http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE74J3C820110520?irpc... Federal level is still 18. This is interesting though, a lot of data can be gathered in the wake of the transition.
THERE SHOULD BE NO TEST TO VOTE! A test would introduce a very viable method for biasing elections toward... ahhh I'll say segregationist politics. Areas that have underfunded educational systems with lots of non-native english speakers would face increasing disenfranchisement. If you are a citizen of what ever age is chosen you have the right to vote, this should be the rule with no exceptions. White, rich districs with good educational systems would be overrepresented. Prisoners should have the right to vote. As it currently stands States like New York count prisoners as living in the areas the are imprisoned in but have no vote. This means that these areas get disproportionate electoral representation, giving the citizens in these areas more power than other citizens then your average urban resident. Give all prisoners the vote in the area they resided in before they were arrested and you would encourage an otherwise disenfranchised population with a lot of time to study policy issues to become involved and interested in civic life. The idea of a test seems a lot like a poll tax, I find it offensive.
This much is probably true, but it would also probably be true even in the case of just requiring a civics class. If there were a test, maybe the most distasteful thing would be the special interest groups rounding up kids and coaching them for early voter status. Yes, maybe not a test. At first I had the notion of a small number of interested kids getting motivated to be involved in voting. -I didn't consider much about how it would be gamed. Maybe just move the age to 16. The prisoner issue is disgusting. If I remember correctly, I think Michigan does the same thing. I don't think a conviction should strip you of your right to vote. As you point out, that can be gamed in a way that disenfranchises criminals and non-criminals.
I think the argument would have been a bit more effective if he had left Bush's re-election out. It needn't be a political issue, and making it one won't help the cause. (As an aside, that was one of my biggest problems with Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth". -I think he should have left the 2000 election out of the movie, because in some minds, it colored the issue as political.) Also, the generalization about "millions of wives in conservative parts of the country" is simply ignorant. Aside from those problems, he makes an effective case. I am for giving some minor's the right to vote.