Advocates suggest that setting a voting age at or below 16, would accomplish that goal, while also creating a more ethical democracy for those who believe that those most impacted by government decisions (those with the longest life expectancy[2]) are given at least an equal say in decision-making.
[3][4][5] Erring on the side of over-inclusion also checks the temptations of those with power (or simply status quo bias) to exclude capable voters.
"[6] If kids were given the same tests that adults whose brains are atypical must pass in order to vote, then many pre-adolescents would qualify as competent[3] (see also: ableism, neurodiversity, and Suffrage for Americans with disabilities).
Additionally, ballots cast by someone (ie kids) with little understanding might simply randomly allocate votes and have no impact on the outcome of the election.
[3] Further, law professor Vivian Hamilton argues that in light of findings from research in developmental psychology and cognitive and social neuroscience, governments can "no longer justify the electoral exclusion of mid-adolescents by claiming that they lack the relevant competencies.
"[3] John Wall argues that precisely because children and youth think differently than adults, that they would make unique contributions to decisions around issues with their fresh perspectives and useful abilities such as compassion for suffering and even great wisdom.
[3] Additionally, not every voter is expected to know about every issue, but the wisdom of the crowd from different expertise and life experiences is what contributes to a healthy and informed citizenry, including perspectives that are unique to those under 18.
[3] Additionally, while prior knowledge and experience can provide greater understanding, it can also lead to less informed decision-making by closing an otherwise open mind.
[14] John Wall argues that even if children chose to vote exactly as either their parents or their peers, it would not justify their disenfranchisement just as such behavior would not disqualify adults.
[17] A lot of development in that analytical part of the brain takes place between 14 and 16, which is why 16 year-olds are often given more societal privileges like being able to work jobs or drive a car that are more difficult than voting.
Scholars have found no negative effects from lowering the voting age below 18 in countries around the world, and in many places, positive ones like increased turnout and engagement.