Editorial: Student ballot rights inalienable

Given how ingrained free and open elections have become in our civic vernacular, we commonly… Given how ingrained free and open elections have become in our civic vernacular, we commonly think of our right to vote as an immutable constant.

Almost 50 years since the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 21st-century American young people have comfortably internalized the notion that regardless of wealth, race, belief or educational status the ballot will always be free to us to cast.

Though considering legislation pending in the New Hampshire state houseouse, perhaps college students have been naive.

Early last month, a Republican New Hampshire state representative introduced a bill aimed at barring college students from voting in the towns in which they attend school.

If the bill passes, students will only be able to vote in their college town if they lived there before enrolling and can prove an intention to stay.

According to its sponsor, Rep. Gregory Sorg, the bill tries to allow only those with true community ties to influence elections. After introducing the bill last month, he told the Boston Globe that, “It’s about making sure that people who live in these towns have some control over the destiny of their towns.”

Sorg and his voting eligibility bill received significant flack from student political groups.

The Dartmouth, Dartmouth College’s student newspaper, recently reported that the College Democrat, Republican and Libertarian student groups are organizing a united front to oppose the legislation. To the groups, the bill represents a scantily disguised attempt by the new Republican majority in New Hampshire to limit electoral influence of traditionally left-leaning college students.

In the Jan. 26 article, President of the Dartmouth College Democrats Jeremy Kaufmann said, “But for some reason, just because statistically students tend to vote Democrat, that can somehow remotely be [construed] as justification for this legislation. It’s pretty staggering.”

Although the bill’s passage could potentially help his party, the president of the College Republicans, Richard Sunderland, echoed Kaufmann’s concerns, saying in the article, “It doesn’t matter whether we’re liberal or conservative — it just isn’t right.”

Such bipartisan cooperation among the Dartmouth student political groups is essential at this time, and we hope their effort to drum up popular condemnation for this legislation proves successful.

This bill passing in New Hampshire would be tragic, but its emboldening effects on other politicians seeking to limit the collegiate voice could be much worse. We can’t let this spread.

If you’ve read any of our editorials, you already know that emphasizing the importance that universities have for their surrounding community is part of everyday life at The Pitt News. We have no problem saying it again. But this is not just an issue of people under-appreciating college students — it’s about the future of our country.

Every college student deserves the right to electorally influence his or her immediate environment and if that right is increasingly threatened, the fate of American civic participation might be sealed. According to Josiette White — the New Hampshire director for America Votes quoted in The Dartmouth article — said, “If people start voting at [a] young age, it becomes a habit.”

Trying to hamper voting by the liberal-minded college crowd might make short-term strategic sense for the GOP, especially as 2012 approaches. But over the long run, disenfranchising young people today is an easy way to ensure a future America that no one will be proud of.