During the upcoming session of the New Hampshire Legislature, State Senate and House members will debate two bills proposed by State Rep. David Bates, R-Rockingham, which would require those wanting to vote in New Hampshire to claim residency in the state, according to Bates. This change would particularly impact college students from out of state by prohibiting them from participating in New Hampshire politics, according to State Rep. David Pierce, D-Grafton.
These recent legislative attempts follow a failed effort in March to pass legislation that sought to redefine residency for voting eligibility, preventing out-of-state students from voting in state or local elections. Although those bills did pass through the House due to issues of unconstitutionality, the new bills are consistent with the 14th Amendment and could legally be enacted, Bates said.
"[The bills] are equally applicable to everyone," Bates said.
Under the new proposed legislation, historically conservative "snowbirders," or people who spend their summers in New Hampshire, would be affected in the same ways college students would, with both groups prohibited from voting in state and local elections, Bates said.
Anyone can vote in New Hampshire if they claim it as their residency, according to Bates.
Current New Hampshire law mandates that individuals who wish to vote must only claim domicile in the state, allowing many college students from out of state to vote in New Hampshire, according to Pierce. Domicile status implies no fixed intent to stay, while residency status, which is required to hold a state drivers license, involves an intent to remain in an area for an extended period of time, according to Pierce.
Bates decided to rehash the bills to end the "dishonest" voter practice of claiming domicile in New Hampshire simply for purposes of voting, he said.
"You can't pretend to live here for one reason and not another," Bates said. "The purpose of the bill is to get people to conform to reality."
Bates, who is the State House's Election Law Chairman, wants to ensure voting practices are legal and return to the original Constitutional construct for voting registration, he said.
The bills have been met with opposition from Democrats like Pierce, who called prohibiting domicile-status voters from casting their ballots an "assault on voting rights."
Pierce said the bills are a "back-door way" of ensuring Republican control because Republicans want to eliminate certain Democratic-leaning segments of the population in order to gain an electoral advantage.
Pierce believes that the law specifically targets college students, who tend to be more liberal, he said.
"Republicans are trying to socially engineer society to fit what they think it should be," Pierce said.
Pierce cited the 1972 case Newberger v. Peterson, which involved the issue of college students voting in New Hampshire, as a precedent for opposition to the bills. Citing the 14th Amendment, the Federal District Court ruled that the state of New Hampshire could not forbid students from voting in the state, even if they have no intention of remaining after they graduate.
"Every citizen qualified to vote has the right to," Pierce said.
Both Bates and Pierce said that an unintended consequence of the new bills is their negative affect on state income. If more out-of-state students attend public universities in New Hampshire and claim the state as their residency for voting purposes, they would be entitled to in-state tuition breaks, therefore decreasing the amount of money the state collects in tuition annually, according to Bates.
Marty Gatens '15, the freshman representative for the College Republicans, said he opposes the bills proposed by Bates.
"I'd rather vote in New Hampshire because my vote is more powerful here than in Texas," he said.
Gatens, who described the bills as "unfair," said he would not be surprised if the College Republicans, College Democrats and College Libertarians all took action against the bills.
Rona Sun '15, a self-identified Democrat who is moving to Michigan for the summer, said she wants to vote in a "swing" state and feels "targeted" by the new bills.
"You can still identify with a state, even if it's not your home," she said. "It makes sense for Republicans to do this because college campuses, especially Dartmouth, are liberal and they're trying to give Republicans in New Hampshire a boost."
Charlotte Knott '15, who identifies herself as a Republican and hails from Boston, said she also opposes the bill despite its potential benefit on the Republican politicians in New Hampshire.
"We're living here nine months of the year, we should be able to vote here," she said.
Representatives from the College Democrats did not respond to requests for comment by press time.
