Collegiate Times

Yet another mis-characterization of the words of the Montgomery County Registrar. He said, effectively, 'cover your bases, and don't blame me if you get screwed because you didn't realize something.' That's called responsible authority. Personally, I think that having to dodge people with clipboards accosting me with questions about why I refuse to vote for Obama is a bit undemocratic as well. . .

Kyle is right. The issue with the registrar and so-called misinformation is not really an issue at all. He's simply saying, "I'll register you, but just be aware that there MAY be consequences." As for the philosophy of voting from your college town, it seems to me like common gerrymandering, as the people who will likely benefit most from a larger college vote are Democrats running for local office.

No, the registrar lied. He flat out said that by registering to vote in Montgomery County, one would no longer be considered a dependent of their parents, or lose a scholarship. That is a complete lie. This is nothing less than an attempt to stop young people from exercising their constitutional rights. Students should be able to vote in the place they live most of the time. But, hey, I just believe in democracy. Here for source: http://insidehighered.com/news/2008/09/03/voting

Don't misinterpret the Constitution, Brett - voting is not a right, precisely because it can be taken away for certain things. A belief in Democracy is misplaced in this nation, as we are actually a Democratic Republic. It's a major, major difference in how the political process works. And finally, please note that even if we take at face value the assertion that voting is a Constitutionally-granted right (it is not), voting is never mandated to be convenient for everyone. Saying that students can't vote in Montgomery County doesn't say anything about an inability to vote AT ALL. They aren't going to deny you an absentee ballot. There's a difference between blocking the polls (a la Jim Crow), and asking people to vote where their interests (primarily tax-based) lie. Like I've said before - if you want to reap the benefits of voting in Virginia, you ought also to have to pay into the pool. Otheriwse, we've just invited a lot of disinterested parties to set our policy for the next several years.

I think the location a person votes should be the same location where that person has to pay their taxes in. If a person has no tax liability here in Montgomery County because they claim their parents address as a permanent address, their vote should be restricted to that locality. however, if the person establishes themselves locally and pays all local income, property, and other taxes here, then they ought to have every ability to vote here. This essentially comes down to a reverse problem of what our country faced when we were still under British rule. Then, we had the problem of taxation without representation. Now, we have the problem of respresentation without taxation. Far too many people in this country have the ability to vote and have no financial stake in who gets elected, because they pay little or no taxes...while the number of voting taxpayers is now outweighed by nontaxed voters. It's no wonder our imperial Federal government is so bloated and ready to collapse.

So then why are homeless people allowed to vote?

Brett Morris: The only thing the registrar says definitively WOULD happen in that article is that you will be declared independent for tax purposes. Other statements just mention things that COULD happen in some cases. Please show me evidence of how changing your legal residence to somewhere different from your parents' will not force you to declare yourself independent. As far as I know, it does exactly that.

The problem is largely one in circular logic. If the registrar deems you worthy to vote

Sorry, hit the wrong key. The registrar is allowed to ask you questions relating to your domicile (which is determined by physical presence AND an intent to remain there) to determine your eligibility to vote. Then once you are registered to vote, you can use that as evidence of, but not sufficient proof of, domicile. Domicile is not determined by taxes; it is determined by intent to remain in an area. Have a look at http://www.policylibrary.tax.virginia.gov/OTP/Policy.nsf/72ecd7668f3940d2852569910070c1d2/c1d40a2119df827285256a2a00669f6e?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,residence,vote for more.

Okay, well since some of you seem to be informed, then maybe you can answer my question. I live in an apartment in Blacksburg. I am registering to vote in Montgomery County because I will be getting married in February thus living here all year long. (probably at least around 3-4 years) My husband and I will be residing somewhere in Blacksburg/Montgomery County. So, my parents will claim me on their 2008 taxes, but not their 2009 taxes because I will be married the second month of the year. So, I shouldn't be affect by registering to vote in Montgomery County, right?

kdd, you will be fine. I moved off campus after my second year and declared local residency and idependence for tax purposes, mainly because I made too much to be claimed any longer. But yes, you should be able to register and vote locally with no problem, especially because you have a street address.

If you have any questions, do what the registrar said in the first place: consult a tax professional. That's the whole point.

Jason T: I registered to vote in Blacksburg last year, I voted in this year's primary and re-registered again in Blacksburg at my new apartment just a few weeks ago. I had no issues with my registration either time and I am still a dependent on my parents taxes.

Glad to hear it. Now, in keeping with the registrar's point, let me ask: did your parents ask a tax professional whether they COULD still claim you, or did they just do it and never get questioned about it by the IRS? Plenty of people do plenty of things on their taxes that they shouldn't but they get away with it. Just because you don't get audited doesn't mean that you submitted your tax forms correctly.

Why don't you read the information from the horse's mouth? It's not that hard. IRS Publication 17 (http://www.irs.gov/publications/p17/ch03.html#publink100032170) "Qualifying Child There are five tests that must be met for a child to be your qualifying child. The five tests are: Relationship, Age, Residency, Support, and Special test for qualifying child of more than one person." Basically, it's under 24 and a full time student, away for educational purposes (REGARDLESS OF RESIDENCY), and did not provide more than half of their own support. Indeed, students over the age of 24 also qualify, as long as they are the children of the taxpayer, did not earn more than $3,400 in taxable income that year, and the parent and guardian provided half of their support. That test specifically disclaims residency completely, and is the one used for claiming parents in nursing homes (who obviously don't have residence with the taxpayer). Jason, your fearmongering is absurd and you should read rather than scaring others.

But the IRS documentation is only one piece of the puzzle. Because of the way elections work, each state is entitled to make its own rules about who is and is not eligible to vote in the state. Further, local registrars are charged with interpreting the laws passed by the state legislatures and ensuring that the local citizens applying for registration actually meet the criteria set forth by the state. But keep in mind, the local registrar denying a person the ability to vote locally does not equate to a Constitutional violation of voting rights - all it says is, you don't have a vested interest in the community's development and sustainment (from a legal perspective), so you need to go exercise your right where you DO have such a legal interest. The laws are fairly ambiguous, of course, which is why the registrar has such a difficult task. There really isn't any fearmongering going on here. . . the simple thing to do would be submit your registration request, and see if you get turned down. But you also ought to follow the suggestions of talking to a lawyer and a tax professional (NOT JUST FROM THE IRS - the state collects taxes too) to ensure that you aren't shooting yourself in the foot.

I am not fearmongering, just as the registrar is not. What matters to me is that I am registered to vote. Everyone thinks the registrar is maliciously trying to keep the student element out of the election, but I'd argue that he's just doing what all officials learn to do: CYA (cover your ...).

The problem is that when you tell people to talk to an attorney and a tax professional, that means $$$. Most attorneys charge at least $100 an hour for a consultation and most EAs charge almost the same amount. I'm giving free advice, with the caveats that come along with it, but the vast majority of lawyers and tax professionals are not going to give you free advice specific to your situation. Thus, by saying "talk to an attorney and tax professional", you are basically telling the poor college student to spend $200 for the right to vote. Very disappointing.

Nobody is being denied the right to vote! This is an issue of convenience, not disenfranchisement. The ability to vote still exists, it's simply a question of whether or not an individual can vote in Blacksburg (or Montgomery County proper). The registrar has pretty much said "register here at your own risk - stuff might change for you if you don't do the proper research before you make this pronouncement." It isn't fearmongering and it isn't disenfranchisement - it's responsible government.