Recent Comments

ACR wrote:
Gov. Rell Vetoes Seven Bills: “>>Spoke to people from Subway …”
christine wrote:
Gov. Rell Vetoes Seven Bills: “Thanks Martha. I know he's pus…”
Johnny wrote:
Gov. Rell Vetoes Seven Bills: “Its nice to see that Rell has …”
Martha H. wrote:
Gov. Rell Vetoes Seven Bills: “Christine, Don't know all of …”

Categories

  • CT Elections 2006
    • Closure on 2006 Democratic Primary
    • Daily Kos Poll Finds Many in CT Would Change Vote
    • Edited: Waxing Nostalgic
  • Cartoons
    • Rell Kills Bill
    • Treading Water Is Getting Tougher In Connecticut
    • Looks Like It's Been Off For A While. . .
  • Congress
    • Dodd Praised For Tobacco Legislation
    • Dodd Unveils Public Option, Says It Lowers Price Tag
    • Joe: No Go On 'Public Option'
  • Corporate Watch
    • Banks Committee Begins With Little Fanfare
      AIG Executive Answers Few Questions
    • AIG Executive To Testify Thursday
    • Lawmakers Frustrated By AIG 'Compliance'
  • Courts
    • Senor Pancho's Owner Pleads Guilty
    • 'If You Work Hard You Can Succeed In America'
    • Supreme Court Overturns City on Ricci
  • Education
    • Programs Scaled Back Without Budget In Place
    • A Year Later, Still Waiting For Education Ruling
    • Students Lobby For Opportunity To Sit On School Board
  • Election 2008
    • With Obama, De'Vonna Solemnly Swears
    • Hairdresser Scores Ticket To History
    • Connecticut Dems Vent Against Lieberman
  • Election 2010
    • Scully's Departure From Amann Campaign
      Leaves More Questions Than Answers
    • State Elections Watchdog To Retire
    • Q-Poll: Dodd Shows Gains, Simmons Still Strong
  • Environment
    • Developer Aims High As He Waits For
      Rell To Sign Green Tax Credit Bill
    • Dairy Farmers Celebrate Legislative Victory
    • Bill Would Ban Lions, Bears, and Chimps
  • General News
    • Foiled Again! Polka Bill Dies During Legislative Session
    • Next for news?
      Introducing the Valley Independent Sentinel
    • State Won't Charge Cromwell Lawmaker
  • Health Care
    • Dodd Praised For Tobacco Legislation
    • Dodd Unveils Public Option, Says It Lowers Price Tag
    • HIV/AIDS Funding At Risk?
  • Iraq at Home
    • West Hartford Movie Night
    • Five Years of War
    • Hartford Passes Anti-War Resolution...5 Years Too Late?
  • Labor
    • Paid Sick Days Bill Passes House
    • Nursing Home Strike Canceled
    • Senate Gives Final Passage To Union Deal
  • Legal
    • Blumenthal Sides With Catholic Church
    • Governor Signs 'Madoff' Bill
    • Bill Seeks To Protect Consumers From Scams
  • Local Politics
    • A Garden Grows. Do The Children?
    • Municipal Leaders Request Meeting
      With State Budget Negotiators
    • Marshal Forced To Lower Fees In New Haven
  • Media Matters
    • JRC Boss Hangs Up Hatchet
    • A Sentinel Remembered--& Welcomed
    • Next for news?
      Introducing the Valley Independent Sentinel
  • News Links
    • State Government Home Page
  • Opinion
    • OP-ED: SustiNet Awaits Action In The Senate
    • Op-Ed: Smoking Ban Would Cost State
    • OP-ED: Time to Get Tough On Credit Card Companies
  • State Capitol
    • Taking A Break From The Budget
    • Gov. Rell Vetoes Seven Bills
    • HIV/AIDS Funding At Risk?
  • Transportation
    • New Rail Cars Fail First Test, Officials Not Worried
    • 40 Percent Bus 'Tax' Blasted
    • Debate On Open Containers Stalls In House

17 Year Old Voting Rights Revisited

by Christine Stuart | February 29, 2008 12:59 PM
Posted to State Capitol

Christine Stuart photo

High school students from three schools came to the Legislative Office Building Friday to speak in support of a constitutional amendment that would give 17 year olds the right to vote in a primary, if they turn 18 before the general election.

Last year the House passed the measure with 105 votes, but it was 9 votes short of the supermajority needed to pass a constitutional amendment.
Click herefor a reminder of the games played during last year’s House vote. The Senate never took up the measure because if it had and passed it with a simple majority, it would have needed to pass both the House and the Senate two years in a row before it went to the public for a vote, Rep. James Spallone, D-Essex, said.

Spallone said Friday that this year he’s confident both chambers will pass it with the requisite supermajority and it can appear on the ballot in November 2009.

Christine Stuart photo

“I do not see this as an issue between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party,” Connor Toole, a 17 year-old student from Stonington High School, said. “Allowing 17 year-olds, who will be 18 by the time of the general election, to vote in primaries is an issue of common sense.” He said young voters often get labeled with a liberal label. “Why not give them a chance to say who they will vote for,” Toole said.

The elephant in the room is the Republican Party’s unstated opposition to the measure, Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz, said Friday. She said the Republican Party believes the “Democratic party would benefit more,” from an influx of young liberal voters, when that’s not the case.

John Santoro, of Notre Dame High School in West Haven, said that he’s testified in favor of the amendment for three years in a row. When he started, 6 states had passed legislation allowing 17 year olds to participate in primaries and caucuses. Now there are 18, and Santoro hopes Connecticut will be number 19.

If 17 year olds were able to vote in a primary today, Bysiewicz estimates that 10,000 new voters would register to vote.

The proposed constitutional amendment to allow 17 year olds the right to vote in a primary received a public hearing Friday.

Comments (2)

Posted by: spazeboy | February 29, 2008 3:37 PM

She said the Republican Party believes the "Democratic party would benefit more," from an influx of young liberal voters, when that's not the case.

No kidding. This is about voting in the primary. If one-hundred 17-year-olds are Democrats today and they're going to vote that way in the general election after they turn 18, how does it hurt the Republicans if they have a say in who the Democratic nominee is?

I am critical of people who don't vote in primaries, but then bitch about the choices we have come November. By not allowing some general election voters to vote in the primary (on the basis of their age, not their party affiliation or lack thereof), we're effectively robbing them of a say in what options they'll have in November.

Posted by: Headless Horseman | February 29, 2008 3:57 PM

Fascinating. The Democrats have 107 members and yet Young Democrats blame the GOP for killing it. Why not ask why they couldn't get 76 of their fellow Democrats to support their young partisans?

Incidentally, I am totally in favor of allowing 17 year olds to vote in primaries preceding elections they will be 18 for.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)