Vote or Consequences


Missed this a few days ago. The Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina dislikes how the local and state Board of Elections resolved the Warren Wilson voter registration confusion. Their executive director does not seem to recognize that Warren Wilson students had no need for (and the school did not furnish) dorm-specific addresses prior to Republicans drawing a new district line through the middle of campus. (Have I got that right?)

An unpopular but prudent solution would either have been to let the students vote by absentee ballot from their home of record or for the Buncombe County Board of Elections to count their ballots as “partials,” only applying their votes for the bigger races but not the problematic district ones. Some would scoff at that, but let’s never forget how many college students don’t even qualify for in-state tuition. They can vote in local races without consequence and rarely pay local property taxes.

Election officials blew the call. Hopefully, the courts will appreciate this peril along with a few related issues involving the entire student-voting franchise: First, do college students living at temporary addresses really have standing in local races? Second, are those young adults being politically manipulated by their college professors who can shape values with a bully pulpit and a grade book?

Fox News using the public airwaves to manipulate voters is one thing, but parents paying to send kids to the private school of their choice? The horror.

Plus, we can’t have students “voting with their feelings,” I guess.

When a phrase like “without consequence” makes you cock your head and go “baroo?“, you’ve just heard another right-wing dog whistle. Or when they consider it “emancipating” (later in the piece) to require students to pay property tax before they can vote. This is how self-appointed VIPs ensure that “no voters are disenfranchised.”


  1. Andrew Dahm says:

    I’m glad to hear of this Voter Integrity Project, and await their investigation into increasing pluralities for Democrats without corresponding increases in representation.

  2. Lesley Groetsch says:

    It’s an interesting choice of words, “bully pulpit,” considering how hard preachers and priests have worked to elect Republicans and pass GOP sponsored legislation…from the “pulpit.”

  3. Sanuk D says:

    Would it not simplify things if we just assessed the tax at the poll? We might also administer a short quiz to insure the voter was sufficiently informed about the issues. Politically literate, if you will.

  4. Don’t forget the skin luminosity test.

  5. Phil B says:

    Love the sarcastic answers. I can’t top them. Think of how different all this would be if the Republican candidate had won by 18 votes (or whatever the final number was) and the Democrats were challenging it in court.

  6. Ascend of Asheville says:

    The Democrats have a strong history of accepting the political reality (Gore, Kerry etc.) rather than going to extreme contra-electoral means to get a victory.