OpenCampaign

Democracy

Youth voting age (Vote 16)

Culver City has debated whether 16- and 17-year-olds should be allowed to vote in local elections. Student advocates argue that local decisions on schools, gun control, and the environment directly affect them and that California’s required high-school government classes leave them as prepared as many adults.

Should Culver City allow 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in local elections?

How OpenCampaign quiz-takers stand on this issue

No quiz question covers this exact issue — showing responses to the closest one, Civil Liberties and Civil Rights.

32% call it a high-priority issue (rating it 7+ out of 10).

  1. Liberal20%
  2. Lean liberal28%
  3. Moderate26%
  4. Lean conservative14%
  5. Conservative12%

Where do you stand?

Should Culver City allow 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in local elections?

How important is this to you?

Sources

Culver Crescent / student advocates — https://www.culvercrescent.com/vote-16-what-culver-city-voters-should-know
16- and 17-year-olds in Culver City argued that local issues are impactful enough in their lives to deserve a voice, with decisions related to schools, gun control, and the environment highlighted by student advocates.
Positions on this issue  ·  liberal → conservative
  1. Yes, fully extend local voting rights to 16- and 17-year-olds immediately
  2. Pilot youth voting in school-board or advisory races first, then expand
  3. Undecided or need more local study before changing the voting age
  4. Keep the voting age at 18; civic education is enough without ballots
  5. Oppose any lowering of the voting age; only adults should decide local policy

State redistricting and Culver City representation

A Culver City PAC has debated California’s independent redistricting commission. Critics warn that scrapping the commission for legislatively drawn maps could let Sacramento carve up cities including Culver City and control congressional representation affecting the city.

Should California keep its independent redistricting commission rather than return map-drawing to the legislature?

How OpenCampaign quiz-takers stand on this issue

No quiz question covers this exact issue — showing responses to the closest one, Civil Liberties and Civil Rights.

32% call it a high-priority issue (rating it 7+ out of 10).

  1. Liberal20%
  2. Lean liberal28%
  3. Moderate26%
  4. Lean conservative14%
  5. Conservative12%

Where do you stand?

Should California keep its independent redistricting commission rather than return map-drawing to the legislature?

How important is this to you?

Sources

Protect Culver City PAC — https://protectculvercity.org
Our issue is, ff California scraps its redistricting commission, and resorts to districts drawn by Sacramento, then Sacramento will now be in charge of our Congressional delegation. It carves up cities (including Culver City) into
Positions on this issue  ·  liberal → conservative
  1. Strengthen independent commissions and add stronger anti-gerrymandering rules
  2. Keep the independent redistricting commission as the primary map-drawer
  3. Undecided; evaluate commission performance before any structural change
  4. Allow more elected-legislator input while retaining some independent review
  5. Return full redistricting power to the state legislature and elected officials