Voting Blocks and Blockheads

The Boomer Generation–or those born in the USA from 1946 through 1964–represents the largest voting block in America.  Boomers, as described by Paul Begala in an Esquire article and regurgitated by Bill Keller in a recent OP ED in the New York Times, are “The Worst Generation.”  Begala went on to say, “The Baby Boomers are the most self-centered, self-seeking, self-interested, self-absorbed, self-indulgent, self-aggrandizing generation in American history.” That description may sound harsh, especially considering how America’s graying population has mellowed from its activist days nearly half a century ago. These days, for my Boomer compatriots, AARP discounts and timely Social Security payments are of more concern than EPA regulations or Chinese trade policies.

As a Boomer, I experienced the 1960’s first hand.  It was a turbulent decade that saw social and economic factors so melded that they became indistinguishable from one another. America was at war or at least was warring in Vietnam. A presidential assassination, drugs and the peace movement were a potent combination that helped spawn free love, campus uprisings and inner city riots. The Draft was in full swing; most of today’s youngsters could not fathom government requisitioning young men for a military mission on the other side of the world, any more than older generations understood the treatment of those soldiers upon their return to American soil. Many of my friends went to Vietnam; some did not come back. This chapter is often left out of Boomer history due in part to a cultural shift in some quarters that service to one’s country is a stigma instead of an honor.

In the 1960’s, New York State allowed spirits to be purchased and consumed at age 18.  In 1982, the State bumped the legal drinking age to 19, and finally in 1985 to 21. Nationally, the voting age was 21. Most late adolescents are more concerned about drinking than voting, so both appeared to be logical benchmarks.  As the Vietnam War raged, restless college students in the anti-war or anti-draft contingent mobilized and began a campaign to lower the national voting age to 18.  Their rallying cry was “Old enough to fight, old enough to vote.”  Oddly, individuals chanting the slogans were rarely the ones that went off to fight.

President Nixon may now be best remembered for opening relations with China (then commonly known as “Red China”), for “Watergate” and for taking the dollar off the gold standard. But on his watch as well, in 1971 he reluctantly witnessed passage of a constitutional amendment that gave voting rights to citizens at age 18. With that, the American political landscape changed forever because youngsters vote their own self-interest, as do we all. And youngsters today, who are being schooled in the premise that individual success can only be the result of greed or chicanery, tend to vote as a socially conscious collective. Those of us who are the parents or grandparents of young people between 18 and 21 years would be justified in surmising that their general political awareness is gleaned from Twitter messages routinely popping up on their hand-held devices.

The current political environment has spawned numerous disputes about one’s eligibility to vote.  I am one of the radicals who believes in a voter ID card or some other indisputable proof of citizenship, not just a driver’s license, which can easily be obtained by non-citizens in many states. If such a requirement eventually lead to some form of national identity card a host of other issues could also be remedied, from Medicare fraud to legal employment. National identity cards are not the end point of some dictatorial edict;  they are a common requirement in many countries in Europe and elsewhere in the world. Getting the proof needed to be able to vote in America is far easier than passing the citizenry test to become naturalized. College students overwhelming support the easy voting threshold, since only about half are able to pass the test given foreigners who aspire to become American citizens.

Of course, it is unfair to judge every young person between the ages of 18 and 21 according to whether they can pass the naturalization test or not. We are a democracy and in a democracy even the illiterate and ignorant can vote and their vote counts as much as a Nobel Laureate’s. It would also be an unwarranted assumption to say that all Boomers have a greater capacity to put the best person in office. Politics in America seems to have more in common with voting for an American Idol contestant than a presidential candidate; often a candidate’s capability is overshadowed by perceived culpability.

Instead of focusing on our nation’s current financial and economic woes, “social justice” by the collective has become a resounding political theme. Social justice is a wonderful phrase that has been co-opted to serve as an excuse for a member of any ethnic, religious, or racial group to claim victimization. As an example, in some minority groups more than 50% of those between 18 and 21 years old are unemployed; coincidentally, the same percentage never finished high school.  These victims of “social injustice,” both nationally and internationally, demand to be properly compensated for their misfortune by those who–to their way of thinking–are responsible for depriving them of a high paying job or a large estate.

Those who believe that curing every real or imagined social injustice will lead a country to prosperity have it exactly backwards. Only a strong nation with positive fiscal policies and a strong economy has the luxury or the will to correct social injustice. Watching the actions and listening to the grievances of the young Occupy Wall Street protesters makes me an advocate of repealing the 26th Amendment.

Tags: Teenage vote, Youth vote