Legislature removes 16-17 year olds’ right to marry, moves towards giving them right to vote

By Guy Page

When it comes to legal rights for teenagers, the Vermont Legislature giveth and the Vermont Legislature taketh away.

On Tuesday, the Vermont Legislature passed H.148, prohibiting 16 and 17 year olds the right to marry. Current law allows marriage with parental permission, but the bill passed Tuesday would ban it outright. Supporters say teenagers who marry are more likely to divorce and suffer from spousal abuse. 

On Thursday, the Vermont House voted 103-33 (with 13 absent) to approve the Town of Brattleboro charter change allowing 16 and 17-year-olds to vote in local elections. H386 now goes to the Senate. If successful there, it faces a likely veto by Gov. Phil Scott, who vetoed a similar bill several years ago and said Wednesday he hasn’t changed his mind. 

A rollcall on H386 shows that the House vote on teenage voting followed a party line, more or less, with Democrats and Progressives in favor and almost all Republicans either in opposition or absent.

Yes Votes:

Roberts of Halifax

Andrews of Westford

Andriano of Orwell

Anthony of Barre City

Arrison of Weathersfield

Arsenault of Williston

Austin of Colchester

Bartholomew of Hartland

Beck of St. Johnsbury

Berbeco of Winooski

Birong of Vergennes

Black of Essex

Bluemle of Burlington

Bongartz of Manchester

Bos-Lun of Westminster

Boyden of Cambridge

Brady of Williston

Brown of Richmond

Brownell of Pownal

Brumsted of Shelburne

Burke of Brattleboro

Burrows of West Windsor

Campbell of St. Johnsbury

Carp   er of Hyde Park

Carroll of Bennington

Casey of Montpelier

Chapin of East Montpelier

Chase of Chester

Chase of Colchester

Chesnut-Tangerman of Middletown Springs

Christie of Hartford

Cina of Burlington

Coffey of Guilford

Cole of Hartford

Conlon of Cornwall

Corcoran of Bennington

Demrow of Corinth

Dodge of Essex

Dolan of Essex Junction

Durfee of Shaftsbury

Elder of Starksboro

Emmons of Springfield

Farlice-Rubio of Barnet

Garofano of Essex

Goldman of Rockingham

Graning of Jericho

Headrick of Burlington

Holcombe of Norwich

Hooper of Burlington

Hooper of Randolph

Houghton of Essex Junction

Howard of Rutland City

James of Manchester

Jerome of Brandon

Kornheiser of Brattleboro

LaBounty of Lyndon

Lalley of Shelburne

LaLonde of South Burlington

LaMont of Morristown

Lanpher of Vergennes

Leavitt of Grand Isle

Logan of Burlington

Long of Newfane

Masland of Thetford

McCann of Montpelier

McCarthy of St. Albans City

McGill of Bridport

Minier of South Burlington

Morris of Springfield

Mrowicki of Putney

Mulvaney-Stanak of Burlington

Nicoll of Ludlow

Notte of Rutland City

Noyes of Wolcott

Nug    of South Burlington

O’Brien of Tunbridge

Ode of Burlington

Pajala of Londonderry

Patt of Worcester

Pearl of Danville

Pouech of Hinesburg

Priestley of Bradford

Rachelson of Burlington

Rice of Dorset

Satcowitz of Randolph

Scheu of Middlebury

Sibilia of Dover

Sims of Craftsbury

Small of Winooski

Squirrell of Underhill

Stebbins of Burlington

Stone of Burlington

Surprenant of Barnard

Taylor of Colchester

Templeman of Brownington

Toleno of Brattleboro

Torre of Moretown

Troiano of Stannard

Waters Evans of Charlotte

White of Bethel

Whitman of Bennington

Williams of Barre City

Wood of Waterbury

No Votes:

Bartley of Fairfax  

Branagan of Georgia  

Brennan of Colchester  

Canfield of Fair Haven  

Demar of Enosburgh  

Donahue of Northfield  

Galfetti of Barre Town  

Goslant of Northfield  

Graham of Williamstown  

Gregoire of Fairfield  

Hango of Berkshire  

Harrison of Chittenden  

Higley of Lowell  

Labor of Morgan  

Laroche of Franklin  

Lipsky of Stowe  

Maguire of Rutland City  

Marcotte of Cov   ry  

Mattos of Milton  

McCoy of Poultney  

McFaun of Barre Town  

Morgan of Milton  

Oliver of Sheldon  

Page of Newport City  

Parsons of Newbury  

Peterson of Clarendon  

Shaw of Pittsford  

Smith of Derby  

Taylor of Milton  

Toof of St. Albans Town  

Walker of Swanton  

Williams of Granby  

Wilson of Lyndon  


Burditt of West Rutland

Buss of Woodstock   

Clifford of Rutland City  

Cordes of Lincoln   

Dickinson of St. Albans Town      

Dolan of Waitsfield      

Hyman of South Burlington      

Krasnow of South Burlington      

Mihaly of Calais      

Morrissey of Bennington      

Sammis of Castleton      

Sheldon of Middlebury      

Stevens of Waterbury

“Within safe and principled bounds, the freedom to experiment with our democracy is fundamental to our United States.” Rep. Tristan Roberts, a Wilmington Democrat, said from the floor of the House. 

Categories: Legislation

8 replies »

  1. Of course! And school administrators & staff can ensure they take puberty blockers but not Tylenol. Perfect, CRAZY Vermont!

    • Exactly can’t drink, smoke, and barely old enough to drive but their coherent enough to have a informed decision. Lol

      • They are well informed enough to vote due to the political literacy instilled through Transformative Social Emotional Learning, which indoctrinates children into marxist change agents, based off of Paulo Freire’s “Pedigogy of the Oppressed”.

  2. If you’re a 16 or 17 year old you can vote, but you’re not allowed to get married ! SERIOUSLY ! Not that I advocate 16 & 17 year old teenagers getting married. The reason I don’t think teenagers should get married (especially 16 & 17 year olds) is because the lack of maturity. BUT, legislation thinks they are mature enough to vote, but not mature enough for marriage. So legislation advocates 16 & 17 year olds to play house without getting married, possibly having children out of wedlock. These are the best and maturest bills our Legislature can come up with ? How about Montpeculiar recognize the lack of maturity for 16 & 17 year olds for voting too. It’s a shame nobody in Montpelier has any common sense, and do something that you were voted in office to do; represent The People of Vermont.

  3. Rep Roberts should know better than anyone that we are a republic, so that statement is idiotic and dangerous.

  4. The Supreme Court gave our visiting students the vote a long time ago. This gave radicals and student bodied the power to elect representative not elected by the town residents but by the inexperienced students.
    The Romans said 35 was the minimum age.
    What could go wrong giving the vote to 16 year old woke students?

  5. For the citizen’s paying attention, this a patently absurd and goes to show you the extremes that Progressives will go to secure their stranglehold on Vermont. Regrettably, a sizable population of the State of Vermont just doesn’t care. Someday they will and it will be too late. These is the same shameful Politburo that deny access to alcohol, tobacco, firearms and other tangible items for those under 18 or 21 given their inexperience and the absence of critical thinking skills, The hypocrisy of these leftists is granting voting rights to the same youthful inhabitants of the State who are easily manipulated in their government gulag indoctrination centers (they call them schools). Of course, to do their bidding. In a just society, these regressive’s would be shamed and run out of office. Not in Vermont, given the pro-Politburo support structure: The media, unions, outside $$, leftist activists, leftist Universities, etc.). Serious and concerned citizens should be making plans to flee the State.

  6. So maybe after the legislature allows 16-17 year olds the right to vote, they will use the right to vote to change the fact that 16-17 year olds can’t marry – based on another new law by our legislature. They cant marry because they are not mature enough. How cynical these people are. They are destroying this state.

Leave a Reply