right to vote, after all. Scott, you realize you're all but asking for MIT students involved in the whole "undergrad dining" fiasco to try to rope you into it? Anyway, if I may play devil's advocate for a moment: But why isn't the driver's-ed test or the citizenship test given to immigrants similarly elitist? Well, an "untrained voter" isn't by itself a terrible thing; a single person is just too unlikely to affect the outcome of an election. A single untrained driver, on the other hand, can directly cause potentially tens of injuries and deaths. As for citizenship: we certainly can't let everyone into the country who wants to be let in; we just don't have the resources! And asking someone who wants the privileges of being an American to know some basic facts about the country is at least as good a dividing line as any other. In both those cases, there's very good justification for not having a 0-1 law; for child voting, there's not. "Over a certain age or has passed a test" is silly. If we're going to acknowledge that some people under the age of 18 are mature enough to vote reasonably, then we should admit along with it that some people over the age of 18 aren't . Mary: I, too, would not want to see the world (or any part of it) run by student council members. Precisely because they have no real responsibilities, there's nothing for student councils to do except to