GOP Targets Voting Rights of College Students?

[chiver78]

Mar 9, 2011 12:19:36 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

Mar 9, 2011 12:07:07 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

you just said

This is not about taking away anyone's right to vote. It is just about making sure that the block of votes that comes from temporary residents does not result in a different outcome than what might otherwise have been if the student population voted absentee thereby spreading their votes among their own communities back home.

it is if you force a college kid to vote absentee in the district where he grew up because you deem him a temporary resident. he doesn't get to vote on local things that will directly affect him while he's here. what's the limits on temporary, anyway? do I get to vote if I move next year? will I have to wait until I've been there long enough to qualify as a permanent resident?

The point is that it is highly likely that his/her vote will not effect him/her for the long term - after graduation, but it certainly could have an impact on the local community that he/she leaves behind.

I do not "deem" anyone a temporary resident; it's just a fact for most university/college students.

how do you* know what will and won't affect him long term? how is that any different than someone living somewhere for 2 years, voting once, and moving across the country? it isn't, that's life. people move, people vote on things that don't affect them. some people live in the same town for 90 years and never even register to vote. why are you going to limit a certain group of people because you think they are temporary?

*you being collective here.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

If a college student chooses to follow the process to establish residency, I have no problem with them voting. However, if they do not meet residency requirements, then they must vote where they ARE a legal resident. A common tactic in Chicago is for students to commit vote fraud by voting in Wisconsin AND then voting in Illinois. When I was in school, they talked pretty openly about it.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

I'm for NO drinking age. And in terms of felons voting-- I'm for the decriminalization of all drugs, and I would exsponge the criminal records related to the possession of drugs (for smuggling and sale of drugs I think some period of rehabilitation would be appropriate) as long as the offender didn't have a conviction for a violent offense, or weapons charge.

[swamp]

Felons can vote in NY, they're only disqualified when they are imprisoned.

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 9, 2011 12:19:36 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

Mar 9, 2011 12:07:07 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

you just said

This is not about taking away anyone's right to vote. It is just about making sure that the block of votes that comes from temporary residents does not result in a different outcome than what might otherwise have been if the student population voted absentee thereby spreading their votes among their own communities back home.

it is if you force a college kid to vote absentee in the district where he grew up because you deem him a temporary resident. he doesn't get to vote on local things that will directly affect him while he's here. what's the limits on temporary, anyway? do I get to vote if I move next year? will I have to wait until I've been there long enough to qualify as a permanent resident?

The point is that it is highly likely that his/her vote will not effect him/her for the long term - after graduation, but it certainly could have an impact on the local community that he/she leaves behind.

I do not "deem" anyone a temporary resident; it's just a fact for most university/college students.

Voting affects everyone in the community, including the people that plan to live there for their entire life to the people that only plan to live there for a year. Every US resident has a right to have a say in their local government.

Limiting someones ability to vote based on an assumption, an assumption that cannot be proven individually and does not apply to everyone is wrong and IMO not what the right to vote is about.

Once you start putting undue and unfair restrictions on who gets to vote it creates a precedent that is very difficult to stop.

I moved away from my parents at the age of 18 and they passed away shortly after that when I was in college. Where should I have registered to vote? In the area that my parents use to live, or in the community that lived in for 10 years after I graduated?

If the rule cannot be applied fairly then it should not be applied.

[ChiTownVenture]

block of votes that comes from temporary residents

If you live in a community that has a high rate of temporary residents and you don't like it, then maybe it's time to move...

[dancinmama]

Mar 9, 2011 12:23:44 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

Mar 9, 2011 12:19:36 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

The point is that it is highly likely that his/her vote will not effect him/her for the long term - after graduation, but it certainly could have an impact on the local community that he/she leaves behind.

I do not "deem" anyone a temporary resident; it's just a fact for most university/college students.

how do you* know what will and won't affect him long term? how is that any different than someone living somewhere for 2 years, voting once, and moving across the country? it isn't, that's life. people move, people vote on things that don't affect them. some people live in the same town for 90 years and never even register to vote. why are you going to limit a certain group of people because you think they are temporary?

*you being collective here.

chiver: If the student graduates and moves away from the college community (which is usually the case), then his/her vote on LOCAL issues will not affect him/her long term.

Put yourself in the place of the residents who live and will live in the community long after the students are gone.

I ask again. How is requiring students to vote absentee an infringement on their rights as voters? Could you PLEASE explain what the PROBLEM with that is. What are you afraid of? They will STILL VOTE.

[dancinmama]

Mar 9, 2011 12:33:11 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

block of votes that comes from temporary residents

If you live in a community that has a high rate of temporary residents and you don't like it, then maybe it's time to move...

That's the best solution I've heard to this debate yet!!

[Angel!]

If the student graduates and moves away from the college community (which is usually the case), then his/her vote on LOCAL issues will not affect him/her long term.

Yes, if that student moves away after 4 years (or more if they are going for a masters or doctorate). That is 4+ years that the student will be affected by how they vote. In the mean time, you are asking them to instead vote on local issues at a place where they don't currently live & may never live again. How do you think residents of those locations feel about having people completely unaffected by their vote deciding local issues.

I don't think the logic follows. People move all the time. To assume someone is temporary & will move back where they came from simply because they are a student is unreasonable. You should be allowed to have the option to vote where you live as long as you took the time to get registered.

[chiver78]

Mar 9, 2011 12:37:17 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

Mar 9, 2011 12:23:44 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

how do you* know what will and won't affect him long term? how is that any different than someone living somewhere for 2 years, voting once, and moving across the country? it isn't, that's life. people move, people vote on things that don't affect them. some people live in the same town for 90 years and never even register to vote. why are you going to limit a certain group of people because you think they are temporary?

*you being collective here.

chiver: If the student graduates and moves away from the college community (which is usually the case), then his/her vote on LOCAL issues will not affect him/her long term.

Put yourself in the place of the residents who live and will live in the community long after the students are gone.

I ask again. How is requiring students to vote absentee an infringement on their rights as voters? Could you PLEASE explain what the PROBLEM with that is. What are you afraid of? They will STILL VOTE.

go back and read ChiTown's post. what I have a problem with is that by restricting a group of voters because somebody deems them to be temporary residents infringes upon their rights to vote in local elections that affect them, where they live at the time they vote.

[Bluerobin]

chiver, we used that argument to get the age lowered. It was all BS. 18 yo are just too immature to vote! Notice, not all adult things were given to 18 yo. Now it is time to reverse the trend.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

I disagree. If you can serve in the military, or even be drafted-- then you can vote. The age of maturity is a moving target. Every time we decide to move it up, we just move up the age at which we EXPECT people to GROW UP.

[973beachbum]

Mar 9, 2011 10:49:42 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

I'm annoyed with people who think Fox News is the gospel. Do you think I can get them purged from the voting rolls?

No, not really. But requiring a transient population, such as college aged kids, who would number in the 1000s in a small community, could cause numerous problems for a small town. College kids would typically vote in their home towns via absentee voting.

I have seen this argument from the other side too. I live in a small town at the Jersey Shore. In my area 50%-90% are vacation homes. Try telling someone who bought a million dollar home that he also has to vote where he is a resident, then duck for cover fast.

I have seen so many people scream about this for years. I understand that they pay taxes to the town and school district. But the law is you only get to vote once in the district that you legally reside. You should see some of the things people have done to try and make it look like they actually live there.

I have never seen this done to swing an election though. That is a new low.

[dancinmama]

Mar 9, 2011 12:30:32 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

Mar 9, 2011 12:19:36 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

The point is that it is highly likely that his/her vote will not effect him/her for the long term - after graduation, but it certainly could have an impact on the local community that he/she leaves behind.

I do not "deem" anyone a temporary resident; it's just a fact for most university/college students.

Voting affects everyone in the community, including the people that plan to live there for their entire life to the people that only plan to live there for a year. Every US resident has a right to have a say in their local government.

Limiting someones ability to vote based on an assumption, an assumption that cannot be proven individually and does not apply to everyone is wrong and IMO not what the right to vote is about.

Once you start putting undue and unfair restrictions on who gets to vote it creates a precedent that is very difficult to stop.

I moved away from my parents at the age of 18 and they passed away shortly after that when I was in college. Where should I have registered to vote? In the area that my parents use to live, or in the community that lived in for 10 years after I graduated?

If the rule cannot be applied fairly then it should not be applied.

Yes, "voting effects everyone in the community". That is what the entire debate is about. The vote of the student population (many times in the tens of thousands) will effect the outcome of local elections - a community that the majority of them will not remain in. Isn't that taking weight away from the vote of individuals who are and plan to be long term residents? What about their vote?

How is asking students to vote absentee in the community that they grew up in "limiting" their ability to vote. No one is taking away their ability to vote or trying to "limit" it.

Why can't you see that a voting block made up of mostly temporary residents, will have; but should not have, a long term outcome of the lives of the people that the students will in a very short time leave behind. Tell me how that is right or fair to them?

I am sorry that you lost your folks at such a young age , but you would have to agree that your situation is an anomaly.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

I disagree. If you can serve in the military, or even be drafted-- then you can vote. The age of maturity is a moving target. Every time we decide to move it up, we just move up the age at which we EXPECT people to GROW UP.

So now the age we expect kids to grow up is 26.

[973beachbum]

Why can't you see that a voting block made up of mostly temporary residents, will have; but should not have, a long term outcome of the lives of the people that the students will in a very short time leave behind. Tell me how that is right or fair to them?

Dan my problem is that you are the one deciding that they are temporary residents. It isn't your decision to make. If someone moves somewhere and knows they might move soon it is no ones business but their own. The law is you vote where you reside legally. Not who do we want to reside there legally.

This same argument could be made with any number of other groups of people. Does anyone want to exclude military members?

[ed1066]

Does anyone want to exclude military members?

Most military members vote absentee in the state where they legally reside, which is not necessarily where they are stationed. I never voted in the state where I was stationed, because I was not a legal resident of that state. I was a legal resident of California, and I always voted in California (absentee) even though I was never stationed in California during the five years I served...

[dancinmama]

Mar 9, 2011 12:43:56 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

Mar 9, 2011 12:37:17 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

chiver: If the student graduates and moves away from the college community (which is usually the case), then his/her vote on LOCAL issues will not affect him/her long term.

Put yourself in the place of the residents who live and will live in the community long after the students are gone.

I ask again. How is requiring students to vote absentee an infringement on their rights as voters? Could you PLEASE explain what the PROBLEM with that is. What are you afraid of? They will STILL VOTE.

go back and read ChiTown's post. what I have a problem with is that by restricting a group of voters because somebody deems them to be temporary residents infringes upon their rights to vote in local elections that affect them, where they live at the time they vote.

And that is the whole debate. Should students who statistically ARE temporary residents be allowed to impact the outcome of local elections the results of which may impact them for the short term (statistically speaking), but will definitely impact the entire community for the long term.

You say yes; I say no.

My feelings on the subject come from experience. I grew up in a university town. Both my parents worked for that university. I went away to college, but always voted absentee.

[chiver78]

so you voted in California elections for 5 years, affecting the lives and livelihoods of people that would live there long-term, even though you weren't actually living there.

I commend you for taking the time to vote at all, but this hardly seems like what the absentee ballot was intended for - the person who will be out of town for the election, and absent from being able to physically vote in person. wouldn't it have made more sense to change your residency to wherever you were stationed?

[Angel!]

The vote of the student population (many times in the tens of thousands) will effect the outcome of local elections - a community that the majority of them will not remain in.

Even if those specific students move on, then other students will move in & take their place. So overall, the students have a large place in the communtiy & it seems their voices should be heard in the elections.

[dancinmama]

Mar 9, 2011 13:13:26 GMT -5 973beachbum said:

Why can't you see that a voting block made up of mostly temporary residents, will have; but should not have, a long term outcome of the lives of the people that the students will in a very short time leave behind. Tell me how that is right or fair to them?

Dan my problem is that you are the one deciding that they are temporary residents. It isn't your decision to make. If someone moves somewhere and knows they might move soon it is no ones business but their own. The law is you vote where you reside legally. Not who do we want to reside there legally.

This same argument could be made with any number of other groups of people. Does anyone want to exclude military members?

Come on. I am not "deciding that they are temporary residents". We all know that as a voting block, they are.

And again, no one said anything about excluding students or the military or anyone. How does asking students to vote absentee "exclude" them?

[Bluerobin]

Paul, I expect maturity to start around age 40. 18 is definitely too young to vote. You get all them democrats that way!

[ed1066]

so you voted in California elections for 5 years, affecting the lives and livelihoods of people that would live there long-term,

Yes, people like my parents, brother and sister, aunts, uncles and cousins.

I commend you for taking the time to vote at all, but this hardly seems like what the absentee ballot was intended for - the person who will be out of town for the election, and absent from being able to physically vote in person. wouldn't it have made more sense to change your residency to wherever you were stationed?

I think this is exactly what the absentee ballot is for. I was born and raised in California, and I moved back after I got out of the Army. My stations were not my residences, only my workplace. In my current career, I travel a lot, and I work out of state probably nine months out of the year, but my home is still in California, and so is my family. It's also where I pay taxes. Why would I not want to vote there?

[dancinmama]

Mar 9, 2011 13:23:22 GMT -5 Angel! said:

The vote of the student population (many times in the tens of thousands) will effect the outcome of local elections - a community that the majority of them will not remain in.

Even if those specific students move on, then other students will move in & take their place. So overall, the students have a large place in the communtiy & it seems their voices should be heard in the elections.

You are in essence saying that most students will vote the same - based on the needs of the students in the community - which completely supports my point. The needs, wants, desires, etc. of such a large voting block of people who will not have an individual long term stake in the outcome diminishes the true individual vote of the long term residents of that community.

I'm going to try an analogy. It probably isn't the best one, but it's the best that I cant think of. University/college students are like short term guests in a community much like you might have a guest in your home. They come and could fully participate in the community/household dynamic for a short time, but the majority of the time, they leave. I do not want to give students a say in how a town might be run any more than I would give a guest in my home a say in how I run my household. Okay, sorry - probably pretty lame.

[973beachbum]

Mar 9, 2011 13:27:43 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

Mar 9, 2011 13:13:26 GMT -5 973beachbum said:

Dan my problem is that you are the one deciding that they are temporary residents. It isn't your decision to make. If someone moves somewhere and knows they might move soon it is no ones business but their own. The law is you vote where you reside legally. Not who do we want to reside there legally.

This same argument could be made with any number of other groups of people. Does anyone want to exclude military members?

Come on. I am not "deciding that they are temporary residents". We all know that as a voting block, they are.

And again, no one said anything about excluding students or the military or anyone. How does asking students to vote absentee "exclude" them?

I also live in an area that includes 3 colleges and a military base. While some of them do come and go I don't know of anything that says they are more transient than any other part of the population. Most of the military do vote here. And while they do live here everything that goes on does effect them. Ironically we have a huge number of homes owned by people who don't reside here and therefore don't have the right to vote in elections about things like who will decide on the property taxes assesed on their property, or the school budget. And clearly those people are affected by what gets voted on in the local elections.

But that isn't what this argument is about at it's heart. The writers of this law don't want these voters to vote because they don't like the way they think they will vote. someone remind me but isn't this the same argument used to keep blacks and women from being alowed to vote?

Bottom line lawmakers dont get to decide who gets to vote based on how they they want the election to turn out.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Why is this hard: students must meet the same residency requirements as anyone else. IF they don't-- it's an absentee ballot for them. Do we really want to create an environment where public universities are established as centers for election fraud in swing states by either party?

It's pretty clear to me from this discussion that there is a culture of corruption that so permeates the Democratic Party, that they can't even support reasonable measures to protect the sanctity of the ballot in a free country.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

When I was military in Kingsland, GA, I WAS NOT PERMITTED TO VOTE IN GEORGIA unless or until I became a LEGAL RESIDENT of GEORGIA. I absentee voted there as a resident of IL.

[chiver78]

Mar 9, 2011 13:52:38 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

It's pretty clear to me from this discussion that there is a culture of corruption that so permeates the Democratic Party, that they can't even support reasonable measures to protect the sanctity of the ballot in a free country.

where do you see this? we've been discussing why students should be forced to use absentee ballots to their home states or whether they should be allowed to declare residency.

[chiver78]

Mar 9, 2011 13:46:58 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

Mar 9, 2011 13:23:22 GMT -5 Angel! said:

Even if those specific students move on, then other students will move in & take their place. So overall, the students have a large place in the communtiy & it seems their voices should be heard in the elections.

You are in essence saying that most students will vote the same - based on the needs of the students in the community - which completely supports my point. The needs, wants, desires, etc. of such a large voting block of people who will not have an individual long term stake in the outcome diminishes the true individual vote of the long term residents of that community.

I'm going to try an analogy. It probably isn't the best one, but it's the best that I cant think of. University/college students are like short term guests in a community much like you might have a guest in your home. They come and could fully participate in the community/household dynamic for a short time, but the majority of the time, they leave. I do not want to give students a say in how a town might be run any more than I would give a guest in my home a say in how I run my household. Okay, sorry - probably pretty lame.

you still haven't answered why a student living somewhere for a few years is any different (for better or worse) than some adult living somewhere for a couple years, then moving across the country. that adult has voted in some elections that affect the community dynamic, even though they are no longer there.

[dancinmama]

Mar 9, 2011 13:49:17 GMT -5 973beachbum said:

Mar 9, 2011 13:27:43 GMT -5 dancinmama said:

Come on. I am not "deciding that they are temporary residents". We all know that as a voting block, they are.

And again, no one said anything about excluding students or the military or anyone. How does asking students to vote absentee "exclude" them?

I also live in an area that includes 3 colleges and a military base. While some of them do come and go I don't know of anything that says they are more transient than any other part of the population. Most of the military do vote here. And while they do live here everything that goes on does effect them. Ironically we have a huge number of homes owned by people who don't reside here and therefore don't have the right to vote in elections about things like who will decide on the property taxes assesed on their property, or the school budget. And clearly those people are affected by what gets voted on in the local elections.

But that isn't what this argument is about at it's heart. The writers of this law don't want these voters to vote because they don't like the way they think they will vote. someone remind me but isn't this the same argument used to keep blacks and women from being alowed to vote?

Bottom line lawmakers dont get to decide who gets to vote based on how they they want the election to turn out.

How is asking students to vote absentee in any way, shape, or form the same as not wanting students to vote? No one is trying to take away their right to vote.

When you say "bottom line, lawmakers don't get to decide who gets to vote", I believe that is EXACTLY what the law is trying to prevent. The only vote that will be affected and fairly so are those that impact local governments. I do not think that asking students to vote by absentee ballot is going to change the way that they will cast their ballot when it comes to their votes for state laws or officials or when they cast their vote for the POTUS. Do you?