[AnimalMuppet]

And maybe elders should be excluded for the same reason!

That is: Why do we exclude people under 18 from voting? Because we think they don't have the mental tools to understand policy well enough to make an informed decision. Well, if seniors don't have the mental tools anymore, should they be allowed to vote?

And this is even stronger with holding office. You can vote at 18, but you can't be a representative until 25, or a senator until 35. Why? Because you need to be old enough to (hopefully) have some judgment. Well, what if you're too old to have judgment?

So, yeah, excluding seniors from office would in fact be reasonable. Or at least requiring an annual mental competency test.

Unfortunately, we'll never get it without a state-driven constitutional convention, because those with the most power in Congress are highly correlated with those with the highest age.

[bombcar]

Remember that much of our current system has been a slow increase of the "popular" vote, from landholders to men to adults. At some point it'll go to "everyone above the age of 0" but let's not ignore that kids will at first vote the way their parents do, and then vote the exact opposite for awhile.

[poulsbohemian]

I don't think we need to assume that actual children will someday vote. It's not punitive to say that we should have some age threshold into adulthood and its responsibilities. There are so many facets of society that necessitate some degree of protection of young people that it isn't unfair or unrealistic to also create a barrier around their full participation in our Democratic society.