Unfortunately, an Unconstitutional Proposal

Lamentably, Representative Savage's bill will most likely be challenged by the Supreme Court and deemed unconstitutional as it is now written. His proposal would allow high school students to sit on local Boards of Education as voting members. Although I agree that it is important to give students a say in how their school is run, I believe that this is the purpose of Student Governments within schools. Also, Amendment 26 of the US Constitution sets the legal voting age at 18, and most high school students are not 18 years old. The only way for the Honorable Representative's bill to be deemed constitutional and passed would be to add a stipulation that only students who are age 18 could sit on a local board. Although some people would say that this scenario would be better than no representation at all, I believe that such a limitation would defeat the purpose of Mr. Savage's bill. If only seniors are allowed to sit on the Board, then the needs and ideas of only one-fourth of the actual student body will be represented. This could instill tension between the senior class and younger classes, creating an environment less conducive to effective education than before. I like the Representative's idea, but unfortunately it is not practical without another amendment to the Constitution regarding the legal voting age.

There are also a few other problems with the Representative's proposal. A decision would have to be made regarding the number of students who could sit on the Board of Education in a given town. Would it be proportional to the number of elected members? Would the bill ensure that the elected members retain the majority, and thus the ability to override the less experienced student members? And, what about towns with multiple high schools? How would the available student seats be divided among the multiple schools? With all due respect, I think that Mr. Savage has stumbled upon an issue that is much more complicated that he realizes. Even if the bill were considered constitutional as it now reads, I would need to see a more defined structure and clearer plans for resolving possible issues that could arise before I could put my name to it.