The traditional argument for lowering the voting age to 16 is
that it's an anomaly: you can have sex legally, pay tax and go
to war, but you can't partake in a little democracy. But,
fundamentally, the debate hinges on whether or not the vote at
16 would improve political participation. The figures show
conclusively that the younger you are, the less likely you are
to vote. At the last election, for instance, national turnout
was 59%, but among 18-24 year olds it was just 39%. Professor
Charles Pattie of Sheffield University, an expert in voting
patterns, says that lowering the voting age would increase the
proportion of people who don't vote. Turnout could dip below
50%, threatening the legitimacy of any government. This could
have the perverse effect of decreasing representation, he
argues. "If a substantial cohort never votes, the risk is that
the parties stop trying to attract them. In America, where
turnout is lower, the Republicans and Democrats don't focus on
social policies to help the poorest, they f