|
No edit summary
|
No edit summary
|
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
In the second he has produced a [[website]] entitled "Votes for Adults" in which he claims to dismiss comprehensively the arguments put forward in support of a reduction of the [[voting age]] to 16. This is in opposition to the [[Votes at 16]] campaign, supported by a broad coalition of youth charities and other organisations, and contains Cowley's thoughts as to the complete and total illogicality of such a change and how it fundamentally differs from all previously proposed extensions of the franchise. Since the adverse report of the [[Electoral Commission (UK)|Electoral Commission]] towards a reduction in the [[voting age]] in the near future, Cowley's maintenance of the website has ceased as a result of his success. In producing a platform for his arguments he has done a service to the cause of democracy by showcasing the case for maintaining the status quo: a cause which, by its very nature, does not normally benefit from positive advocation. |
In the second he has produced a [[website]] entitled "Votes for Adults" in which he claims to dismiss comprehensively the arguments put forward in support of a reduction of the [[voting age]] to 16. This is in opposition to the [[Votes at 16]] campaign, supported by a broad coalition of youth charities and other organisations, and contains Cowley's thoughts as to the complete and total illogicality of such a change and how it fundamentally differs from all previously proposed extensions of the franchise. Since the adverse report of the [[Electoral Commission (UK)|Electoral Commission]] towards a reduction in the [[voting age]] in the near future, Cowley's maintenance of the website has ceased as a result of his success. In producing a platform for his arguments he has done a service to the cause of democracy by showcasing the case for maintaining the status quo: a cause which, by its very nature, does not normally benefit from positive advocation. |
||
==Links== |
|||
*[http://www.revolts.co.uk Revolts] |
|||
*[http://www.votesforadults.typepad.com Votes for Adults] |
|||
Philip Cowley is a British political scientist and professor at the University of Nottingham in the United Kingdom.
He is notable for two things: one the analysis of Parliamentary voting behaviour in the UK House of Commons and House of Lords, and the other his opposition to a lowering of the UK voting age below 18.
In the first he is involved in the continuous production of highly detailed and closely analysed briefing papers and reports of divisions in the UK Parliament, with eye-witness accounts of whipping practices in action, counts and comparisons of rebellious voting by Parliamentarians and discussion of how such activity impacts on its politcal context. He co-ordinates this work through the maintenance of a website which includes a forum. He is assisted in this work by his colleagues Mark Stuart, also of the University of Nottingham, and Lord Norton of the University of Hull. They are funded by the Economic and Social Research Council and through previous research by their respective universities and the Leverhulme Trust. The project is not affiliated to any political party, nor does it receive funding from any other source.
In the second he has produced a website entitled "Votes for Adults" in which he claims to dismiss comprehensively the arguments put forward in support of a reduction of the voting age to 16. This is in opposition to the Votes at 16 campaign, supported by a broad coalition of youth charities and other organisations, and contains Cowley's thoughts as to the complete and total illogicality of such a change and how it fundamentally differs from all previously proposed extensions of the franchise. Since the adverse report of the Electoral Commission towards a reduction in the voting age in the near future, Cowley's maintenance of the website has ceased as a result of his success. In producing a platform for his arguments he has done a service to the cause of democracy by showcasing the case for maintaining the status quo: a cause which, by its very nature, does not normally benefit from positive advocation.
