by Jim McCarthy

Governor Glenn Youngkin had an opportunity to withdraw his big-footed amendment to a bill that would have moved the election date of the Loudoun County School Board from 2022 to 2023 and vacate the nine board seats for a new election. The original bill sought only to stagger the terms of five of the seats. Now, rejected by vote of Democrats in the senate, the Governor has the choice of vetoing the original bill or signing it.

Whichever choice is made, it is not likely to diminish the feral fever that has enveloped school board meetings nor will it appease the bloodlust outrage stoked during the campaign.

Passage of the proposed amendment rested, in part, upon the Dillon Rule, a judicial doctrine from the 1800s which provides that a local jurisdiction may exercise only what authority is conferred by the parent state. This principle, in turn, is mirrored by another dominant value that has guided educational policy for centuries called in loco parentis (ILP) or in place of the parent. Historically, as population grew and shifted from agrarian settings to urban and suburban ones with enhanced employment opportunities, the education of youth was entrusted to a public school system with professional personnel.

While withdrawal of the amendment might have demonstrated statesmanship, a quality not yet overtly evidenced in the new administration, there is an elegant and attractive solution that would serve the long-term interests of public education in the Commonwealth: a legislative measure to authorize counties to establish the voting age in non-federal state and local elections at not lower than twelve years of age.

This derogation of the Dillon Rule is not as audacious as it may first appear. Recall that one of the governor’s sons attempted to vote in the November 2020 election on two occasions. Thus, the chief of state has had personal experience with the exuberance of youth for participation in the voting franchise.

Enfranchisement of a cohort of citizens who are the front-line consumers and customers of public education would create a voice and channel to shape the debates about CRT, DEI, school books and related issues that presently confound those who can vote. ILP is essentially an exclusionary value that assumes youth are not capable of determining what is in their own best interests. That assumption, in contemporary America, may not be as rigid or firm as was once believed.

In addition, the current architecture and sophistication of local jurisdictions has matured well beyond the fears and reservations inherent in the Dillon Rule with respect to their competence and fidelity to their residents and dedication to service. Such progress has received recognition nationally with suffrage for women and eighteen-year-olds and the direct election of US Senators, for example, once unthinkable, now practice.

In the Commonwealth, a 12-year-old may be employed in limited circumstances and be a page in the General Assembly. A 14-year-old youth can be tried in court as an adult or be employed for wages. A 16-year-old qualifies for driving and marriage licenses as well as emancipation. A 12-year-old will have experienced about eight years of mandated education, exposed to numerous teachers and administrators as well as text and school books. These experiences are indicators of potential and they are probably no less than the sum of that brought to the ballot box by presently enfranchised voters, a portion of whom are not parents of school agers. Literacy tests are no longer required.

While there are some who persist in the belief that the brains of youth are not fully formed to be able to exercise the responsibility for their own lives much less vote in elections, that canard ignores the conspiracy utterances of far too many elected officials and candidates presently on the scene. Psychological litmus tests for office have not been established nor for voting.

Disenfranchisement of youth from participation in voting is primarily nostalgic and not rationally parsed. The nation’s traditional policy for public education acknowledges that public education is to be free, taught by trained professionals, to function in the creation of an informed citizenry capable of engaging in productive employment and enhancing its social mobility.

The governor has an opportunity to advance democracy and public education in a single leap and reflect the personal values he has occasionally postulated, converting a minor loss into a major accomplishment.

Jim McCarthy is a retired New York City attorney now living in Virginia.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

22 responses to “School Daze”

  1. Is this a Jonathan Swift-like “A Modest Proposal,” or are you serious?

    “A Modest Proposal For preventing the Children of Poor People From being a Burthen to Their Parents or Country, and For making them Beneficial to the Publick” suggested that the impoverished Irish might sell their children as food to rich gentlemen and ladies.

    “A young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout.”

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      I can only assume he is one more Democrat who sees the wave coming in November, and needs to change the rules yet again to try to eke out a win. Other than that, this is just freaking nuts.

      1. James McCarthy Avatar
        James McCarthy

        Strategically incorrect as the newly enfranchised will surely in the vast majority vote for Republicans.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          And screw themselves.

    2. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      Not at all embarrassed by the comparison. Swift, of course, was spoofing a truth concerning the treatment of the Irish by the colonialists of England. I have yet to read or hear of any who control the educational destiny of children suggesting that they be consulted about their education. How is it they have been ignored as grown ups make fools of themselves in the name of protecting youth?

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        “I have yet to read or hear of any who control the educational destiny of children suggesting that they be consulted about their education.”

        Argument form ignorance for 1000 Alec.

        I don’t think you’ve asked anyone outside of yourself that question. Teachers often engage their students on what they would like to learn. There is also this thing called electives, where the student gets to decide what course out of graduation required classes they’d like to take (shop, chorus, art, etc…).

  2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    Fascinating argument. It was once unheard of to suggest lowering the voting age from 21 to 18. But it happened.

    Why is 18 years old any more sacrosanct? Lowering it to 12 years old may be going too far, but going below 18 is not unheard of. The voting age in Brazil has been 16 for many years. In Germany, 16-year olds can vote in municipal elections and may very well get the authority this year to vote in all elections. In Austria, 16-year olds can vote , as they can in Scotland. The world has not fallen apart in any of those countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_age

    1. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
      f/k/a_tmtfairfax

      How do you rationalize voting at even 16 when the law prohibits life sentences without parole for juveniles because their brain development is such that their judgment is not sufficiently developed to be held fully accountable for even heinous crimes? No one in the United States can marry based on his/her own consent until age 18. We generally don’t allow a minor to bind herself/himself to a contract. The drinking age is 21. States have generally raised the age to purchase tobacco to 21.

      American law clearly assumes that children below the age of 18 don’t have the sound judgment to make key decisions about their own lives. Making an exception for voting simply makes no sense.

      I thought McCarthy’s piece was intended as satire. If so, it’s extremely well done. He had me going for a while.

      1. James McCarthy Avatar
        James McCarthy

        Getting folks going was an objective. Child psychologists generally agree that at the age of seven right and wrong can be distinguished. Whatever limitations for consent to marry exist, it is available to youth at age 16. Fourteen qualifies for felony prosecution. The assertion about American law applicable to folks less than 18 is groundless. The criteria offered would disenfranchise youth from driving, working (including in the General Assembly), among a few.

        In fact, the rationale you offer is precisely the nostalgic barriers challenged.

    2. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Not so sure it was satire. Hmmm. Dick’s support is again making me suspect the real goal is one more effort to massively expand the electorate to game future elections. If you just want to ensure middle and high school students have some input on educational policy, plenty of other ways to do that (and who says they are not?)

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        I don’t necessarily support it, although I know one kid who was certainly mature enough at age 16 to vote and one who will be when he turns 16 in the fall. Not that they are all that politically involved.

        I had not really thought about this issue until this article and then was struck by the immediate dismissal of the idea by you and Jim. So, I did a little internet research and was surprised to learn that several developed countries have lowered the voting age. Therefore, the rhetorical question: wjy 18? One answer would be because most kids are under their parent’s care until they finish high school at the average age of 18 and one needs to draw a line somewhere and that seems to be a logical place to draw it.

        1. James McCarthy Avatar
          James McCarthy

          SCOTUS functionally eliminated in loco parentis in higher education decades ago. A significant cohort of first year collegians are still in their teens. The premise and objective of public education is an informed citizenry. A companion article in BR today asserts children belong to parents like chattel. Few would ascribe to that value. There is no pain to granting suffrage (other than that such is a leftie conspiracy) to youth. We should try it because we might like it.

        2. Michael Fruitman Avatar
          Michael Fruitman

          Mr. Sizemore appears to be the only reader who came to this with an open mind. I know Mr. McCarthy, and this is not satire. I don’t agree with lowering the age to 12, but 16 might make sense.

          Further, as far as developing brains are concerned, 25 is when real adult judgment comes into play (check the science), and that is obviously too old to grant the vote.

        3. Lefty665 Avatar

          “I know one kid who was certainly mature enough at age 16 to vote”

          And I know some with another 60 years added to that who have never been mature enough to vote and have now segued straight into soft headed dementia. They can’t be trusted to drive either.

      2. James McCarthy Avatar
        James McCarthy

        Nostalgia and paranoia fogs perception. Awaiting proposals by adults to create input on educational policy for school agers. Surely, the Governor is anxious to hear your proposals.

  3. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    Fascinating argument. It was once unheard of to suggest lowering the voting age from 21 to 18. But it happened.

    Why is 18 years old any more sacrosanct? Lowering it to 12 years old may be going too far, but going below 18 is not unheard of. The voting age in Brazil has been 16 for many years. In Germany, 16-year olds can vote in municipal elections and may very well get the authority this year to vote in all elections. In Austria, 16-year olds can vote , as they can in Scotland. The world has not fallen apart in any of those countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_age

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Lower the voting age to 16, or 12 for pregnant persons (see? I’m hip) since they have the extra burden of failed sex education.

    Or, let HS SGA presidents have a seat on the board.

    1. Lefty665 Avatar

      … but they have completed sex training which they may not have considered a burden, until they have to carry it for 9 months and care for it for a dozen years.

      Having the generational cycle time shorter than the time to maturity cycle is a problem.

      SGA presidents would likely be no change from what (hip?) is on the board now.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Hip. After abortion is outlawed even in cases of rape and incest, the next step is lawfully forced impregnating by Republican men.. think Jeffers.

  5. As satire I give it a B+

  6. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    “There are two kinds of humor. One kind that makes us chuckle about our foibles and our shared humanity — like what Garrison Keillor does. The other kind holds people up to public contempt and ridicule — that’s what I do. Satire is traditionally the weapon of the powerless against the powerful. I only aim at the powerful. When satire is aimed at the powerless, it is not only cruel — it’s vulgar. ” ― Molly Ivins

  7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    If twelve year old Susie can be forced to have Uncle Fred’s baby in Texas… surely she can vote, eh…??

Leave a Reply