In class we discussed the difference between electing judges and appointing them. One of the issues with electing judges is the need to campaign. Here are a couple of websites from judges running for office at the appellate level in Michigan. Note that the second one even has endorsement videos. What do you think?
http://www.kellyforcourtofappeals.com/
http://www.promotejudgemanderfield.com/
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
A voter at 16? Governor at 25? Really?
Austria just changed its laws and lowered the voting age from 18 to 16. See http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/austria-opens-the-polls-to-16yearolds-943706.html Why? Partly a move to attract more young people to the polls to maintain the "balance of the generations." But does a focus on sheer numbers outweigh a clear look at the voters themselves? Are 16 year olds even interested in voting? Willing to find out about the issues? Are they even going to be able to get to the polls, or will they be in school or have to wait for a ride from mom or dad?
Are we just pandering to an age group who's not even interested in the process?
Here in Hawai`i, we have another proposal for an age decrease: One of the ballot issues in next week's election is whether the age qualification for the office of governor and office of lieutenant governor should be reduced from thirty years of age to twenty-five years of age.
http://www.mauitime.com/Articles-i-2008-10-16-186208.112113_Constitutional_questions.html
The rationale for this seems to be the same as the lowering, in the 1970s, of the voting age from 21 to 18. The reasoning was that if 18 year olds could be be drafted, they should also be entitled to vote. Apparently this change was prompted in part by the fact that one can run for Congress at age 25. But as important as the right to vote is, or the right to run for one of the 435 members of Congress, are these really in the same realm as being Governor (we'll leave Lt. Gov. out of this)? The buck stops with the Governor. Any freshman year mistakes that a member of Congress makes, or a voter makes, will not have the same impact as those mistakes being made by the head of the Executive Branch. In my opinion, the job of Governor requires not just book smarts but life experience smarts, and keeping the minimum age at 30 will do more to ensure that we have someone with more of a balanced approach.
What do you think?
Are we just pandering to an age group who's not even interested in the process?
Here in Hawai`i, we have another proposal for an age decrease: One of the ballot issues in next week's election is whether the age qualification for the office of governor and office of lieutenant governor should be reduced from thirty years of age to twenty-five years of age.
http://www.mauitime.com/Articles-i-2008-10-16-186208.112113_Constitutional_questions.html
The rationale for this seems to be the same as the lowering, in the 1970s, of the voting age from 21 to 18. The reasoning was that if 18 year olds could be be drafted, they should also be entitled to vote. Apparently this change was prompted in part by the fact that one can run for Congress at age 25. But as important as the right to vote is, or the right to run for one of the 435 members of Congress, are these really in the same realm as being Governor (we'll leave Lt. Gov. out of this)? The buck stops with the Governor. Any freshman year mistakes that a member of Congress makes, or a voter makes, will not have the same impact as those mistakes being made by the head of the Executive Branch. In my opinion, the job of Governor requires not just book smarts but life experience smarts, and keeping the minimum age at 30 will do more to ensure that we have someone with more of a balanced approach.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
