Collegiate Times

I spent four years in Blacksburg attending Virginia Tech. I registered to vote in Montgomery county, voted in the 2004 Presidential election, and voted for the local town council elections. Granted, Montgomery tries to find ways to discourage student voters (such as by moving the voting site to a location not on a BT bus route or not within walking distance), the fact is I voted in three elections and nobody cared. When i left, i registered to vote in Nova. Forget what the uninformed say. You go to school in Blacksburg, you live there, don't be afraid to vote there.

The law is up for interpretation. Luckily, we have people who are more qualified than some college student who works on the school paper for a couple hours a week to handle this. According to the Virginia State Board of Elections, college students are free to vote in any locality they live. Don't spew your vapid musings all over campus unless you have the facts. And if they haven't contacted you by "press time", wait a little longer, I'm sure you could have written a fine column about how unjust the ban on the "Stick It In" cheer is. Source: http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/wb/176293

Wow, pretty venomous with the comments. I actually thought this column was well-written. You see, the missing piece from the argument is this: just because you register to vote here doesn't mean you are allowed to. The Board of Elections admits that each individual situation is complicated, which is why, for the millionth time, they urge people to "consult appropriate advisors regarding these issues." Ms. Summers sources her article well, describes the domiciliary and residential requirements based on VA code and the Board of Elections publications. What more do you want? By the way, the Board of Elections specifically says that you must reside here AND PLAN TO STAY FOR AN UNLIMITED TIME (http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/Voter_Information/Registering_to_Vote/College_Student.html). As for waiting for more information before publishing, these missing details are not essential to the story. I don't see the big problem with publishing with the information she already had.

I agree with Jason, I feel that the CT has finally put out a decent article. She gave all the quotes so the nay-sayers can criticize her all they want. She left the quotes in the article for interpretation. A true informed person would read the letter of the law and investigate on their own instead of listening to some NOVA person without any facts or quotes.

Well-written and well-researched column. Voting laws are difficult because there are so many different circumstances into which people fall. The US Constitution guarantees, under certain conditions, that everyone gets to vote. What it does not guarantee is a specific choice of voting location - this is to say, I can't physically prevent you from entering a polling place, but the registrar doesn't necessarily have to permit you the ability to vote in his own local elections if he doesn't think you pass the legal qualifications set forth by the State Constitution. Remember, you can always vote absentee - so the legal questions here have to be answered by the State Constitution instead. This isn't much of an issue for VA residents - the real concern here is over out-of-state residents. Which, in my opinion, is why the Electoral College exists in the first place - to keep people who practice 'self-gerrymanderization' from having a distinct effect on elections.

Have you researched previous attorney general opinions? The Sachs case indicates this issue is not new.

Jason T said "you must reside here AND PLAN TO STAY FOR AN UNLIMITED TIME " Given the hard time students can have getting into required classes in time to graduate in traditional 4 years, it is much easier to consider the undergraduate years of residence in Blacksburg "unlimited." :-)

Even though he was poking fun, I have to agree with PJ. Most of us have plans to leave here, but we are not limited by them. No one says we have to leave here, we can stay as long as we would like. I thought I was going to be here for 4 years, then I did a Co-op and I am in my 5th year. I am considering going to grad school here, and I have a good job in the CRC that I might keep. I would argue that most of us have factors that will limit us if we must stay here a little longer to get our degrees.

I understand your point, Ben, but the design of the law is an indefinite commitment to the locality. The point I'm getting at is that the law indicates that one should not register to vote here (or anywhere, for that matter) unless he has some sort of indefinite commitment to the locality. The fact that your situation has changed is a prime example of this - you used to consider residence in Blacksburg to be temporary, and now it seems like a longer-term thing. Makes sense, to me, that you should want to vote here. But for Joe Student, who has no intention of staying in town after he graduates (even if graduation seems to be four or five years in the future) doesn't really have a vested interest in the success and operation of local politics. That's where the line gets drawn - nobody will hold you to act on your intention to stay indefinitely, because things often change, but if the plan right now is to 'stay until I finish the degree and then get out,' then registering to vote in Montgomery County is at the very least unethical.

I think calling it unethical is a little harsh. Most college students don't vote in any local elections, regardless of where they live, so I doubt they will be rushing out to all the local elections in Blacksburg just because they are registered here. If the town decides to have their local elections at the same time as the presidential elections, then that is their decision. I would think that you would get a lot of people, even local residents who don't care about who is on the school board, voting for someone they have never heard of or something they don't understand. It seems that the solution is to hold local elections at a different time to make sure that those showing up to vote care about what happens. Most students here have never been able to vote in a major election. Voting in the polls on election day is a much more active process than sending in an absentee ballot, and it is important for everyone to take an active roll in national politics, especially those of us experiencing it for the first time.

When I say 'local elections,' I mean in this context the election of the local representative to the state and congressional legislatures. Apologies for the confusion. The point that is important here, though, is that this campaign seems largely focused at encouraging out-of-state voters to register to vote in Montgomery County - something which ought not be encouraged because of the variety of ramifications involved. It might make one feel better to pull the lever in the voting booth, but that isn't an excuse for blasting the rules out of the water to make people feel better about themselves. If the thing holding people back from voting is the 'tribulation' of having to get and return an absentee ballot, I'd charge that those people probably have no business voting anyway. . . it isn't like the opportunity to vote doesn't exist. The fact that the most ethical method of voting doesn't happen to be the most convenient isn't relevant (or shouldn't be) in any way.

First, I am not and have never been a VT student. There seems to be much quibbling about what the law says about voting. Bottom line according to multiple Federal court decisions is one is allowed to vote where they physically reside. This has nothing to do with what Virginia or any other state or university uses to determine tuition residency. We are talking about voting in elections that are enshrined by US Constitution, multiple Federal Voting Right Acts and Federal Court decisions. Fundamentally, the 14 Amendment guarantees one equal protection under the law and Virginia's interpretation on intent of domicile is therefore irrelevant if your body lives in Blacksburg and wishes to vote there. The other issue is should the voting registrar be warning people that they may need to "consult appropriate advisers(sp) regarding these issues?" Absolutely not. As I have noted, the laws of the United States give you the right to vote where you live. Where you register to vote can not be used as a basis for determining any legal entitlement to benefits. Most importantly, why is the Registrar for Elections in a local county trying to give legal advice to students on scholarships and health benefits when their job is just to assure that legal voters are able to register to vote? Clearly he is now aware of this as noted in his clarification statement. Remember well stated, strong opinions on this website that are wrong may unfortunately visible for a very long time.

Local elected officials have a huge say over life here at Virginia Tech. This newspaper writes many articles every year about the school's budget and other issues that these officials have say over. Why shouldn't a student here have a say in that, regardless of where they are originally from? We are all Hokies and we all care about and are affected by what happens to our school. More importantly, we all pay to be here. Part of that money goes to the town and the state, so saying out of state students don't pay taxes here is not the best argument. Also, the House Rep from the Fightin' 9th was elected in 2006 by a 2/3 majority. He doesn't even have a republican opponent yet. Out of state students will have no say over that election.

The United States Supreme Court already answered this question in 1979. If you are a college student, you may register to vote in the college town where you physically reside. End of story.

Apparently, one person's "loophole" is another person's "established Supreme Court precedent from almost 30 years ago that's binding nationally and incontrovertibly allows Virginia Tech students to register in Montgomery County if they so choose." Different strokes for different folks, or just a completely asinine exercise on the part of the author? I guess that's open to interpretation, too. :)

Anyone have a cite for the SCOTUS case? Incidentally, if you're really super concerned about it, all you have to do is request to register. The worst that could happen would be that the registrar tells you that you have to vote absentee, and cites the appropriate law. Disenfranchisement? I think not.

//Disenfranchisement? I think not.// Actually, it is disenfranchisement. It is purposefully trying to confuse students into think that they are not allowed to vote here. Let's be real, absentee ballots are a crock of crap. Always have been, always will be. The only state I can condone using an absentee ballot is in Ohio simply because they use a lot of Die-bold machines.

into thinking* Oh, and I would not doubt for a minute that the author of this "column" is a Republican. Always trying to disenfranchise voters, every election. Johnny Mac just sent out 1 million fake absentee ballots in Ohio. Same tricks as always...damn voter cagers.

Please explain how encouraging students to check the law and the implications of their decisions is disenfranchisement. And as for 'being real,' I voted absentee each of my four years at VT and never felt that I had been disenfranchised in any way. I mean, it's just as possible that your electrons can get lost in the voting machine tally as it is for your envelope to get lost en route to your official registrar. The bottom line here seems to be more in terms of general laziness . . .

advisers is spelled correctly according to the AP stylebook, which the CT follows. just a little fyi. also there is no need to put "column" in quotations. it is a column, therefore the author is entitled to write her opinion. hence, why it is on the opinions page. if you don't like it, write a letter to the editor.

//I mean, it's just as possible that your electrons can get lost in the voting machine tally as it is for your envelope to get lost en route to your official registrar.// There's a paper trail for the voting machine, this is why I recommend absentee ballots for Ohio. Absentee ballots are not counted unless the election is close, and sometimes they're thrown out altogether. //Please explain how encouraging students to check the law and the implications of their decisions is disenfranchisement// That's not what she's encouraging. She's essentially saying "it's illegal so don't do it." There's no need to check the law when there has already been an established precedent about this...

//also there is no need to put "column" in quotations. it is a column, therefore the author is entitled to write her opinion. hence, why it is on the opinions page. if you don't like it, write a letter to the editor.// Because you're not allowed to lie in the columns page, even if it's an opinion. ////However, if you want to know what the real law states, visit the Va. Board of the Elections' Web site. The first bullet point there says: "To be eligible to register to vote in Virginia a person must be a resident of Virginia (A person who has come to Virginia for temporary purposes and intends to return to another state is not considered a resident for voting purposes)." Therefore no person can be registered to vote in more than one place at once. To me, this plainly and simply says that people from other states coming to Virginia Tech for college do not fall under this category and should not be allowed to register here.// This is a lie. The law could very well be there, but thankfully the SCOTUS, as established in Marbury vs. Madison, is the Supreme Law of the Land as they interpret the Constitution.

Please cite the SCOTUS case you keep referring to. Also, it isn't Marbury v. Madison which made the Federal Constitution the 'law of the land' - and in fact, there is no law making it such. M v. M founded the principle of Judicial Review, under which SCOTUS could find laws passed by Congress to be Unconstitutional and thus effectively throw them out. It didn't affect the federal system which had been established. The applicability of Federal laws to the states comes from (what I consider to be) a gross misinterpreation of the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. So long as states aren't denying equal protection (in this case, by prohibiting voting - which VA isn't doing since one can still vote absentee), the law actually defaults to the 10th Amendment, which reserves non-enumerated rights to the states.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/education/08students.html?ref=us http://supreme.justia.com/us/439/1105/case.html

the supreme court case cited below is only a jurisdictional decision. It does not stand for the precedent that people think it does. The only reason the SCOTUS got involved is b/c it was a matter of jurisdiction. this was the Texas state court determining state law, subsequently challenged by a district court (hard to tell if it's a Texas state court or the U.S. district court in Texas interpreting state law.)

Honestly, I don't quite understand why there's such a huge debate. If you have a vested interest in the politics of Montgomery County and Blacksburg go right ahead change your voting district. If you prefer to have a say in the politics where your from, vote absentee. It's pretty simple.

This column was well written and well researched. To those that think it's completely wrong: something makes me highly doubt that you've done the research or talked with the people like the author did, even you you may delude yourself to think you did. So next time you feel like whining about something make sure you are well educated before you look like an idiot when you try to complain by using citations of cases that aren't related. And I don't see how stating that the law equates to displaying this author's political point of view.