Fair warning, or voter suppression?
Brent Finnegan -- September 3rd, 2008
On August 15th, I started hearing reports that the Harrisonburg Registrar’s Office was indirectly discouraging new voters — particularly college students — from registering to vote in the city. The allegations were that the registrar was warning younger registrants that registering in their college town could possibly have a negative impact on their scholarships and tax status.
Now I read in newrivervalley.com and Inside Higher Ed that this “warning” was being given to Virginia Tech students in Montgomery County.
A Montgomery County official’s attempt to outline state elections law for thousands of Virginia Tech students this week prompted a swift reaction from Barack Obama campaign officials, who worried the statement could have a “chilling effect” on a massive registration effort now under way.
Montgomery County Registrar Randy Wertz said he wrote the news release, distributed through the county’s Web site, amid concerns that the hundreds of Tech students registering to vote using their Blacksburg addresses would essentially change their permanent address. That, he wrote, could affect students’ scholarships or tax filings and would obligate them to change car registrations and their driver’s license to their permanent address.
But Obama campaign officials said they had never heard of students’ dependency status on their parents’ tax forms affected by their voter registration and added that other laws the release cited are rarely enforced or subject to interpretation. Wertz issued a second statement two days later, saying the county cannot give out tax advice.
Selected text from that memo is included in the Inside Higher Ed article. The implication is that the registrar was trying to discourage students from registering there, because they were likely to vote for Obama, and skew the region more blue.
Although the Voting Rights Act is pretty clear about giving different treatment to different groups of registrants, this “free legal advice” seems to be a matter of interpretation among Virginia registrars. The registrar in Charlottesville doesn’t feel the need:
Charlottesville Registrar Sheri Iachetta said she faces the same issues with University of Virginia students as registrars in Radford and Montgomery County. But the question of whether students can consider addresses at college permanent is one she said she leaves up to the voter.
“I’m not going to question anyone. They have to sign under penalty of perjury that the information they gave me was correct,” Iachetta said. “They’re 18 years of age and they’re away from home, and they can make their own decision.”
Debbie Logan took over the position of Harrisonburg Registrar in 2006. Logan said that the Harrisonburg office was informing students that registering locally could possibly affect certain scholarships, but that they’ve stopped as of last week. According to her, she wanted to avoid angry phone calls from parents regarding the loss of their child’s scholarship. She said that what they were doing was previously okay with the SBE, but that they were told last week by the SBE to stop.
I call shenanigans.
That same warning was given to me eight years ago while I was a VT student during the 2000 election season… wonder how long this has been going on?
Wasn’t the same thing happening in Williamsburg, too? (William & Mary)
Interesting…around mid-August I overheard someone who works at the registrar’s office saying they were getting a flood of college registrants using PO Boxes as their mailing address (I guess they lived on campus) and that they were on the phone with the Attorney General’s office “every day” over this matter. Yesterday, a college undergrad was relaying to a group her difficulties trying to register to vote here during a discussion about the government and privacy rights. She said it had led to a string of difficulties around getting her student financial aid and DMV info updated too.
Here’s some info from the Virginia SBE for college voters.
It’s my understanding that a revised memo is being drafted (or has already been drafted) in Montgomery that essentially states “We’re not allowed to tell you how this may affect your insurance, scholarship, or tax filing status.”
That would be like your waitress saying, “Enjoy our soup. I’m not allowed to tell you whether it’s been poisoned or not.” Would you still enjoy the soup?
Thanks for the good link, Jeremy.
Just in case anyone is interested in the law on this issue, the law that Registrars are obligated to follow, it isn’t cut-and-dried.
A person may register to vote where he resides. § 24.2-400. The Code defines “residence” or “resident”: “[F]or all purposes of qualification to register and vote, means and requires both domicile and a place of abode. In determining domicile, consideration may be given to a person’s expressed intent, conduct, and all attendant circumstances including, but not limited to, financial independence, business pursuits, employment, income sources, residence for income tax purposes, marital status, residence of parents, spouse and children, if any, leasehold, sites of personal and real property owned by the person, motor vehicle and other personal property registration, and other factors reasonably necessary to determine the qualification of a person to register or vote.” § 24.2-101.
It is the voter’s burden to demonstrate a change in domicile. “To establish domicile, a person must live in a particular locality with the intention to remain there for an unlimited time.” Sachs v. Horan, 252 Va. 247 (1996). The Registrar is required to determine domicile by considering the factors listed above.
There was a Charlottesville court case in the mid-1960s and several Attorney General’s Opinions in the early 1970s following the enactment of the 26th Amendment, and both were not friendly to students voting at school. At the time, I think, the statutory definition included a line saying no college student obtained residence by reason of his sojourn in such institution. That line is no longer there.
There are some federal court cases out there in other Circuits that are more friendly to college voting than Virginia law. But, in my brief look at the issue, current Virginia law requires Registrars to look closely at claims of domicile and to reject voter applications where the individual does not intend to reside permanently in a particular locale.
Does that mean students cannot vote? Of course not. It just means they need to make arrangements to vote at home.
I know, you didn’t ask.
Sure you can vote. But first, just tell me how many bubbles are in this here bar of soap.
State board of elections policies say the student decides where they live. The questionnaire that a registrar can, not must, present to potentially transient residents pretty much leaves it up to the student to state where he or she lives.
They don’t have to vote at (their parents’) home. They can vote where they say they’re home. That’s from the State Board of Elections. It’s unfortunate they still have the information up about possible effects on insurance, etc. That information is bogus. Nobody has found a single example of any of that.
Looking over Cooks response seems it would be a lot easier to just be in the country illegally. You wouldn’t have to worry about any of this stuff and you could go to school with in state tuition.
Seriously, your drivers license and your voter registration should have to match up. When I was in the Navy my mother would get me an absentee ballot so I could vote in the MD elections. Who was I to cast a vote for San Diego City Council or on California propositions? I cared a lot more who was getting elected Governor of MD than of CA. Sure, I got mail in San Diego and could have registered there, but that seemed senseless. It’s like being in a 401K…voters should be fully vested in the area they are voting in.
Detractors might want to check on the percentage of the city’s taxes paid by students, not to mention the percentage of students on, for instance, the Rescue Squad. As to who should say who’s to vote where, the voter should.
The specious argument often put forth is that if students vote here they’ll take over city council. What are they gonna do, build too many strip malls? Or, god help us, a golf course?
Why are you surprised this occurs here? After all, the Registrar for the City goes to:
First Presbyterian Church
The only other staff in the office also goes to:
First Presbyterian Church
Suzanne Obenshain (who once somehow served as 26th District Chairman of the Republican Committee while simultaneously serving as Secretary of the Harrisonburg Electoral Board — a crime under Virginia law by the way) and Mark Obenshain both go to:
First Presbyterian Church
All are Republicans…JMU students and their skulls full of mush most likely would not cast a vote for Republican candidates so it’s obviously not in the local party’s best interest for JMU students to vote.
Unbelievable. I was THIS close to agreeing with something David Briggman had to say. And then in the last paragraph he goes and pulls a full-on Briggman — casting an aspersion about a large group of people, most of whom he has not met.
For your information David, JMU students — year after year — report that about 30 percent are “conservative,” 30 percent are “liberal,” and 40 percent are “middle of the road.” Both the Young Democrats and the Young Republicans are active on campus and engaged in the issues. Obama has no corner on the student market at JMU.
Lastly, I ran one of the discussion groups with Freshmen this August about their summer reading assignment, which was James Madison’s Federalist 10 — one of the most respected of the founding documents. These 18-year-olds understood that the presence of faction — groups with differing passions — is a necessary component of a free and open republican democracy.
I asked the group, “why do you think the university had you read this?” And one student responded, “If we understand that faction is natural part of true liberty, we’ll accept that others in this country might have differing views than our own. And so maybe it will occur to us that not everyone is an idiot simply because they might disagree with you — it’s just part of the deal of being free.”
You should have a head full of such mush, David Briggman.
“Looking over Cooks response seems it would be a lot easier to just be in the country illegally. You wouldn’t have to worry about any of this stuff and you could go to school with in state tuition.”
Oh good grief. This topic can just be fit in anywhere can’t it.
I agree with Joe. It shouldn’t be up to us to decide where someone votes. Some of our college students become very invested in this community. Some even stay here after they graduate. God forbid we let them have any interest in the place where they will spend most of the next four years and perhaps the rest of their life.
Way to go Andy!
I wish I had been assigned Federalist #10 for my summer reading before entering JMU. *pouts*
Well, while the Obama people are here, they should do something positive and file a lawsuit – for the sake of clarifying this once and for all – and probably because it would be in their favor to do so. I agree it should be up to the voter to choose where he/she votes during their short or long stay at college. some stay tied to home, some become involved in local politics – they should cast their vote where they feel its needed. i don’t think any one can argue jmu students don’t bring something to the area whether its diversity, money, or just uggs.
Yes Emmy, my joke comment actually does have a place here. This registration situation involves students that are from out of the area, some out of state. I met a guy over the weekend who apparently hasn’t lived in Virginia long enough to be an “in state student.” He put off enrolling at JMU since he couldn’t /didn’t want to pay the out of state tuition. It reminded me of how backwards it is that some are penalized for being a citizen of the United States. At least he can register to vote as a Virginian right? That takes me back to first paragraph. It doesn’t matter how invested a student from New Jersey gets in Harrisonburg, they’ll still be out of state when the tuition bill comes. If you used the in state tuition measuring stick, only students that lived where the school is prior to enrolling should be able to register in that community. I’m not going to say it’s right or wrong, but something doesn’t compute when it comes to how the state views college students.
Found this on UVA’s website:
“Students who have moved to Virginia to attend school are not entitled to in-state tuition rates unless they can overcome – by clear and convincing evidence — the statutory presumption that their residence here is primarily for educational purposes. Eligibility is not conferred by the performance of acts that are auxiliary to fulfilling educational objectives, such as part-time employment, or the acquisition of a Virginia driver’s license, and/or, voter registration card.”
Forgive me if I still don’t think its relevant.
What is relevant, however, is that one group of voters is (or was) being treated differently than everybody else.
It’s relevant because you want to view the students differently than the very school they came here to attend. You need to think about the reasoning behind the in state tuition rules and apply them to your argument that students should be able to register and vote in their temporary communities. You can’t think the two jive.
I’m not saying I disagree with your overall position. Students that care about and invest themselves in the community should vote and probably twice to offset those that arrive at the voting booth to see the names on the ballot for the first time.
Normally, 3,500 people vote in a city council election. This year, even allowing for the 600-900 who will, based on historical trends, vote for president and leave the down-ballot races blank, at least 10,000 people will vote for city council. About 6,500 of them will be seeing the council candidates’ names for the first time.
to me the rules seem to be in place to prevent funny business. if there aren’t some relatively stringent requirements, it opens the door to all sorts of funny business. i don’t trust either party enough to believe that if they thought they could somehow import a surplus of voters from an area where they were strong to vote in an area where they needed a bump to carry their candidates, they wouldn’t do it. it’s kind of a far fetched scenario, but the sentiment that ‘the voter should decide who should vote where’ assumes voters wouldn’t get involved in this sort of shenanigans (they would) and that the rules we have in place are irrelevant and serve no purpose (they aren’t and they do (seem to serve a purpose)).
that being said, it sounds like the actions of the vt registrar were perhaps questionable. the rules need to be enforced equitably. to act like they’re making people count soap bubbles is reactionary and borderline whacko though. why am i not surprised?
Finnegan says student voters are the same as voters that have lived in Harrisonburg for 5, 10 or 20 years. Maybe, but it is state law that says some are not…certain parts of state code say some are not even Virginia residents. They basically have dual state residency which makes them very different from other voters.
It may be convoluted, but I don’t think it’s a conspiracy to keep people from voting.
Back to the beginning: There is no evidence that registering to voter in, for instance, Harrisonburg, would affect the insurance, tax status, or financial aid of a student who graduated high school in, for instance, NOVA or Pennsylvania. So why bring it up? It’s not so much where students can vote. It’s whether they’re being, as a group, actively discouraged with bogus information.
Suppose a registrar distributed a form telling everyone wearing a black coat or a gingham dress that registering to vote might affect their status in the Mennonite church? Would that be OK?
yeah i see your point.
they shouldn’t have been saying that kind of thing, particularly without providing any specific information. elevating it to the level of disenfranchisement is going too far though. it reminds me of folks who go to the wrong polling place screaming about how they weren’t allowed to vote. i’ve always thought that if you’re not with it enough to figure out where you’re supposed to be voting, there may be some question as to whether or not you should be voting. i mean, there are rules here. this isn’t nam.
Should someone who just moved here from NoVa or Roanoke to start a new job be allowed to vote? What about a new U.S. citizen? I know quite a few of out-of-state college students that stay in town longer than most new TV3 and DNR/Rocktown reporters. Should new reporters be allowed to vote?
How about we raise the voting age to 22? Or prohibit anyone without a college degree from voting? Or make them sign a contract that newcomers will stay in Harrisonburg for 20 years?
I’m not so sure I’ll be in Harrisonburg in 2010. Should I not be allowed to vote?
The fact is that most college students are transient. They may not return to their hometowns, they may stay in their college town, or they may move across the country to take a job on the West Coast. Who is the registrar to judge where they can vote?
Karl, how is there a penalty for being a US citizen? Don’t the same rules for Virginia residency to get in-state tuition rates apply to everyone, citizen and non-citizen?
I grew up moving around the country. Lived in SoCal until I was 6. Moved from Centreville to Broadway in third grade. Moved to Boise, Idaho in 7th grade. Moved back to Broadway to start high school in Harrisonburg. Moved to Austin, Texas to go to college, and back to Harrisonburg after college. It’s likely I’ll move again in the next year or two.
Military families have it even worse.
I don’t see the difference between moving somewhere to go to school for four years, and moving somewhere else for a few years because the job market is good there.
Some people don’t have a hometown. Some people never put down roots. But that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to vote where ever they are.
Someone going to the wrong precinct is hardly comparable to someone being actively discouraged, for whatever reason, from voting. Intent hardly matters. If the Montgomery registrar discourages student voting as a service to the students or as a service to the McCain campaign, it’s the same thing, particularly if the discouragement is factually inaccurate.
I agree with what seems to be the majority sentiment in this thread; you vote in the precinct of your primary residence, and there can be consequences (tuition, etc.) for not doing so. When I was a JMU student, I voted in Northern Virginia. When I set up permanent residence in Harrisonburg, I switched. Karl’s comment above is correct, get an absentee ballot if you want to vote while away from home for college, military service, etc.
yeah i hear you.
do you think that it would be reasonable to say that if they are still dependents (as claimed on federal tax forms) then their permanent address is that of whosoever they depend upon (and that they should vote accordingly)?
to me, it’s shouldn’t really about about telling people where they can or can’t vote as much as it should be letting them know why the rules are written the way they are. if college kids are allowed/encouraged to act as de facto transients, even if they’re not the intended beneficiaries of such a classification, then i can see how we may be asking for trouble. think of the libertarians trying to get their thing going in nh. they’ve tried to organize a massive migration, but what if they could just apply for po boxes, or spend a month’s vacation, or register a car there and somehow take advantage of the laws that allow for transiency? i realize that it’s a bit of a stretch but it’s just not that hard for me to believe that people could get organized in a way that would essentially amount to gerrymandering districts through voter turnout.
I think we should make a law that you have to own land here to vote here. That would take care of the concerns of the registrar’s office so they could focus on more important things.
(I hope everyone’s sarcasm detectors have fresh batteries in them today.)
“and there can be consequences (tuition, etc.) ”
Actually, no. If so, what are they, and where is the documentation?
here’s a scenario…..
i live in harrisonburg and attend jmu (assume i’m a townie. it’s ok, it doesn’t hurt my feelings).
my second year, i decide i’m tired of being in harrisonburg and want to get out of here.
i transfer to the university of maryland (or vermont, or wyoming, whatever), where instead of procuring an absentee ballot, i register to vote.
now, halfway through the year, i decide that out of state tution is killing me, and that i’d do better to attend one of the commonwealth’s many fine universities.
so i transfer to virginia tech where i’m totally stoked about getting a virginia tech education at a virginia tech price.
but someone somewhere along the way realizes that i’m not actually a virginia resident, that i can’t be seeing as i’m registered to vote in maryland (i realize that this is unlikely, almost to the point of being statistically irrelevant).
so my decision to change my voter registration just cost me somewhere between 8 and ten grand a year.
that’s the best i can come up with.
really though, the point is that you can vote wherever you want . if you’re voting in a place where you know you’re not (or have no intention of being) a permanent resident (not meaning you plan to stay here forever, only that you consider this to be the place you’re from) then you’re playing games with the system. i don’t have a problem with that, just like i didn’t have a problem with the republicans who voted in the democratic primaries. if the system allows itself to be gamed, more power to the gamers. i just hope y’all would hold the same positions if the potential gaming were more likely to benefit the right.
What, Andy, student put their political preferences on their JMU apps? I doubt it…and I doubt there are as many “conservative” students on your campus — except in the tiny portion that you may have surveyed.
And this “head full of mush” whipped your campus weapons policy, huh?
By the way, the city Electoral Board this afternoon adopted a policy that students who live here can vote here. They won’t be telling students anything about insurance or finances, just as (I’m guessing, because it didn’t come up) they won’t be mentioning the gingham dress thing.
An attorney for the Obama campaign who was in town today confirmed that the tax and insurance warnings are pretty much bogus. This is based not on wishful thinking, but on calls to tax attorneys and insurance companies.
The information on that topic on the State Board website, like the polar bear, will probably be gone soon.
“Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: September 4, 2008, 10:31 am
“and there can be consequences (tuition, etc.) ”
Actually, no. If so, what are they, and where is the documentation?”
I’m going by the information made in the post (below), if it’s wrong, then oh well, I just wanted to express my opinion about the subject.
“…concerns that the hundreds of Tech students registering to vote using their Blacksburg addresses would essentially change their permanent address. That, he wrote, could affect students’ scholarships or tax filings and would obligate them to change car registrations and their driver’s license to their permanent address.”
And then there’s the next paragraph:
“Wertz issued a second statement two days later . . .”
Yeah. I cherry-picked. On purpose.
Here’s the data Andy is referring to–
First Year Student Survey Results
2003 (pg 7, tbl 29) (39% middle-of-the-road, 32% liberal, 29% conservative)
2004 (pg 7, tbl 30) (38% middle, 34% lib, 28% cons)
2005 (pg 7, tbl 31) (35% middle, 31% lib, 34% cons)
2006 (pg 7, tbl 31) (40% middle, 31% lib, 28% cons)
2007 (pg 8, tbl 33) (35% middle, 35% lib, 30% cons)
To address Dave’s concern about “tiny portion surveyed,” the latest survey (2007) said 3592 usable surveys were obtained. The 2007 statistical summary says 3867 new freshmen enrolled. That’s hardly a tiny portion.
JGFitzgerald:
I hear ya, Wertz was challenged by the Obama office for her statement since the laws cited that are in-place are rarely enforced and are subject to interpretation. Vague.
The quote from Sheri Iachetta doesn’t really help clear it up anymore, either:
“…But the question of whether students can consider addresses at college permanent is one she said she leaves up to the voter. I’m not going to question anyone. They have to sign under penalty of perjury that the information they gave me was correct,” Iachetta said. “They’re 18 years of age and they’re away from home, and they can make their own decision.”
It kinda swings both ways, depending on who interprets it.
Personally, I still fall on the side of voting in your own district.
Hence my reference to cherry-picking.
Four years. 45 months, matriculation to graduation. Student here, 34 months. Student at (parents’) home, 11 months.
Vote there because … ??
…it’s the law.
Thanks Marty — those are the data.
And David, the reason the conceal carry issue is alive again is because it is now a concern among the students. It is their interest in this issue that is relevant. But if it makes you feel good to feel that this is about you, you go right ahead.
Andy…it was never about me.
It was always about the concealed carry holders throughout Virginia…I just happened to be one of those.
As long as JMU and the other government universities are PUBLIC, they are not exempt from the same laws applying to all other government agencies.
No matter how else you may characterize it, your university wasted $10,000 to prove you guys weren’t obeying the law.
“…it’s the law.”
Actually, no, it’s not. You’re perhaps familiar with the dictum that, “You’re welcome to your own opinion, but not your own facts.” Facts: There is no law that says students have to vote where their parents live, and no financial jeopardy for students who vote in their college town.
There are people who feel, think, believe, opine, and passionately urge that students should not vote where they live and go to school, but that doesn’t make it a law.
And to be fair, Joe, it is also not the law that anyone can vote wherever they want to vote. The law requires a person to vote in their domicile; that is, the locality where they intend to remain for an unlimited time.
Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that domicile is an antiquated notion in our transient society, but as long as it is on the books we (and especially the Registrar) cannot just choose to ignore it because we disagree with it. There are good reasons to limit where a person can vote, gaming the system being the one that comes to mind first. The idea of domicile was not recently invented to suppress college students or to help John McCain.
JGFitzgerald:
According to the Virginia State Board of Elections (http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/), which gets its information from US/VA State Law:
-No person may procure or submit materially false, fraudulent or fictitious voter registration applications.
-No person may submit false information as to name, address, citizenship or period of residence in a voting district for the purpose of establishing eligibility to register or vote in any election.
And additionally:
What is my legal residence?
You are the one to determine and declare the city, county and state in which you claim your legal residence. This may be the residence where your family lives, or the city or county and state where your school is located. Consider the following questions to determine which to declare:
* Are you claimed as a dependent on your parents’ income tax return? If you are, then their address is probably your legal residence.
* Do you have a scholarship that would be affected if you changed your legal residence? Some scholarships require that the student be a resident of a particular town, city or state. Contact the provider of your scholarship to determine if a change in your legal residence will affect your scholarship.
* Would your health, automobile or other insurance coverage be affected by a change in your legal residence? If you are covered under your parents’ insurance policy, your protection could be affected by a change in your legal residence.
* Are you close to graduation and intend to live and work in the same community as your college after you graduate? If you do, then you may want to use your college address as your legal residence if you will not be affected by the issues listed above.
* Also consider that many students move frequently while in college and after graduation. You must update your address with the registrar each time you move to keep your voter registration valid, regardless of the address you use as your legal residence.
—
So yes, it’s vague as mentioned before relying on individual interpretation, but it looks to me like, according to law, you’re not supposed to vote somewhere that’s not your primary residence, and in some cases, you might run into some trouble with insurance, taxes, scholarships, etc.
I can see your side, but in my case, I think my kids will be voting absentee if they are attending college out-of-state with a scholarship.
And lastly, there’s no need for the subtle disrespect in your post. I admit, this is not my area of expertise, and have conceded that, overall, the information for this topic is vague and subject to interpretation; additionally, if you were overwhelmingly right, I would have no problems admitting it and taking it as a lesson learned. All in all though, I appreciate the discourse; thanks for the whole back and forth with me today.
“and in some cases, you might run into some trouble with insurance, taxes, scholarships, etc. ”
Again, no. There’s been no evidence, and the information on the SBE site is wrong on that issue. Some sources are listed here: http://www.josephgusfitzgerald.com/Politics/Voting.html. Attorneys for the Dems have contacted the ten largest insurers, all of whom say the ideas are bogus, urban legends at best. IRS pub 501 and FASFA instructions don’t mention the topic, any more than they mention going to church, shopping for groceries, driving on the streets, or any other of the things people do where they are, but where some traditionalists do not think they live.
As to where a students can vote, interpretation has been mostly left to the local registrars in the past, with H’burg accepting student registrations. The issue of domicile for college students for voting purposes has gradually changed with loosening of attitudes, often accompanied by legal pressure. The issue now is whether any Virginia registrar will move backwards in that regard, and whether the new approach will be accompanied with vague and inaccurate threats about phantom financial consequences.
I realize that many local residents, in any college town, are loathe to accept the idea that college students really live there. This is “our” town, and those outsiders are only here for one purpose. Personally, I’ve not accepted that idea since 1974, when I began getting absentee ballots to vote for constitutional officers I’d never heard of in Sussex instead of the ones I’d occasionally seen downtown in Lexington. I ate there, I shopped there, I slept there, I went to school there, but I voted by mail. It was nonsense then and it is now. If the laws remain vague, it is probably not so much because of partisan interest, as it is legislators leaving those laws vague so as not to take sides in town-gown issues, like a cop who’d rather answer any call but a domestic.
So the law remains to an extent neutral, with students able to vote, but with registrars allowed to treat that right as a privilege, and to on occasion tighten up their interpretation in order to single out one particular group. Why they do it is irrelevant. If a registrar drags his or her feet because of concern for a student’s finances, because the student is the wrong race or party, or just because the registrar doesn’t understand why a student would want to vote in the college town, the outcome is the same. A right previously granted has been taken away.
That’s not America. Not before Bush, anyway.
JGFitzgerald:
I appreciate your points and taking the time to express them; and I also agree that it’s really too bad that the laws are and, will probably, remain vague.
Lastly, I just want to point out, that I am not one of those who loathe college students living in *my* town because it wasn’t too many years ago that I was one of those college students. I did undergrad/grad school at JMU and admit during the years that it was a pain to vote absentee for people I was not familiar with; so I agree with you.
Interesting in 2008 we’re still all arguing about security issues in voting and physical locality. As we move to electronic voting, the physical location of the voter becomes irrelevant. In the meantime, we’re just lucky we can all vote as long as we jump through the appropriate long list of hoops.