any participation in such decisions is sort of compelling, but of course, the voting record of young people shows it was, like much high political purpose, too optimistic.
Sub for comments.