North Carolina Lawmakers Introduce Bill To Penalize Parents Of College Student Voters

[EagleKeeper]

Oh, I didn't realize there were so many old and/or stupid people here.

7 Ways North Carolina Republicans are Trying to Make it Harder to Vote

So says a Democratic leaning blog

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I saw this as much the same, I thought all of progressives here loved tax increases, especially on those who are wealthy enough to send their kids to college.

Right, because everyone who sends a kid to college is rich.

Are people really this unintelligent, or do they just pretend to be on the Internet?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

So says a Democratic leaning blog

Sorry, that was the wrong link.

This is the right one.

That said, your refutation of the arguments, with links, in that blog post, is what exactly?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

How is it discouraging students from voting.

By making it more difficult for them to do so.

they also have the option of absentee voting and/or early voting.

Which the assholes who run NC are also trying to reduce or eliminate.

 

[bozack]

How is it discouraging students from voting.

A student can vote anywhere that they declare their primary residence.

they also have the option of absentee voting and/or early voting.

Where is the STUDENT right to vote being suppressed/discouraged.

its not, which is why that second article and Charlie's points are pretty silly....

Again when I was in school they didn't even mention that you could use your university address as your primary, and you were strongly encouraged to submit an absentee ballot, and I went to school in the liberal wonderland of Massachusetts so its not like some limp wristed liberal argument that there was some type of suppression going on.

 

[Moonbeam]

And consider it the other way, individuals who spend the vast majority of their year in a place have no say in how it is run.

Republicans need to stop messing with voting issues entirely for awhile. At this point they have established such an atrocious record of attempts at voter suppression it is hard to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are acting in good faith.

First you determine what you want to do, like suppress democratic vote, and then you look for supposed injustices and flaws in the law that that you can come in and remedy, like stopping the dead and illegals from voting while whipping that issue into a frenzy. Republicans are really moral decent people who what to fix things that are wrong. Those who are harmed in the process are either lazy or to stupid to vote if they can't get registered or off on the day of the election or can't get to the DMV etc. etc. etc. Republicans are scum but it's that hiding behind virtue that is truly sickening.

 

[bozack]

By making it more difficult for them to do so.



Which the assholes who run NC are also trying to reduce or eliminate.

LOL that second article is even better....

$10 for papers to get an id = a poll tax, the libs are funny, if anything it is a complete travesty that one doesn't have to show id currently to vote, but I guess mandating that people show ID will disenfranchise liberal voters so why not be against it.

Cutting early voting is a big who cares in my book, I don't think it would make a major difference as if people are motivated to vote they will find a way, but can't see that being a big deal....

Same day registration? didn't even know that is/was an option, and not even certain it is in my area...all of this stuff should be standardized, here in MA you have to register 20 days before elections or primaries....it is pretty liberal here so all you leftists should love that, my stance is everywhere should have a 20 day period for registering since it works well for us and libs love MA http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/eleifv/howreg.htm

And as for straight ticket voting, well if voters can't figure out or deal with more than one scantron bubble then wow, we have bigger issues to deal with, god forbid we make people actually think about their choices instead of just slurping down the Kool aid.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

English comprehension seems not to be a strong suit for a lot of people around here.

The title of the article is not "7 Ways North Carolina Republicans are Trying to Make it Impossible to Vote".

The title of the article is "7 Ways North Carolina Republicans are Trying to Make it HARDER to Vote.

 

[bozack]

Right, because everyone who sends a kid to college is rich.

Are people really this unintelligent, or do they just pretend to be on the Internet?

Chuckie, you're problem is that you think everyone comes on here and actually cares about what the people in this forum think, or takes this "seriously"

So back to the above, everyone knows the Dems love taxes, especially on anyone who is even remotely considering luxuries like College...so why shouldn't these people pay their fair share?

English comprehension seems not to be a strong suit for a lot of people around here.

The title of the article is not "7 Ways North Carolina Republicans are Trying to Make it Impossible to Vote".

The title of the article is "7 Ways North Carolina Republicans are Trying to Make it HARDER to Vote.

Oh Chuck...why is being harder a bad thing? why should voting be easy? or are you implying that Liberals need it easy to be elected into office as the bulk of their electorate is lazy?

 

[mshan]

"North Carolina had been reliably Republican for more than two decades. Even Bill Clinton, a Southerner who managed to carry other Southern states, fell short in North Carolina. But over the past few decades, the state’s economy has become much more diversified, remaking the state’s political landscape.

Longtime economic engines in the state, like tobacco, textiles and furniture, have been fading, while newer sectors — like banking, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and telecommunications — have been growing. New kinds of jobs have attracted new kinds of voters, and North Carolina is younger, more diverse and better educated than it used to be.

But Mr. Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina came early. Favorable political conditions nationally and a substantial surge in turnout pulled the state into the Democratic column ahead of schedule. North Carolina, while more competitive than it used to be, is still to the right of the national tipping point, and Mitt Romney has had a slim lead in most surveys of the state conducted this year."

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...na-obamas-2008-victory-was-ahead-of-schedule/

 

[Fern]

-snip-

It is blatantly obvious what they are doing. Trying to discourage college kids from voting, because they know that it is mainly the youth vote that got Obama elected, and then re-elected. So now they will resort to these tactics to try to win any future elections by discouraging voters, particularly the college kids.

When you strip away the bullshit, what's left is the real point of this law: to discourage students from voting, because they mostly vote Democratic.

I don't understand this line of thinking.

The proposed law doesn't make any sense to me. First, it's redundant. Second, the Repub legislator is encouraging those Democrat voting students to actually vote IN NC.

This legislator is a moron. If he passes a law in NC that effects NC resident's it will only force their children to vote in NC, children that he claims are "liberals". If someone lives in NJ and sends their liberal child to NC then his dumb ass laws have no effect on them.
-snip-

^^This guy gets it.

Fern

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Chuckie, you're problem is that you think everyone comes on here and actually cares about what the people in this forum think, or takes this "seriously"

So, you were trying to sound like a moron. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Fern]

So ignoring the other argument, say a child lives at home in an election year until the fall when they go off to school for their first year. They also register to vote there.

Should the parent lose the ability to claim as all tests in the link you referenced would otherwise be met minus this new rule that they can't vote elsewhere?

If you're asking if the parents could still claim their child as dependent for the year (s)he moved, yes I think so.

Fern

 

[Fern]

"[B]North Carolina had been reliabl...deral and state court for his crimes. Fern

 

[Charles Kozierok]

That's a very misleading statement. I think prior to the 2008 or 2010 election the Democrats had controlled the NC Congress for something like 100 years.

They're talking about presidential elections.

I don't understand this line of thinking.
The proposed law doesn't make any sense to me. First, it's redundant. Second, the Repub legislator is encouraging those Democrat voting students to actually vote IN NC.

They are gambling that more students -- who are busy people, if they are studying anything meaningful -- will simply not vote rather than go through the absentee process. Also, if students cannot vote locally, then GOTV efforts at colleges become less effective. This is covered in the article I referenced.

Again, this is about the national elections, not the state ones.

 

[Fern]

They're talking about presidential elections.

Yeah, but he doesn't say that. That's why I think it was misleading.

They are gambling that more students -- who are busy people, if they are studying anything meaningful -- will simply not vote rather than go through the absentee process. Also, if students cannot vote locally, then GOTV efforts at colleges become less effective. This is covered in the article I referenced.

Again, this is about the national elections, not the state ones.

Possibly. But I've had to vote using an absentee ballot. I've found it to be less time consuming than going to the polls etc.

No matter the purpose, this is a stupid law. It doesn't actually change anything, it merely publicizes the status quo. Here in NC audits of individual income tax returns are almost as rare as unicorns. The NC Dept of Revenue will NOT be auditing people to see if their kid voted out-of-state while at college. Even if they had the staff, which they don't, it would be a huge waste of money. At a 6-7% tax rate it would cost far more money to audit than could ever be brought it.

Fern

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Yeah, but he doesn't say that. That's why I think it was misleading.

The quote mentions Bill Clinton by name, and the title of the article referenced is "In North Carolina, Obama’s 2008 Victory Was Ahead of Schedule". That seems pretty clear context to me.

No matter the purpose, this is a stupid law.

I agree, though for different reasons. If nothing else, it's stupid because it makes the Republicans look petty and foolish. The GOP is turning overreach into an art form.

 

[sixone]

The part where they are physically not in the area at election time.

Since slavery is no longer legal, it's safe to assume that they aren't physically in the area by CHOICE.

Since an absentee ballot can be requested by the voter OR a near relative, failure to do so can also be assumed to be a CHOICE.

It's not difficult by any stretch of the imagination.

So let me ask again: what part of this law discourages students from voting in their home districts?

 

[ivwshane]

Since slavery is no longer legal, it's safe to assume that they aren't physically in the area by CHOICE.

Since an absentee ballot can be requested by the voter OR a near relative, failure to do so can also be assumed to be a CHOICE.

It's not difficult by any stretch of the imagination.

So let me ask again: what part of this law discourages students from voting in their home districts?

I can't answer that but can you tell me what the point of the law is?

 

[sixone]

I can't answer that but can you tell me what the point if the law is?

I'll answer your question, after you answer mine.

 

[ivwshane]

I'll answer your question, after you answer mine.

I just said I couldn't answer it.

 

[sixone]

I just said I couldn't answer it.

Then the law isn't very effective at discouraging student voting, hmmm?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Since slavery is no longer legal, it's safe to assume that they aren't physically in the area by CHOICE.

Since an absentee ballot can be requested by the voter OR a near relative, failure to do so can also be assumed to be a CHOICE.

It's not difficult by any stretch of the imagination.

So let me ask again: what part of this law discourages students from voting in their home districts?

You mean what is the marginal discouragement to voting in their parents' home district? Nothing, of course. It isn't designed to discourage students from voting in their parents' home districts, so it would be rather useless if it did.

What is the point of the law?

 

[Fern]

Maybe, just maybe, some politicians are so stupid that it is futile to try to understand their point.

I'm predicting this proposed law will not pass.

Fern

 

[ivwshane]

Then the law isn't very effective at discouraging student voting, hmmm?

So what's the point of the law then?