Skip to main content

Young people "lack life experience," are "foolish," vote "as a liberal," and "just vote their feelings," apparently, all reasons to shut down or limit their access to democratic participation. At least, that's what New Hampshire state House Speaker William O'Brien seems to think, causing partisans like him to take matters to the Legislature.

Yesterday, Washington Post writer Peter Wallsten wrote on Speaker O'Brien's YouTubed speech to a N.H. tea party group, linking his views to the state Republicans' assault on young people's access to the ballot. Among the measures under consideration are HB 176, a bill to "permit students to vote in their college towns only if they or their parents had previously established permanent residency there," and HB 223, a bill to end the state's Election Day Registration policy, a policy that is known to increase overall voter turnout, especially among young people.

The House Election Law committee is scheduled to hear both bills today.

New Hampshire is not the only state to challenge voters' access to the ballot. More states are introducing and advancing anti-EDR, voter ID, and proof-of-citizenship bills. All are based around alarmist notions of election problems, particularly the unsubstantiated threat of voter fraud.

So, why are voters being punished with more red tape when there’s no actual proof that the “problem” with elections lies with the voter?

"It's true that without the participation of many, power will consolidate into the hands of the few," writes Rock the Vote executive director, Heather Smith at the Huffington Post yesterday. "The inverse is also true: When many participate, it threatens those in power."

Doug Chapin of the Pew Center on the States tells Wallsten that "Election policy debates like photo ID and same-day registration have become so fierce around the country because they are founded more on passionate belief than proven fact. One side is convinced fraud is rampant; the other believes that disenfranchisement is widespread,” he says.

Precious time and resources are being wasted over partisan-slanted perceptions of what is wrong with the administration of elections. The real offense is that only 71 percent of eligible citizens are actually registered to vote, and therefore able to cast a ballot. Adding more restrictions, or further limiting access to the franchise by enacting these partisan-driven policies only hurts democracy.

"Every four years when our country is focused on a Presidential election, there are obligatory stories written expressing outrage about flaws in our voting system," Smith writes. "Why aren't we automatically registered? Why is it so hard to register and why can't we use new technologies to make it easier? Why are certain groups of people being intimidated at the polls? Who is really cheating? What in the world is a hanging chad?"

Learn more about positive election reforms by downloading our advocacy toolkits here.

Monitor election legislation in all 50 states by signing up for a weekly email here.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Just imagine (3+ / 0-)

    if someone made the suggestion that old people are too addled, chronically set in their ways, and all around silly to vote.

    Can you imagine the furor over that?  It's essentially the same argument.  You don't want a certain demographic to vote because they are too ___ (fill in the blank.)

    Perhaps we could bar anyone without a high school education from voting.  Obviously, they're too dumb to vote.  Or pregnant ladies--they're "the crazy" with all those hormones.

    I blog about my daughter with autism at her website

    by coquiero on Wed Mar 09, 2011 at 09:24:03 AM PST

  •  "Why aren't we automatically registered?... (6+ / 0-)

    ... Why is it so hard to register and why can't we use new technologies to make it easier? Why are certain groups of people being intimidated at the polls?"

    Yes. Always asked. Never fully answered.

    Every election, one of the key attacks is directed at voting by college students in communities where they go to school instead of their parents' home community. In fact, given the mobility of Americans, even if they leave town immediately after graduation, and even if they are away for summer, they spend more time there than many non-students whose voter bona fides are not questioned.

    Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Wed Mar 09, 2011 at 09:37:03 AM PST

  •  Despite speaking highly about democracy... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JimWilson, happymisanthropy, coquiero

    ...Republicans really hate it when people vote.

  •  The Supreme Court decided in 1979 (0+ / 0-)

    that college students do have the right to vote wherever they go to school.
    SYMM v. U.S, 439 U.S. 1105 (1979) affirmed the lower court's ruling that questions asked of voters to determine 'residency' for voting purposes [such as the NH GOP is legislating] are in violation of 42 U.S.C. 1971(a), 1971(c), 1973, 1973j(d), 1973bb, and the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Twenty-sixth Amendments.

    But then the Tihadist GOP don't give a tinker's damn about the Constitution, the law, citizens of the state or the Supreme Court.  So I imagine if this passes the General Court of NH and survives a veto override, the whole thing will be played out in the courts . . . . . again.

    ----- GOP found drowned in Grover Norquist's bathtub.

    by JimWilson on Wed Mar 09, 2011 at 12:24:01 PM PST

  •  Good News! (0+ / 0-)

    The restrictive student voting AND anti-EDR bill are dead, according to Rock the Vote today.

    Unfortunately, a photo voter ID bill is still pending.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site