[normhead]

requiring all others to vote in the states or other New Hampshire towns they come from.

In other words, you have to go home to vote, no absentee voting. I guess the article didn't make it clear enough.

[Parallax]

In other words, you have to go home to vote, no absentee voting. I guess the article didn't make it clear enough.

I must have missed it. Where in the article did it say that New Hampshire could dictate to other states that they could not allow absentee voting for their residents that were temporarily living in New Hampshire?

[normhead]

As far as I know no state has ever had the right to tell others how they registered voters, and my contribution here was: since this is a Republican initiative, if the Dems had ever in their history tried to put forward a piece of legislation specifically to disenfranchise a select group of people. IN their own state or for the whole country is pretty much irrelevant to my point.

Is this a case of you don't like the answer to the question so you're trying to drag the issue somewhere else?

[GeneV]

I must have missed it. Where in the article did it say that New Hampshire could dictate to other states that they could not allow absentee voting for their residents that were temporarily living in New Hampshire?

No, but that requires a lot more forethought than most college students have. The end result of requiring absentee voting, rather than voting where you reside, like every other citizen, will be that a lot fewer students vote. I suspect that is the intention.

[Parallax]

No, but that requires a lot more forethought than most college students have.

They unquestionably should be allowed to vote, but those that aren't capable of enough forethought to get a ballot probably lack the forethought to investigate the issues and/or candidates; so maybe it is best that those students don't vote regardless of what party they belong to.
The fact that most college students have a situational awareness roughly equal to that of a turnip is not the Republicans' fault.

[Wheatfield]

They unquestionably should be allowed to vote, but those that aren't capable of enough forethought to get a ballot probably lack the forethought to investigate the issues and/or candidates; so maybe it is best that those students don't vote regardless of what party they belong to.
The fact that most college students have a situational awareness roughly equal to that of a turnip is not the Republicans' fault.

You could say that about probably 95% or more of the citizenry in general.
Anything that limits participation in the political process is regressive. What should be happening is encouraging and enabling young people to vote, and encouraging them to exercise their say.

[Parallax]

You could say that about probably 95% or more of the citizenry in general.

Absolutely. In fact, 95% may be a conservative estimate.
I don't believe requiring them to spend 44 cents on a postage stamp unduly limits participation. To encourage participation, the colleges could run ads, put up posters, etc., reminding them get their ballots in time to vote.

[shooz]

the colleges could run ads, put up posters, etc.

Nice.
With all the budget cuts, who would you have pay for this?
Wanna donate?

[Wheatfield]

Absolutely. In fact, 95% may be a conservative estimate.

Don't try to tar me with the conservative brush.

I don't believe requiring them to spend 44 cents on a postage stamp unduly limits participation. To encourage participation, the colleges could run ads, put up posters, etc., reminding them get their ballots in time to vote.

It's not just the 44 cents, it's encouraging them to become educated and active about their countries politics.
Waiving the postage on an absentee ballot would be a good idea, since then they don't need to make a trip to the post office for that stamp.
But your idea is probably as close as one would hope to see.

[Parallax]

Nice.
With all the budget cuts, who would you have pay for this?
Wanna donate?

No, that was in response to "What should be happening is encouraging and enabling young people to vote, and encouraging them to exercise their say. "
I'm sure there would be plenty of volunteers to be had, and it could be done without cost to the schools, or students.
I would rather have people accept that if a person can't remember to vote, or remember to get an absentee ballot to vote with, that it isn't somebody else's fault (or responsibility), or a failure of the system.

[jeffkrol]

No, that was in response to "What should be happening is encouraging and enabling young people to vote, and encouraging them to exercise their say. "
I'm sure there would be plenty of volunteers to be had, and it could be done without cost to the schools, or students.
I would rather have people accept that if a person can't remember to vote, or remember to get an absentee ballot to vote with, that it isn't somebody else's fault (or responsibility), or a failure of the system.

This matters little in fed elections where they vote.. Most colleges are pretty small.
How about giving them a choice, vote at home or locally??? I bet suddenly it becomes "problematic".
In my little town when a college student made it to alderman, they just redrew the districts so the college "slums" were broken up..
Democracy a wonderfully messy thing.......
more flea spit.......

[raz-0]

Parallax, dude, get with the program. That's what the Repubs are trying to ban, college absentee voters.

Your reading comprehension sucks.

what they are talking about is NOT banning absentee ballot voting by college students. What they are talking about is being more strict with residency requirements for college students where they can currently register to vote on election day for elections local to the college they attend (including students attending from out of state), without having established permanent residence.

They want to require they or their parents establish permanent residence status first. Which would not only make the students ACTUAL residents of the districts they are voting in, but also make them ineligible to also cast an absentee ballot for back home and thus get two votes to other voters single vote.

1 person, 1 vote, vote where you live. Sounds truly oppressive and undemocratic, unlike the current system of 1 person 2 votes and lots of fraud.

[lesmore49]

Lesmore49 keep in mind they are NOT being banned from voting--despite the title of the article--they are only being told WHERE they are going to be allowed to vote. i.e. Where they are registered!

In Canada if you live in an area for 6 months and more and are a Canadian citizen over 18 years of age...you get on the voting list of the area that you have resided for more than 6 months.

I quote from the Washington Post article, supplied by the OP:

New Hampshire's new Republican state House speaker is pretty clear about what he thinks of college kids and how they vote. They're "foolish," Speaker William O'Brien said in a recent speech to a tea party group.


"Voting as a liberal. That's what kids do," he added, his comments taped by a state Democratic Party staffer and posted on YouTube. Students lack "life experience," and "they just vote their feelings."

New Hampshire House Republicans are pushing for new laws that would prohibit many college students from voting in the state - and effectively keep some from voting at all.

What is your opinion of what has been reported to have been said by the politician in question.

[Wheatfield]

No, that was in response to "What should be happening is encouraging and enabling young people to vote, and encouraging them to exercise their say. "
I'm sure there would be plenty of volunteers to be had, and it could be done without cost to the schools, or students.
I would rather have people accept that if a person can't remember to vote, or remember to get an absentee ballot to vote with, that it isn't somebody else's fault (or responsibility), or a failure of the system.

I wasn't really trying to make it sound that way. We have terrible voter turnouts here as well, BTW.
Not encouraging people to engage themselves in the politics of a country is certainly not a failure of the system, but it is entirely possible that the system will fail if they don't become engaged.

[GeneV]

No, that was in response to "What should be happening is encouraging and enabling young people to vote, and encouraging them to exercise their say. "
I'm sure there would be plenty of volunteers to be had, and it could be done without cost to the schools, or students.
I would rather have people accept that if a person can't remember to vote, or remember to get an absentee ballot to vote with, that it isn't somebody else's fault (or responsibility), or a failure of the system.

I really think that is a bit unrealistic. College kids will be more informed usually about the politics of the place where they are living, not the place where they originated. Making them vote back where their parents live is actually likely to result in a less informed voter, not to mention making it more difficult and reducing liberal votes--which seems to be the clear goal here, according to statements by some of the sponsors in New Hampshire. The fact that it appears to be part of a Republican push across the country to make voting harder also speaks ill of it.

I see no good reason for not letting them vote where they live. These reasons seem like excuses for making it harder. I am a very committed voter, and I have never used an absentee ballot. (I do vote early, though that is not much use to college stutents) It isn't just the cost of a stamp, Jim. You must apply in advance, and for every election in which you wish to vote absentee, rather than just registering the the place where you live, which continues untill you register elsewhere. I am also aware that absentee ballots get more scrutiny in many states as well.