[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ENSURING THE RIGHTS OF
COLLEGE STUDENTS TO VOTE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
ADMINISTRATION
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
HELD IN WASINGTON, DC, SEPTEMBER 25, 2008
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration
Available on the Internet:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/administration/index.html
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
47-731 WASHINGTON : 2009
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION
ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania, Chairman
ZOE LOFGREN, California VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
Vice-Chairwoman Ranking Minority Member
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California
CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas KEVIN McCARTHY, California
SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama
S. Elizabeth Birnbaum, Staff Director
Will Plaster, Staff Director
ENSURING THE RIGHTS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS TO VOTE
----------
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2008
House of Representatives,
Committee on House Administration,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 2:00 p.m., in Room
1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Robert A. Brady
(chairman of the committee) Presiding.
Present: Representatives Brady, Davis of California, Davis
of Alabama, and Ehlers.
Staff Present: Thomas Hicks, Senior Election Counsel;
Janelle Hu, Election Counsel; Jennifer Daehn, Election Counsel;
Matt Pinkus, Professional Staff/Parliamentarian; Kyle Anderson,
Press Director; Kristin McCowan, Chief Legislative Clerk;
Daniel Favarulo, Legislative Assistant, Elections; Robert
Henline, Legislative Assistant; Fred Hay, Minority General
Counsel; Ashley Stow, Minority Election Counsel; Bryan T.
Dorsey, Minority Professional Staff; and Salley Collins,
Minority Press Secretary.
The Chairman. I would like to call the hearing on House
Administration to order. Today's hearing will focus on voting
for college students, the difficulties they face, and how we
can ensure their right to vote. I would like to recognize
myself for an opening remark.
In 2008, 44 million Americans 18 to 29 years old are
eligible to vote, more than one-fifth of the voting population.
And young voters in primaries and caucuses this year have more
than doubled their turnout from previous elections. Students
are also volunteering in greater and greater numbers.
The historic 2008 Presidential election clearly has young
voters energized like never before; however, college students
today face barriers to vote, restricting or vague residency
requirements confuse both election officials and students. Many
States require forms of identification at the polls that
students simply do not have. Some election officials still
believe the myth that young people don't care about voting and
don't provide enough machines in college towns. Even worse,
deceptive fliers on college campuses have threatened students'
financial aid and health care if they register to vote on
campus.
Several of our witnesses today have done a great job of
protecting the rights of college students to vote. I hope this
hearing today sends the message to election officials and
university presidents to take steps to encourage and protect
student voting rights.
We also will hear from students and student advisor
organizations who have encouraged students to vote in this
historic Presidential election. Studies have shown that for the
first-time voters cannot register and vote the first time they
try, they will be less likely to participate in future
elections. We owe it to our young voters and our democracy to
do what we can to encourage a new generation of American
voters.
[The statement of Mr. Brady follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. I will now ask our Ranking Member Mr. Ehlers
if he has any statement.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I do.
I thank you for calling today's hearing on this important
and timely issue. With the excitement surrounding the upcoming
election, particularly with young Americans who may be casting
a vote for President for the first time, we must do everything
that we can to encourage participation in the elections
process. I know I personally have been involved when I was a
professor at a small, but excellent college. I was involved in
recruiting people to register students to vote, putting them at
the end of the registration line and nabbing the students as
they came out of their college registration, and saying, ``hey,
you registered at the college, now register to vote.'' And we
got quite a few that way. It is a good thing to do.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on the
efforts to educate student voters. We must also ensure that
voting advocacy groups that tour college campuses respect the
laws of each State they visit and adjust their instructions
accordingly, as many States have varying residency requirements
to cast a ballot. And I want to emphasize that because of my
work in this committee, I have encountered shady registration
practices in various States where the registrars simply
disregard the rules and tell the students they can do anything
they want. That is not true. We have to follow the laws of the
State. It is not Federal law, but State law.
In order to get young people excited about participating in
the electoral process, elections administrators and third-party
groups must find new and creative ways to reach out to college-
age voters. One such approach that I am very proud to say comes
from my home State of Michigan is a mobile branch office which
is established by Michigan's forward-thinking Secretary of
State Terri Lynn Land. Michigan's mobile branch office has
traveled more than 125,000 miles while registering voters,
issuing driver's licenses, answering questions and offering all
the services found at a traditional secretary of state branch
office. Since 2004, the mobile branch office has visited
Michigan's public universities to assist students in
registering to vote just before major elections, and it is
scheduled to visit Michigan's 15 public universities before the
deadline to register to vote passes. I hope they can also go to
the smaller private universities. Following the introduction of
the mobile branch unit, its popularity has resulted in a number
of universities reserving a spot on the vehicle's calendar
months in advance in order to coordinate complementary voter
education activities.
Unfortunately, Secretary Land could not be with us today to
discuss this innovative program as she is busy ensuring that
Michigan is prepared for the upcoming election. However, if
there are no objections, I would like to submit a description
of the mobile branch office program for the record.
The Chairman. Without objection.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Ehlers. The success of Michigan's mobile branch program
has made it a model for other election programs around the
Nation, but it is only one solution. Through our efforts such
as today's hearings, we may look for additional ways to
increase the youth vote in this country and perhaps inspire a
lifetime of involvement in the elections process. I thank you,
Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Any other statements?
With none, we would like to get on with our first witness,
the Honorable Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, representing the
Ninth Congressional District of Illinois' House of
Representatives. She currently serves on the House Democratic
leadership as a chief deputy whip and as a member of the
Steering and Policy Committee. Representative Schakowsky has
been a leading advocate for students' voting rights, and I
commend her for her leadership in introducing the Student VOTER
Act.
I would also like to take time to make part of the official
record testimony submitted by Senator Durbin, who has been a
leader on the issue and introduced similar legislation in the
Senate.
[The statement of Senator Durbin follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. I thank my colleague today and look forward
to your testimony.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JAN SCHAKOWSKY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Ms. Schakowsky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Mrs. Davis. I am so happy to be here today. I appreciate your
opening statements that really show your support of students
having greater access and participation in our electoral
process.
I represent the Ninth Congressional District, which is not
so unusual, and also representing colleges and universities,
Northwestern University, Loyola University of Chicago, Oakton
Community College, Truman College. And I want to talk to you
about this bipartisan legislation and thank my friend
Congressman Steve LaTourette of Ohio, who is cosponsor with me
to reduce some of the barriers that college students face when
trying to vote.
I want to extend a particular thank you to Matthew Segal,
who actually brought this legislation to me. And he is the
founder and executive director of the organization SAVE and
will be testifying before you.
But I know there are a number of college students here who
themselves are advocating on their own behalf, and I want to
welcome them as well.
I believe the foundation of America's democracy lies in
civic engagement and broad participation in government. And
from the civil rights amendment to women's suffrage to the
abolition of the poll tax, and finally to the ratification of
the 26th amendment, this Nation has embarked on a difficult,
but steady march toward being a more inclusive Nation.
So in July I introduced H.R. 6704, the Student Voter
Opportunity to Encourage Registration Act, the Student VOTER
Act of 2008, which is a continuation of that progress, because
it provides a pathway to participation for America's youth. The
need for this bipartisan bill is clear. Despite a small rise in
youth voting in 2004's Presidential election, young voters, all
the data shows us, are far less likely to vote than older
voters. In the 2004 Presidential election, only 47 percent of
the 18- to 24-year-olds voted compared to 66 percent of
citizens 25 and older. This marked the eighth straight
Presidential contest in which less than half of young Americans
voted.
While there is a number of factors that contribute to this
trend, one is clearly the fact that many college students are
first-time voters and often are unfamiliar with how to
register. The Student VOTER Act offers a straightforward
solution. It requires colleges and universities that receive
Federal funds to provide students the opportunity to register
to vote on campus. The Student VOTER Act does this by amending
the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, also known as
Motor Voter, to designate colleges and universities that
receive Federal funds as voter registration agencies.
This legislation will not present a substantial burden to
our Nation's universities. Already the Federal Election
Commission has created the national mail voter registration
form, which allows Americans to register to vote from anywhere
in the United States. This form can easily be used at any
university providing registration services for its students.
For example, even before registration begins, Brown University
in Rhode Island, just one example, provides its students with
voter registration materials.
I am here today to talk with you about my bill, but I also
understand that my legislation addresses only one of the
challenges I believe young people will face when they attempt
to vote this fall. As we have already seen in this election
year, enthusiasm and interest in the political process is
stronger among young voters than perhaps at any other time in
our Nation's history. While this is grounds for optimism, I am
also troubled by efforts to intentionally mislead young voters
and/or prevent them from voting. I was shocked to learn about a
misinformation campaign at Virginia Tech earlier this year
where fliers were printed and posted around campus that said
that students who registered to vote in Virginia could no
longer be claimed as dependants on their parents' tax returns.
Aside from being wholly inaccurate, this type of misinformation
can have a devastating consequence by intimidating young voters
into not voting.
Another obstacle for young voters is stringent voter ID
laws. Seven States specify that voters must show a photo ID
before being permitted to vote. According to a Rock the Vote
survey, 19 percent of young adults 18 to 29 report they don't
possess a government-issued photo ID with their current
address. As a result, thousands, if not hundreds of thousands,
of college students will be forced to vote provisionally this
September, for which they may not even receive verification as
to whether or not their ballots count.
These examples of the barriers students face today when
attempting to register to vote demonstrate the importance of
today's hearing. And again, I want to say that my bill takes
one step forward by making it easier by making registration
more available to students on college campuses around the
country. And I thank the committee very much for inviting me
today.
I yield back my time.
The Chairman. Thank you, and thank you for participating.
And thank you for your introduction to the Student VOTER Act.
It is very much needed and appreciated.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Does anybody have any questions for the
Congresslady?
Thank you very much again.
The Chairman. We would like to call panel number one up
please. And while you are doing that, I would like to recognize
somebody in the audience. With us is Mr. Ken Smuckler. He is
president of the InfoVoter Technologies. InfoVoter manages and
operates the Tom Joyner hotline, the largest national voter
hotline in the country.
Please raise your hand, and thank you for participating and
your interest.
He is somebody that is going to--is participating or
listening today that knows he is going to be hearing something
that he can hopefully won't hear on election day. He is in
charge of trying to make a lot of problems that happen on
election day go away or try to solve them at that particular
16- or 13- or 12-hour window that we have, and hopefully he can
hear some things today that can maybe help before election day
happens. And we appreciate your attention and your
participation.
I would like to call the panel up to the desk, please. I
would like to welcome and thank our panel of witnesses today.
And we start off with Ms. Sheri Iachetta. Thank you. Ms. Sheri
Iachetta currently serves as a registrar for the city of
Charlottesville, Virginia. As a registrar Ms. Iachetta has had
the opportunity serve on many task forces that have been
important in shaping election administrative procedures, such
as the State Board of Elections Committee on Electronic Poll
Books, the State Task Force on Electronic Voting, and the
National Election Center Task Force on Poll Working Training.
Thank you, and appreciate your testimony today. Just push
that button and speak right into the microphone.
STATEMENTS OF SHERI IACHETTA, REGISTRAR, CITY OF
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA; NEIL ALBRECHT, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,
CITY OF MILWAUKEE ELECTION COMMISSION; MARVIN KRISLOV,
PRESIDENT, OBERLIN COLLEGE; AND CATHERINE McLAUGHLIN, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE OF POLITICS, HARVARD UNIVERSITY
STATEMENT OF SHERI IACHETTA
Ms. Iachetta. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee. Thank you for giving me this opportunity.
During my 10 years as registrar in the city of
Charlottesville, this subject is a significant subject that is
an integral part of my day-to-day activities, but it is not
just ensuring that college students have the right, it is
ensuring that all citizens have the right to vote regardless of
what group they may be identified with.
In the city of Charlottesville, we are home of one of the
State's largest universities. My long-standing policy has been
to accept at face value what the voter has written on their
registration form when they fill out their registration form
wishing to vote. The statement that they sign on their voter
registration form says, I swear and affirm under felony penalty
for making willfully false material statements or entries that
I am a U.S. citizen and a resident of Virginia. The information
that I have provided on this form is true.
I don't believe that I have reasonable cause to question
the statement of a voter simply because they are part of a
particular group. To do so would create a special class of
voter. And as you are aware, Virginia falls under section 5 of
the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and any attempt to create a
special class of voters would run afoul of this act.
One of the recurring themes that we hear in Charlottesville
and in any university community is that students could have
more than one residence. They have a residence in a dormitory,
as well as a possible second residence at their family's home,
which may or may not be in the same State as their college.
Some of my colleagues in Virginia are not comfortable
registering students with a dormitory address. Dorms may be a
more traditional dwelling; however, some students do have off-
campus apartments. Since all voters must be treated in the same
manner, our inability to identify a voter situation simply
based on their address precludes my office from treating all
students to the same standards.
We also have a significant number of residents in
Charlottesville that we term ``snow birds,'' and they have a
residence here for part of the year and then a warmer climate
for part of the year. They have nearly the same identical
housing situation as students and need to determine their legal
residence just as students must.
A second issue that arises is whether students have the
expressed intent to remain at their address indefinitely.
Determining a voter's future intent is beyond the purview of my
office. Due to the presence of the University of Virginia,
there are any number of transient professionals who may have an
expressed intent--who may not have the expressed intent to
remain at their Charlottesville address indefinitely: doctors
in residents, visiting professors. There has been no call to
preclude these individuals from registering to vote. Again, to
determine the intent of any member of the general population is
beyond the scope of local resources.
A third issue raised regarding the registration of students
is whether they have a vested interest in the operation of
local government. To this I would answer that students are a
regular and frequent user of city resources, including the
roads, emergency services and police resources. They are a
valuable source of volunteers to any number of community-based
programs. They are directly affected by all the local
ordinances, such as bicycles, noise control, trash collection
and more. I use University of Virginia students as interns in
my office, as election officials and as volunteers. Moreover,
students are a significant source of fiscal resources in this
community not only for the tax dollars that they bring in, but
since they are included in the census count of local
populations, significant Federal tax dollars are allotted for
this locality based on their presence. If their Federal
taxation dollars are awarded locally, then their representation
should also be local.
In summary, students are an integral part of this community
and, in my opinion, should be afforded the same voter
registration opportunity as any other citizen residing in the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
I hope to continue to work with the Virginia General
Assembly also to make the laws on residence and domicile more
definitive and equitable as they relate to students and other
voters in similar circumstances. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Iachetta follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Mr. Neil Albrecht. Neil Albrecht is a deputy
director of the City of Milwaukee Election Commission and has
held that position since 2005. A life-long resident of the city
of Milwaukee, Neil has a professional background in finance and
nonprofit management. Milwaukee has done a great job working
with area universities to register and assist student voters,
and we are happy to have Mr. Albrecht here with us today.
Also, your statements will be also put into the record in
its entirety. So, Mr. Albrecht.
STATEMENT OF NEIL ALBRECHT
Mr. Albrecht. Thank you. Good afternoon, members of the
committee, Chairman Brady. Thank you for this opportunity to
speak today on the important issue of ensuring rights of
college students to vote.
Wisconsin experienced the second highest voter turnout of
any State during the 2004 Presidential election. Turnout in the
city of Milwaukee was equally significant. The demographics of
those voting represented the vast diversity of the city's
residents, including tremendous participation by student voters
attending local colleges and universities.
Wisconsin's success in maintaining and inspiring voter
participation is rooted in the State laws which recognize that
barriers do exist that can prevent an individual from
exercising their constitutional right to vote. These barriers
can be particularly profound for people in low socioeconomic
classes, seniors, and for students.
For students, some of the most significant barriers include
identification requirements, producing an identification
document that includes the student's name and residential
address for voter registration purposes. This can be
particularly challenging for students attending school away
from their home State. Many of these students live in campus
housing, and most college and university ID cards do not
include residential address information. Additionally, students
living in roommate housing situations may not appear on leases,
utility bills or other documents often used as proof--to fill
proof of residence requirements.
Secondly, students are often challenged by a lack of easily
accessible information or inaccurate information relating to a
State's voter qualification laws and voter registration
process.
Thirdly, the challenge of actually completing the voter
registration process prior to an election, given a lack of
information, complex schedules, the proximity of the election
to the start of a semester, and an obvious focus on academics.
Lastly, as laws vary from State to State, there is often
confusion and/or the dissemination of incorrect information
regarding registration requirements, absentee ballots and
voting requirements. Misinformation is particularly problematic
when it implies a false connection between residency for tax
filing and residency to register to vote.
Wisconsin's election laws and rules clearly recognize these
barriers and include provisions that allow and even encourage
students, many of them first-time voters, to participate in the
democratic process. Most notably Wisconsin allows election day
registration. During Wisconsin's last gubernatorial election,
over 90 percent of the voters at one polling site near
Marquette University registered to vote on the day of election.
Beyond any doubt, the opportunity for election day and
registration in Wisconsin allowed thousands of students to vote
in the last election and is key to ensuring the student vote.
In addition to election day registration, since 1980,
colleges and universities in Wisconsin may provide
municipalities with lists of students residing in campus
housing prior to an election. These lists are distributed to
the appropriate voting sites, and students appearing on these
lists may use their student ID cards without an address as
proof of residence. The success of the single provision--I am
sorry, the success of the single provision in Milwaukee has
been significant. For students in noncampus housing, Wisconsin
allows a voter to appear at a voting site with a corroborating
witness. A corroborating witness may certify the name and
address of another voter by signing their registration
application and providing a proof of residence demonstrating
their own residency.
It is essential to recognize the importance of technology
when discussing student participation in elections. The
Milwaukee Election Commission posts on the city's Web site
comprehensive and accurate information as well as all forms
necessary to register to vote, request an absentee ballot and
serve as an election worker.
While any State or municipality such as Milwaukee can
choose to philosophically embrace the importance of the student
vote, real voting policy is determined by State and Federal
law. We must do everything possible to encourage voter
participation. The opportunity to vote in an election is
important to all qualified electors and equally important to
the principle of democracy. I believe this opportunity, free
from intentional and unintentional barriers, is particularly
important to students as first-time voters. A problematic or
disillusioning first-time voting experience can shape an
individual's voting participation in all future elections.
I am hopeful that this information provides an insight into
the important steps Congress can take to encourage student
voting. I am honored to be here today and proud of the role the
city of Milwaukee and the State of Wisconsin have taken to
ensure access to the polls.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Albrecht follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Marvin Krislov. Marvin Krislov is currently
professor of Oberlin College in Ohio, which has made major
strides in protecting student voting rights. Prior to Mr.
Krislov's work in Oberlin, he was vice president and general
counsel at the University of Michigan.
I thank you for coming here today. We look forward to your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF MARVIN KRISLOV
Mr. Krislov. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you members
of the committee. I am very pleased to be here and talking
about this important issue.
I also want to recognize Congresswoman Kaptur, who has
focused her leadership on providing opportunities for students
to vote in our district.
I am here on behalf of Oberlin College and Oberlin College
students. We are celebrating our 175th anniversary. We are
known in history for being the first college in America to
admit students regardless of race or ethnicity, and the first
to admit women to a coed baccalaureate program.
I am here today to talk to you about some of the practical
issues facing students and young people, and hoping that the
Oberlin experience will help us think about how we can address
these challenges.
The most significant recent development at Oberlin in Ohio
came on February 22nd of this year, when, at the urging of
students from Oberlin and Ohio colleges, the Office of Ohio
Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner issued a memorandum ruling
that colleges and universities can issue utility bills to their
students, thus enabling them to fulfill the State's proof of
voter residency requirements. These bills require no payment
since they reflect services such as telephone, Internet access
and electricity already provided to students. Oberlin now
issues such bills to our students. That ruling was the result
of a 2-year struggle by student and statewide organizations to
make it easier for Ohio's college students to exercise their
right to vote.
The progress we are making on these student voting issues
is due in large part to the hard work, intelligence and
persistence of student leaders at Oberlin and other schools. I
am so proud of their determination to be engaged students and
citizens and to defend their voting rights.
While we have made much progress, much work remains. As you
know, Ohio had been a battleground State in many Presidential
elections. In recent elections there have been significant
complaints that many Ohioans, including college students,
encountered significant obstacles when they tried to vote.
Countless news articles have reported that certain Ohio
precincts provided an insufficient number of voting machines.
Prior to the 2004 election, some election officials let it
be known that they would vigorously challenge out-of-State
students who chose to vote in Ohio by requiring a photo
identification card bearing a current voting address. In 2004,
such identification was actually not legally required. The
problems caused by these actions are well documented. In the
2004 elections, there were lengthy lines and delays at polling
places. Some students, faculty and staff at Kenyon College, for
example, waited in line for up to 12 hours. In Oberlin some
students, faculty and staff, and Oberlin citizens, waited up to
5 hours to cast their ballot.
In 2006, Ohio voting law was changed. All Ohioans are now
required to produce a current and valid photo ID such as an
Ohio driver's license, which does not need to show a current
address, or a State ID or government identification or a
military identification. If the person does not have a photo
ID, he or she can still vote by producing a copy of a current
utility bill, bank statement, government check or other
government document.
While it is established law that students have the right to
live and vote in those communities where they attend college,
practical obstacles to student voting still exist. While the
majority of Oberlin students have a driver's license, these are
often issued by the State where their parents reside. Most of
our students, for example, live in residence halls or co-ops
and receive mail at the Oberlin College mail room. These
Oberlin student IDs do not have their home addresses because
students frequently move from one year to the next.
Fortunately, Ohio's college students actively work to
address these voter ID issues and to register to vote. Our
students, assisted by local board of elections, as well as the
secretary of state and Congresswoman Kaptur, have, we think,
taken an important first step by creating the ability for
colleges to issue utility bills.
I hope that colleges and universities and State government
officials adopt this policy. The first experience young people
have with democracy should not be frustrating. As has been
discussed, studies show that education is the most important
socioeconomic factor in voter turnout, meaning the more
education a person has, it is more likely for him or her to
vote. And men and women who begin voting as youth continue to
vote throughout their lives.
I hope that Oberlin's example can help lead to greater
cooperation between colleges and communities and States that
will further our national goal of a vibrant democracy. These
efforts advance our American values and deserve support from
colleges and universities as well as all levels of government.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Krislov follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Catherine McLaughlin. Catherine McLaughlin
serves as the executive director of Harvard University's
Institute of Politics since 1994. She also served as the
director of alumni affairs and the coordinator of the press and
public liaison office at the Kennedy School of Government from
1986 to 1989. She left the Kennedy School in 1989 to serve as a
tour manager for the band New Kids on the Block. I think that
is for our audience. She also worked on several Presidential
campaigns during the 1980s.
Thank you, and look forward to your testimony.
STATEMENT OF CATHERINE McLAUGHLIN
Ms. McLaughlin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Ehlers and members of the committee. Thank you for this
opportunity to come to talk to you about such an important
subject.
I am the executive director of the Institute of Politics,
and the institute was established in 1966 as a memorial to
President Kennedy. Its mission is to inspire young people to
get engaged in politics and public service. The mission is born
out of President Kennedy's call to all of us, but particularly
to young people, to serve our country and our communities
through political engagement. That is what we are here talking
about today: to make sure young people have this opportunity to
participate in the process.
We are currently witnessing a political reengagement by
young people. The 2004 elections represented a reversal of more
than a decade of declining youth voter turnout. For context,
prior to 2004, election turnout by 18- to 24-year-olds declined
by 16 percent between 1972 and 2000. This downward trend was
reversed in 2004; 47 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds voted, an
increase of 11 percentage points from the 2000 election.
Since 2000, the IOP has been conducting a unique national
poll of political views of 18- to 24-year-olds. Over the years
we have seen that young people with at least some college
experience are twice as likely to vote as those who have never
attended college. Turnout among college-educated young people
in 2004 was 59 percent, while people with a high school diploma
was 34 percent. More importantly, 67 percent of college
students said that as a result of the 2004 Presidential
election, they were more likely to get involved in politics in
the future.
We have seen this new, younger voter momentum be sustained
so far through the 2008 primary election cycle. According to
research from CIRCLE at the University of Maryland, youth voter
turnout doubled, tripled, and even quadrupled in numerous
States during the primaries and caucuses. We have every reason
to believe and expect solid turnout in November.
So how do we make sure that young people, including those
on college campuses, receive every opportunity to participate
in elections? It is first important to recognize how many
college students vote. College students are more likely than
any other segment of the population, except the military, to
vote by absentee ballot. In 2003, we found that 39 percent of
college students preferred to vote in their home State.
Just before the 2004 elections, our data showed well over
half of the college students who plan to vote in 2004 would not
be voting in person. CIRCLE confirmed this data following the
election. And an important fact for local elected officials to
know, 78 percent of the college students said they preferred to
vote in their home State and would like to be registered there.
In light of that fact, the absentee voting has special
importance to college students. In 2003, the institute
developed a guide to absentee voting; a Web-based document that
is an interactive State-by-State information center about how
to vote by absentee ballot.
In addition to that, we are using new technologies to help
first-time voters. For example, the IOP launched a new Web-
based initiative specifically targeted for the 2008
Presidential primaries called No Vote, No Voice, aiming at
increasing youth turnout at the polls. The project featured a
Facebook application young people could download onto their own
profiles. Using the application, youth who pledged to vote were
sent information on State-specific voting deadlines to their
Facebook page, including those registering to vote and sending
in ballots.
Beginning in 2003, the IOP gathered 18 other colleges and
universities to create the national campaign for political and
civic engagement. It is a nationwide consortium of colleges and
universities dedicated to youth engagement. Representatives
from each of the colleges gather annually to share information
on how to best register and educate and mobilize people. Young
leaders from each of the colleges come together for training
sessions and information sharing.
One of the most important things that we have learned over
the years at colleges, it is critical for students to work with
university officials. Having a presence at mandatory academic
registration for freshman allows us to get hundreds of students
who are registering for classes to also register to vote.
Since 2004, the institute has conducted HVOTE, Harvard
Voter Outreach and Turnout Effort, a campuswide voter
registration and mobilization project whose goal is to provide
Harvard students with the information they need.
Both of these efforts have helped us in just the past week
register 500 Harvard college students and helped 400 others
complete their absentee request forms.
In addition, this summer Eric Hysen, a sophomore at the
college, created a new Web site called Campus Voices. This site
allows students across the country to voice their opinion, but
it also provides links to a variety of nonpartisan sites that
provide State-by-State registration, confirmation of
registration, information on absentee ballots and locations at
polling places.
All that said, it is important to note that most
universities do not have an organization with a professional
staff like the Institute of Politics who can help the students.
The absentee ballot process for the students across the country
can still be difficult to navigate. State laws are diverse and
especially difficult for first-time voters and cause great
confusion. Creating a more simplified registration and absentee
ballot voting system would help sustain increased electoral
participation.
Finally, we need to make sure students have the information
they need to vote, targeting voter education sections of State
election Web sites toward students to help make voting by
absentee easier. Although some States already provide some of
this information, it would be beneficial if all States could do
so; detailed information on absentee ballot, including
identification and residence requirements, application
deadlines, downloadable absentee ballots, et cetera.
In conclusion, we have all seen in the primaries this
season alone how much an impact the youth vote can have. They
are excited about voting, and we need to do all we can to
ensure doing so is easy and streamlined as possible.
Thank you for your opportunity to speak today.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. McLaughlin follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. I would like to open up our questions with
one that I have for Mr. Krislov. You said in the 2004 election
where there was an 8- to 10-hour wait. Was that just a voter ID
problem?
Mr. Krislov. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I wasn't in Ohio at the time, but my understanding is that
there were numerous problems with lack of machinery, issues
with provisional ballots, as well as voter challenges and voter
identification. And in addition to the voter identification,
there have been issues including, even at the primaries this
year, about provisional ballots and enough machinery. And that
is something that we have been trying to anticipate because we
do think there will be extraordinary turnout this fall, and we
have been trying to talk to the board of elections and working
with them on things such as the early voting that the Secretary
of State has authorized.
The Chairman. Have you allocated more equipment and
resources to those areas where the heavy voter turnout will be
on the college campuses?
Mr. Krislov. It is not the college's resources, so we are
doing everything we can to educate our students about the
opportunities. And we have encouraged the board of elections
and officials to try to create greater resources, but, of
course, it is the State and local government.
The Chairman. I will also let Congresslady Marcy Kaptur
know that you did mention her twice in your statement.
Mr. Krislov. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. We will get some help from her to push the
election board to get more resources in the college campuses
there that do need them.
The next question is for Mr. Krislov and Ms. McLaughlin.
One of my next panelists from the Student PIRG New Voters
Project set up a MySpace page to solicit questions from college
students across the country, and they asked me to be the
facilitator to ask this question.
Nelson, from the University of Southern California, wants
to know, shouldn't colleges and universities have more than a
good-faith effort to further civic engagement on their
campuses, and does the Higher Education Act amendment of 1998
demand enough from our schools, and has this been effective
since the 10 years have passed? Anyone want to try to answer
that question?
Ms. McLaughlin. I think that some universities,
universities that have the--the universities that participate
in our consortium, there is actually various institutes, like
the Dole Institute, the Baker Institute, the Institute of
Politics, the John Glenn. When there is a staff that you can
connect to, it really does make a difference. We have Laura
Simolaris, who is here with us today, actually is a staff
person who spends all of her time on this.
I think it is important, it makes a big difference, to have
some historical knowledge, because every 4 years the students
are replicating and trying to rebuild something that has
already been built. So having some point of contact would be a
big thing for the universities.
The Chairman. I think a point of contact would be a great--
lets them know that they are needed and that you are paying
attention to them. I think it is a very good idea. Yes, sir.
Mr. Krislov. I would say that this has been a high priority
of mine in the colleges because we have such a strong tradition
of civic engagement. I will mention that we have an initiative,
a co-initiative for electoral politics, which supports students
in internships and work opportunities to work on campaigns. We
also provide a variety of speakers. Last night Newt Gingrich
spoke on our campus and immediately afterward appeared on
Hannity and Colmes. And this weekend Adrian Fenty will be
coming to town. And so we believe in a diversity of views and
informing our students and very much trying to encourage their
engagement.
The Chairman. Thank you. I am sure that Nelson would give
me latitude there to anybody else, Iachetta or Albrecht, if
they have anything that they would add. No? Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Ehlers.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As I indicated earlier, when I was in the academic world, I
was involved in student registration activities. I think it is
a great thing. And I personally started voting when I was
college age. I think I have something like a 99.5 percent
voting record since then, except for the years I was in Europe
doing research. So I think it is a great thing.
Let me, though, in the name of balance indicate some of the
problems. I think it is very, very important for students to
vote. That doesn't necessarily mean they have to register and
vote where they are attending classes. And there are a couple
of problems that I have observed.
I have served in local government as well. I have to tell
you, there is a lot of anger on the part of some of the
citizens when students who don't pay any taxes change the
outcome of an election which involves assessing taxes on
citizens in that community. If, for example, there is a
provision to build a new county building or a new jail or what
have you, and it passes overwhelmingly because students voted
for it, this does not help the town-and-gown relationships at
all. So that is not something I blame the students about, but
you have to recognize there is a problem there.
A greater problem, I think, and one that does affect
students, is to recognize that every State has different laws
about various things involving residency. And now, Mr. Krislov,
you are at Oberlin College, a very prestigious school. A lot of
students, I assume, come from out of State there, and these
students may spend 2 years there and then realize they can't
afford the rest, so decide they should go back home to their
State university where they should be able to get a preferred
rate of tuition because they are residents. If, however, they
register to vote in Ohio and then move back to Michigan or
wherever it might be, are they still residents of the State
according to the State's definition or the State university's
definition of residency?
That is something to worry about, because I have seen
students caught in that, not because of the registering to
vote, but moving to another State, acting like residents there,
voting and everything else, and going back home and discovering
lo and behold they cannot get the resident rate anymore even
though they are an age where they thought they would.
So maybe it is just my good old cautious nature as a
professor who has advised a lot of students, be careful, check
out your own State laws before you suddenly decide, hey, I am
going to vote to register in Ohio or wherever it may be so, and
so what, it won't make any difference. It can make a
difference. And I just simply wanted to put that on the record.
I don't know if anyone wants to contest that or elaborate on
it, but it is a concern I have because of my involvement with
students and the advising that I have done.
Ms. McLaughlin.
Ms. McLaughlin. The one thing that I would add to that, the
CIRCLE polling at the University of Maryland said most students
do want to vote at home and in their home State. And since this
past week we spent the whole week doing registrations, we found
that several students came to us, for instance, students from
Illinois, who really wanted to vote at home, and because of
the--we call them maroon voters, they are not allowed to vote
because they had to either register in person, or they had to
show up and vote for the first time in person. So unfortunately
they now had to register in Massachusetts, which is not what
they preferred to do. So I think knowing that there are some
States that don't allow the opportunity to vote, that you have
to vote in person the first time, these students said they
couldn't afford to go home to vote, so they were going to fill
out applications and vote in Massachusetts.
Mr. Ehlers. So, in fact, if we would pass the Schakowsky
bill, and I don't know if we will or not, then perhaps we
should say that institutions could be designated as voting
registry agencies for students who are away from home as well?
Ms. McLaughlin. I think that would be very helpful, because
we meet that all the time. There is about six States that have
that problem, so I think that would be very helpful.
Mr. Ehlers. I know I myself, when I was a student,
registered to vote back home because I knew the people there, I
knew the candidates, and I was in a city that I knew nothing
about.
Mr. Krislov. Could I just say that certainly if students
want to vote in the States they came from, we would do what we
could to help them. But I think that what many students find at
a 4-year or greater institution like ours is that they actually
grow increasingly committed to the local community, and that
voting is part of that. And many of our students end up living
and working there and staying for many, many years and
participating in the economic and civic life. And frankly, I
think that that is one of the additional benefits; by
empowering them to vote, that you allow them to feel that they
are fully engaged in the community.
Mr. Ehlers. I agree. And I think there is just that natural
transition. The first few years they ally themselves with their
home community. After a few years they have been co-opted by
the institution, and they decide they want to ally with them.
No further questions.
The Chairman. Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis of Alabama. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. McLaughlin, when I was a junior at Harvard school that
you are connected to, I made the decision to register to vote
back in Alabama because, frankly, Alabama Democrats needed me
more than Massachusetts Democrats did. But it was a choice. And
I don't know if there is any--I would probably disagree with
Mr. Ehlers a little bit. I am not sure there are any broad,
overarching public policy values that undercut young people
choosing where they want to vote. They shouldn't be able to
vote twice. I don't think anybody would argue for that. But I
am not sure I see any broad public policy reasons that ought to
constrain them making the choice.
Ms. Iachetta, if I am pronouncing your name right, I fully
understand that your county is UVA and not Virginia Tech. And
if you are like most registrars, I know you are loathe to be
asked about what another registrar did, but you knew you were
going to be here today and you would be. So I don't want to
miss the opportunity. I was really struck by the story I read
in The Times back on September 8th about one of your
counterparts did, and I take it it is Montgomery County, the
county that houses Virginia Tech.
Ms. Iachetta. Yes, sir.
Mr. Davis of Alabama. And there were two things I suppose
that concerned me. And I was bothered by a trained registrar
relying on research from an intern to issue an opinion, but I
won't even get into that.
Ms. Iachetta. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Davis of Alabama. I was troubled, though, by one
observation Mr. Wertz made. I want to just read this to you and
see if this is your experience. The registrar Mr. Wertz was
asked about the interpretation his office advanced, and I think
most people here are familiar with it, that you can lose your
dependent status on your tax returns if you register to vote in
Virginia and not back home; that your health or automobile
insurance or your scholarship status or tuition rates could be
affected by that. And he was quoted as saying in The Times, and
if this your primary residence, you have to register your
vehicle here, change your driver's license to here and so on.
It has been the interpretation in State training sessions. Is
that the interpretation you have received in State training
sessions?
Ms. Iachetta. No, sir, it is not the interpretation. And I
would like to go on record to say that the reason that--we have
134 registrars in the State of Virginia, and all of us
interpret it differently because it is not very clearcut in our
specific law. And that is not how I interpret it. I interpret
it as if a person comes before me, and they are 18 years of
age, and they qualify under Virginia law to register to vote, I
don't have----
Mr. Davis of Alabama. It is their choice.
Ms. Iachetta. It is their choice. I can't second-guess
that, I can't question that, I can't question any voter. And if
I start questioning voters, and if I start putting people in
different groups, then I am going get myself in trouble under
Virginia being under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because you
can't create a special class of voters.
Mr. Davis of Alabama. And I am just trying to look at some
recent history here. Do you know--you have been to training
sessions, you study your field. Do you know of any student
anywhere in the United States of America who has ever been
prosecuted for trying to vote in the place in which they
attended college?
Ms. Iachetta. No, sir, I haven't come across any
information like that.
Mr. Davis of Alabama. Do you know of any voter fraud case
every brought against a student saying, oh, you say you live in
Alabama, you really live in Kentucky, so we are going to put
you in jail because of that? Have you heard of any single case
like that anywhere in America?
Ms. Iachetta. No, sir, I haven't heard anything.
Mr. Davis of Alabama. I have not either. I would find it
very curious.
There was a district attorney in Waller County, Texas, in
2003. Waller County is the home of Prairie View A&M and HBCU,
primarily a black college, and the DA wrote a column in the
newspaper, irrespective of a few canons of ethics, but what are
ethics? The DA wrote a column in a newspaper threatening to
prosecute students who were attending Prairie View, but who
were--I suppose the parents lived out of State, so they could
prosecute them. And that just struck me as something that was
very bizarre 5 years ago.
I have a basic rule for how I assess events. If something
reminds me of an event that would happen if I stepped in a time
machine and went back to 1963, I tend to be dubious of it
because I like now much better than I think I would have liked
1963.
But do any of you have any reaction, and, Ms. McLaughlin, I
guess I will turn to you in deference to the IOP. I think the
overarching public policy question here is kids ought to have
the right to choose where they vote. Obviously they can't vote
twice, but have a right to choose where they vote. I see no
countervailing public policy interest that ought to constrain
their choice. I think the Supreme Court has broadly agreed with
me. I mean, am I right or wrong?
Ms. McLaughlin. I believe you are right on that issue. I
don't believe students are trying to vote in two places. I
think they just want to vote, and the easiest way they can get
there is what they want to do.
Mr. Davis of Alabama. And I would just close, Mr. Chairman.
It may very well be that sometimes students cause elections to
produce results members in communities don't like. If I were to
sample people who lived in my district, they ain't crazy about
everything we do in Washington, and they don't always feel the
outcomes adequately represent their interests. That is life in
the big city sometimes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Ehlers. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Davis of Alabama. I am out of time, but I would be
happy to yield to the Ranking Member.
Mr. Ehlers. I just wanted to comment. I was not raising an
issue of broad public policy with my comments. It is simply
that students should be aware that there may be ramifications
back home. And counseling a student who has lost their instate
tuition advantage is a pretty heartbreaking situation.
I also want to mention just, as you well know, Virginia
State Board of Elections, Virginia law clearly states that it
is up to the registrar to make the decision and no one else.
The last comment and a very quick one, you commented you
voted in Alabama because you thought they needed your help
more. I can assure you that if you had just voted Republican,
the Massachusetts Republicans needed help a lot more than
anyone in Alabama did. It is a real endangered species.
I yield back.
Mr. Davis of Alabama. You may have explained how Clarence
Thomas became a Republican, Mr. Ehlers. I think now I
understand it.
The Chairman. Thank you.
I just have one real quick question. Ms. McLaughlin, you
said that there are six States where people have to vote, when
they vote the first time, in person. Do you know what they are?
Ms. McLaughlin. They either have to register in person, or
they have to vote for the first time in person.
The Chairman. In other words, if I registered in person and
not by mail, they make a notation that I registered in person,
and then I can vote absentee.
Ms. McLaughlin. Yes.
The Chairman. But if I registered by mail, then I have to
vote in person.
Ms. McLaughlin. Yes.
The Chairman. Do you know what States they are?
Ms. McLaughlin. I can get you those. I believe New
Hampshire, Wyoming--Michigan, Illinois, Tennessee and
Louisiana. I am sorry, it is four States that we know.
The Chairman. Michigan, Illinois----
Ms. McLaughlin. Tennessee and Louisiana.
The Chairman. All four of them, either/or. Somebody would
have to be in person either one of them. And they make a
notation, I guess.
Ms. McLaughlin. I don't know. I just know that they have
made it clear to us that we can't send in something. They
either have to register--we actually this year sent out e-mails
to students who said they were interested in the Institute of
Politics prior to them coming to the freshman dean's office and
sent a note to students saying in the States, if you need to
register, you might want to do that before you come to college.
So technology has really been a huge benefit for us.
The Chairman. You need to register in person.
Ms. McLaughlin. Register in person before you come here so
that you can do an absentee ballot.
The Chairman. Thank you, and thank all of you for your
interest and participation. Thank you.
The Chairman. I would now like to call up our third panel,
please. Thank you. Please understand we may be--our
understanding is there may be votes coming up soon. It is no
way, any shape or form a disrespect, but we do have to leave
and vote and come back. We will try to get through as quickly
as possible. That does not mean we are trying to cut you off in
any away either. Speak as long as you like, or 5 minutes is all
entitled to you. Thank you all for being here.
Our first person on our panel is Sujatha Jahagirdar. Not
bad, huh?
Ms. Jahagirdar. Perfect.
The Chairman. Okay. Ms. J is the program director for
Student--I am not trying it twice--for Student PIRG, a
nonpartisan effort to mobilize young voters. She has worked to
study contemporary young voting turnout trends, as well as
worked to train student leaders across the country in the
skills of mobilizing young voters. I commend Ms. J on her
efforts and thank her for coming here today. And you may start
your testimony.
STATEMENTS OF SUJATHA JAHAGIRDAR, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, STUDENT
PIRGs NEW VOTERS PROJECT; MATTHEW SEGAL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
STUDENT ASSOCIATION FOR VOTER EMPOWERMENT; LAUREN BURDETTE,
STUDENT, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA; AND JACQUELINE VI,
STUDENT, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY
STATEMENT OF SUJATHA JAHAGIRDAR
Ms. Jahagirdar. Thank you, Chairman Brady and the
committee, for----
The Chairman. It is appropriate, if you like, you can
pronounce my name to the people. We will be even.
Ms. Jahagirdar [continuing]. For providing the opportunity
to address you today. I am a program director with the Student
PIRGs New Voters Project. The Student PIRGs are the largest
student civic engagement program in the country. Our New Voters
Project is the oldest and largest effort, nonpartisan on-the-
ground effort, to mobilize young voters in the Nation. As we
speak right now 85 organizers are working on 150 college
campuses in 24 States running massive voter registration and
mobilization drives that combine on-the-ground and on-line
organizing to ensure that young people turn out on November
4th.
Young voter participation is essential to our democracy.
And recognizing that, in 1972 Americans granted young Americans
between the ages of 18 and 21 the ability to vote. Immediately
subsequent to that decision, young voter rates actually went on
the decline for several decades. But the great news is that in
recent elections young voter turnout is on the rise. And, in
fact, in 2004, young voter turnout increased by 11 percent,
which was triple the increase rate of the general population.
And in 2008, in States where comparison data is available,
young voter turnout rates actually doubled.
So we are at a very exciting time right now in our Nation's
history, and as policymakers and local officials and education
officials look at these trends, we should be asking ourselves
one fundamental question: How can we keep the momentum going?
How can we ensure that young people continue to show up in
bigger and bigger numbers?
And despite the importance of resolving this question,
several barriers continue--persist that make it more difficult
for young people to show up and cast their ballot at the polls.
And what I am going to spend the next few minutes on in my
testimony is identifying where those problem areas are and
proposing solutions to those problems.
The first are restrictive photo identification laws. Every
State in the country requires its citizens to present proof of
or swear to residency in order to cast a ballot. Unfortunately,
in specific instances, these requirements end up creating
unintentional barriers to student voters.
The State that has most illustrated this problem is
Indiana. During the primaries, a new Indiana law came in effect
that actually required students to present either a State-
issued or a Federal-issued photo ID when they arrived at the
polls. The problem with this law is that many students don't
actually possess this required identification. And, in fact, in
just a few hours, a small team of our staff in Indiana
documented a dozen cases of students who showed up at the polls
to vote on primary day and weren't able to cast a ballot
because they lacked the required identification. And these were
not surreptitious attempts at voter fraud; these were bright-
eyed, bushy-tailed students who showed up very excited to
exercise their rights as citizens for the first time.
And, in fact, at Saint Mary's College, which is a sister
school to Notre Dame University, two students I talked to
really struck a chord. They both volunteer at the local
elementary school, they are members of the campus ministry, and
they just happened to be born in Illinois and were at Saint
Mary's for college. And they arrived at the polls armed with
identification, with their school ID, with their birth
certificate, with a card issued by the local registrar, with
their driver's license from Illinois, and they were refused the
ability to vote that day. And when I talked to them, really it
was hard to miss the tone of dejection and really
disillusionment at the message that they had been sent that
day, which was they are not welcome in our democracy. So that
is voter identification laws.
Other issues that have arisen have already been mentioned
by the committee, which are restrictive interpretations of
State law. In Virginia there have been recent instances where
local registrars have issued warnings to students predicting
potential dire consequences for registering to vote where you
go to school. And unfortunately, Virginia is not the only place
where this has arisen. In fact, in South Carolina local
registrars have provided similar advice to students. In fact,
this was reported just today in the press. A local registrar in
South Carolina around Furman University tells students that if
they are registered as--if they are included on their parents'
tax returns as dependents, that they are not able to vote where
they go to school as a blanket policy, which is incorrect
information.
To prevent a repeat of the Virginia Tech incident and
similar incidents across the country, States should withdraw
confusing and restrictive guidance for student photos that are
subject to gross misinterpretation at the local level and lead
to enormous barriers to students voting.
And the final challenge to voters that I would like to talk
about today is inadequate voting infrastructure. As has already
been mentioned today, we anticipate very large increases in
youth turnout on November 4th. It is very exciting for
democracy. And if you just look at the turnout in 2008 in the
primaries, you get a sense of how big this might be. In Ohio,
for example, all 88 counties in the State had turnouts in the
2008 primaries that were greater than 70 percent of the turnout
in the 2004 general elections. That means that the turnout in
the primaries was approaching the turnout in the general
election from the previous cycle. And the national average is
usually--the historical average is usually only 30 percent. So
if registrars are looking at their numbers and just trying to
figure out what resources they should have, if they are trying
to figure out how many pollworkers they should have, how many
ballots they should order, how many voting machines they have,
if they just look at the 2004 numbers and increase it by 10 or
20 or 30 percent, we are worried that we are going to see
massive shortages across the country, especially in student-
dominated precincts where I think we will see even greater
increases. So it is absolutely essential for local officials to
anticipate these increases.
And finally, under the infrastructure category, really we
should see an increase in the number of on-campus polling
places that are placed at institutes of higher education across
the country. On-campus polling places make it easier for
students to vote. They ease the burden on off-campus polling
places. And most importantly, they help the university
themselves fulfill the educational mission of the campus by
providing students with the ability to have their first lesson
in civic education.
So in conclusion, again I would like to thank the committee
for holding this hearing, for looking into this important
issue. I would like to thank Congressman Ehlers for standing on
campus and registering voters when he was in Michigan. And the
great news is we are here because young people are voting in
bigger and bigger numbers. It is really great for democracy.
And the thing that we should do is take a few simple steps to
make it even easier for young people to show up at the polls,
and by doing so we will send a strong message to students who
are across the country and here in this room that their vote is
not only encouraged, but aggressively advocated for.
Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Jahagirdar follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Mr. Matthew Segal is the executive director
of Student Association for Voter Empowerment, a Washington,
D.C.-based nonpartisan organization founded and run by students
with a mission to increase youth voter turnout by removing
access barriers and promoting stronger civic education. Mr.
Segal has truly been an effective advocate for students'
rights, and we are honored to have him here today and listen to
his testimony.
STATEMENT OF MATTHEW SEGAL
Mr. Segal. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Ehlers and the
committee members. I thank you for inviting me here today, and
particularly grateful for the opportunity to testify on such an
essential and pressing topic.
I also want to thank my friend Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky
for her leadership in joining Senator Dick Durbin and
Congressman Steven LaTourette to introduce the bipartisan
Student VOTER Act of 2008.
My name is Matthew Segal, and I am the executive director
of the Student Association for Voter Empowerment, otherwise
known as SAVE. A national nonprofit association founded and run
by students, SAVE's mission is to increase youth voter turnout
by removing access barriers and promoting stronger civic
education. I speak here today representing a constituency of
over 10,000 members on 30 college campuses across the country.
Almost 4 years ago as a 19-year-old college student, I
entered the Rayburn Building to testify before the House
Judiciary Committee panel about the 10-hour-long voting lines
at Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio, where I recently graduated.
I told the panel then that voter disenfranchisement had
occurred, and that we should never make voting this arduous a
task ever again, and that was a quote.
Unfortunately, today I have little good news to report
about the legislative steps we have taken since then in order
to guarantee an accessible and participatory voting system for
our Nation's college students.
Many of the student voting problems I will address today
were compiled in a hearing SAVE held last summer where we
invited kids around the country to come talk about the problems
they face, and I ask the Chairman for permission to submit our
50-page report into the record.
The Chairman. Okay.
Mr. Segal. Thank you.
As we all know, in order to vote, we have to register, and
in some cases students face overt legislative attempts to
prevent them from registering at their college or university.
For example, SAVE heard testimony that every year a bill is
introduced in the Maine State Legislature prohibiting students
living in college-owned housing from claiming residency. While
the bill has not yet passed, its purpose is unclear other than
to encumber the rights of thousands of college students who
wish to vote in their new communities. According to the former
vice president of the Maine College Democrats who testified
before our SAVE committee, the State legislator who introduced
this bill claimed it could cut the potential for voter fraud,
despite being unable to present any previous evidence of voter
fraud in college districts. And he also went on to say that
college students do not have a vested interest in the State of
Maine, and that they would dilute the voting power of long-term
residents in their counties.
College students live 9 months of a year in their new
homes, however, and provide substantial economic support to
their college communities. But most importantly, college
students have a legal right to vote where they attend school if
they live in that State for 30 days. Just because students live
on a campus does not mean Federal law can be ignored.
Fortunately, this particular bill did not pass, but many
local boards of elections across the country effectively
practice the same discriminatory statements that the Maine
Legislature preaches. Since State statutes expressly prohibit
the use of a P.O. Box for registration purposes, officials
frequently turn student voters away by failing to recognize
dormitory addresses as legitimate residences.
Finally, several instances of election officials presenting
residency questionnaires to students have been reported,
another student testified in our hearing last summer. In 2004,
the board of elections in Williamsburg, Virginia, asked
students to complete a questionnaire relating to the location
of their parents' home, possession of property outside the
town, and their place of worship. Such detailed information was
not required, however, of other residents and was collected
most likely to establish a reason to reject a student's
registration form, by all means a discriminatory practice.
Misinformation campaigns, as was previously alluded to
today, are another example of what hinders youth participation.
My colleague spoke on Virginia Tech, and I learned this very
morning about another case at Colorado College where the El
Paso County clerk also told students that their parents would
lose their ability to file them as a dependent on their tax
forms if they were to vote in Colorado and be from out of
State. In 2004, at the University of Pennsylvania, fliers were
also posted around talking about the possibility for students
losing their driver's licenses or scholarships or grant money
were they to vote in Pennsylvania. The key difference between
Penn and Virginia Tech, however, was that the posters at Penn
did not appear until after the registration deadline, and,
therefore, several students were intimidated from voting
completely because it was too late for them to register for an
absentee ballot.
While long lines or deceptive fliers can create a clear
graphic image of college student voting barriers, perhaps the
most insidious obstacle are voter ID loss. Now, my friend Jan
Schakowsky spoke to this earlier, so to avoid redundancy I will
move on and finally say that I would be remiss if I did not
address the long lines.
I find it curious that many of the long lines reported in
2004 and 2006 took place in heavily populated student
communities. Kenyon students waited 10 hours. Oberlin students
waited 5 hours; Dennison, 4 hours; and Bowling Green College, 3
hours. The list continues. In some instances the intent here
might have been egregious, but in most instances boards of
elections allocate voting machines or resources on the basis of
past voter turnout and were not prepared for an increase in
youth participation which we have now steadily seen in the last
8 years of midterm and Presidential elections. At my alma
mater, Kenyon College, there were two voting machines allocated
for 1,300 registered voters, one of which broke down.
So let me ask this question: What standards or safeguards
are in place to ensure that Kenyon College 2004 can never
happen again? Most States still do not have a quota or ratio of
how many machines or ballots they allocate per number of
registered voters. Simply put, we need these safeguards.
In closing, I want to say that SAVE is fully committed to
protecting student voting rights and removing the unique and
challenging barriers that many young Americans face when
attempting to vote. SAVE is now partnered with EVOCA Voice
Services so that any young person can use their mobile phones
to call a 1-866 number on our Web site and upload audio
accounts of their voting experience on line. We also have
partnered with Campus Advantage, a premier residential life
organization, to launch studentvotingrights.org, which we also
encourage elected officials and the media to visit so they can
continue to monitor young voter access stories and track
disenfranchisement among our particular group of young
Americans.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me here today. I look
forward to updating this committee on student voting accounts
throughout the coming weeks and months, and more importantly, I
also look forward to achieving bipartisan election reform
legislation to ensure that all Americans, including young
Americans attending colleges, can exercise their rights of
citizenship and vote where they live.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Segal follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. We do have a vote. We are going to go a
little further, as far as we can go, but we will come back for
questions. We will come back to ask questions for you.
Lauren Burdette is a junior at the University of
Pennsylvania. I am delighted to have Lauren here today with us
to share some of her experiences with the voting process.
Lauren.
STATEMENT OF LAUREN BURDETTE
Ms. Burdette. Chairman Brady, Ranking Member Ehlers,
committee members, thank you for the opportunity to testify
today at this important hearing. Thank you also to the Student
Association for Voter Empowerment for inviting me here to speak
on behalf of student voters.
My name is Lauren Burdette, and I am here to represent my
perspective as a student leader at the University of
Pennsylvania. On Penn's campus there is a huge student-led
effort to register other students to vote. We have had a lot of
success reaching out to students who are involved in groups on
campus. We have a table on the main walkway every day between
10 and 4 p.m. Where students can register and drop off their
completed forms. We hang posters throughout campus on a weekly
basis, advertise on our listservs Web page and Facebook page.
Penn does not allow dorm canvassing, although we are staging
weekend off-campus and fraternity house canvassing. Overall we
have had a lot of success working alongside Penn's
administration and other student groups to promote voter
registration at Penn this semester.
Some of the problems we have run into, however, have
serious potential to hamper student voting. The bureaucracy and
inefficiency of the Philadelphia board of elections is
staggering. The voter registration deadline is typically 1
month before the actual election. Philadelphia does not have
same-day registration. The biggest problem students face is not
knowing whether their registration form was processed before
the deadline passes. It generally takes 4 to 6 weeks once the
form is received by the board of elections before a voter
registration card is issued. If something is wrong with a form
and it is not processed, the board of elections does not notify
the individual; therefore, most students do not realize their
form did not go through until they actually reach the polls. At
this point they are unable to vote normally in the election.
But under the 2002 Help America Vote Act, they should be
able to vote provisionally. Unfortunately, most pollworkers are
not trained properly, and most are not well versed in voter
registration law. In the 2008 Pennsylvania primary, several
Penn students who registered to vote were not on the rolls and
were turned away at the polls by uninformed and untrained
pollworkers instead of being given the option to vote
provisionally. This is an egregious problem, especially in
Pennsylvania, since it is a critical swing State in all
Presidential elections. But more importantly, it illegitimizes
the entire voting process for students, making it less likely
that they will vote in the future.
I do not think this is a concerted effort to disenfranchise
students; rather, it is ineffective training and an uninformed
group of pollworkers unintentionally preventing students from
exercising their full rights under the law.
There are other examples, however, of a much more
complicated misinformation campaign that results in students
not knowing their full rights under the law and purposefully
not voting because of those incorrect beliefs. Many students
are told that voting at their college residence will cause them
to be taken off their parents' health insurance or prevent
their parents from claiming them as a dependent, or will cancel
their Federal financial aid, none of which are true. Still
other students are told they must vote absentee if they are
going to vote at all. While some students manage to navigate
the complicated absentee ballot system successfully, many do
not get their ballots turned in on time or filled out correctly
and thus are not allowed to vote at all.
Beyond silent misinformation campaigns, there are overt
examples of false information being posted around campuses and
in the community. I have an example of a flier that I would
like to submit for the record that was plastered on the 37th
Street SEPTA stop at Penn's campus that said in a rather
bipartisan manner that anyone who has an outstanding parking
ticket will be arrested if they try to vote on election day.
Clearly the letter is not official, and I personally do not
believe it is targeting Penn students, but instead is targeting
the employees who work at Penn or the hospital at the
University of Pennsylvania. Regardless, the only spot these
have been found so far is at the trolley stops on Penn's
campus.
We are continually combating false information, and it
makes the job of registering students and turning them out to
vote much more difficult.
A final factor that makes voter registration and voting
itself difficult for students is their mobility. Most students
change residences each year they are in college, which means
they need to reregister. This is a time-consuming, confusing
and often unknown requirement for voting.
One perennial problem is that voter rolls have multiple
individuals listed at the same address. Dormitories especially
have a high turnover rate. This process makes figuring out who
actually lives there and is therefore eligible to vote very
difficult. To combat this problem, for the first time this year
we are telling college students to put their room numbers in
the apartment number section of the form. No one typically does
this because a college student's room number is not part of his
or her address like a normal apartment is. They always deliver
to a box number, which is different from the room number. By
ensuring the room number is listed, we can verify without a
doubt who actually lives in the room and who owns the box
number should the eligibility of any of the voters be
questioned.
A major part of an easier voter registration for students
lies in allowing for same-day registration on college campuses
everywhere. This will alleviate many of the problems students
face by allowing them to change their address at the polling
place, receive accurate answers to any questions they may have,
and, more importantly, to ensure that they have the same right
as every other citizen in the United States, the right to vote.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Burdette follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. We do a good job at the University of
Pennsylvania. I happen to be prejudiced toward that university.
I teach there, and still teach there for the last 13 years. I
want everybody to know what a great job you did representing
them. Unfortunately, could we put you on hold? You will be the
last and the best, I am sure, and not the least, that is for
sure. We do got to vote. We will come right back. Thank you.
Just relax. We will be right back. Thank you.
[Recess.]
The Chairman. I would like to call the hearing back to
order, please. I apologize for our brief recess due to votes.
Our next member of the panel is Jackie Vi.
Ms. Vi. Vi.
The Chairman. Jackie Vi. Jackie Vi is a current student at
American University, and we look forward to her testimony.
Thank you for coming here today. You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF JACQUELINE VI
Ms. Vi. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of
this committee. I am honored to have the opportunity to appear
before this committee to discuss college student voting. My
statement will be brief because I think this issue is simple.
College students should be given all the information they
need to make well-informed decisions about where and how to
vote.
My name is Jacqueline Vi. I am 18 years old and a freshman
at American University, majoring in international relations. I
hope to one day work for the State Department at an embassy
overseas.
My feelings about voting as a college student comes from my
basic belief that with a right to vote comes responsibility. As
a young adult voting for the first time, I feel it is important
to be aware of whom and what one is voting for on Election Day.
Voting is a sacred right, and democracy works best when voters
know about what is going on in the world and in their
community.
At this committee's hearing yesterday many of the witnesses
talked about the importance of educated voters. And I think
they are right. Part of the college experience, in addition to
learning math, science and history, is learning how to think
for ourselves and how to make adult decisions. I think that the
issue of voting is a perfect example of what I mean. I am from
Lakewood, California, which is in California's 39th
Congressional District, represented by Congresswoman Linda
Sanchez.
In March of this year, 1 month before my 18th birthday, I
registered to vote. As a legal resident of California I feel
that my vote would be better served in the community where I
have lived for most of my life and which I remain to have ties
to, because my family still lives there. For example, in the
upcoming election California's Proposition 6, also known as the
Safe Neighborhood Act, will be on the ballot. Prop 6 will take
away State funding from education and direct it towards
eliminating bail and increasing penalties for several crimes.
As a former student in the public school system, I believe that
the money would be better spent on bettering the education
system rather than paying for longer jail time for criminals.
I know that several members of this committee are also from
California, Mr. McCarthy, Mr. Lungren, Ms. Lofgren and Mrs.
Davis. And whether your supporters oppose Prop 6 I am sure that
just because you spend a lot of time here in D.C., like I do,
that doesn't mean that you don't want to be able to vote on its
proposition on Election Day.
Many students like me choose to keep their legal residency
as home because we feel connected to the place where we grew
up. For students like us, we believe that we should vote for
the elected official who represents the community of our legal
residence and vote on issues that impact the place that we
consider home. I don't know where I will live after graduation,
but I know as of right now my home is still California.
However, in order to be able to vote as a Californian I
have to vote absentee. I do not believe that just because I
will physically be in Washington on November 4th that I should
vote in Washington, D.C., especially because I am more like a
visitor than a resident of this city. I know that decisions
made by the local government officials in Washington, D.C. May
have an impact on me, but I have a California driver's license
and in my heart I know I am a Californian.
I know that every State has different rules about how to
vote absentee, but it is easier in California than in some
other States like Virginia. But I still managed to register and
request an absentee ballot without any problems. First, I went
to the Post Office to get a voter registration application. It
only took a few minutes to fill out. I mailed it back to the
election boards and they mailed me back a confirmation. After
that, requesting an absentee ballot only took one focal. I
expect my ballot to arrive at my address here in D.C. sometime
this week.
I know that some people say that it is too complicated for
students to request an absentee ballot, but I think that is
just an excuse for laziness. Sure, it would be much easier to
roll out of bed on Election Day and then think about voting
rather than planning in advance to vote absentee. But I don't
think that kind of attitude is the right one for our Nation's
young people.
Shouldn't we strive to develop civic pride and awareness in
college students? After all, aren't they the future of this
country? Plus, these days people move all around the country
more frequently than our parents' generation did, either for
jobs or for other reasons. We will need to know how to register
to vote in these new cities and towns. What better time to
teach young people these important lessons than in college?
I would like to thank the committee for listening to my
testimony, and I really appreciate the committee's interest in
the importance of student voting rights. In addition, I would
like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to participate
in this hearing. Not many college freshmen can say they have
testified before the U.S. Congress on an issue directly
impacting college students. I will never forget this
experience, and I would be happy to answer any of your
questions you might have.
[The statement of Ms. Vi follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, thank you very much.
I would like to start off. I have heard testimony that
there have been some problems at the polls because of the poll
workers or poll watchers. Do any of your organizations, are you
putting any kind of a program together where you can entice
some of these young college students--I understand our poll
workers average 72 years old. So they may have a wealth of
knowledge or maybe they may move a little slower than somebody
22 years old. That is not saying nothing bad about the 72-year
olds, but wouldn't it be nice to have some type of program
where you can get more people, more college students right
there on campus where the voting booth is, to have them there?
And I shouldn't have to say that if there are people doing
things that aren't right, and we heard about and I saw the
fliers that they are passing out, if they see somebody right
there, there is a student right there, they will be identified
by just who you are. You can be identified by wearing your
sweater or whatever. You can't wear anything partisan there.
But that would maybe deter them from trying to do something
that they can maybe try to fool somebody, because they may know
somebody there who is knowledgeable. They go to class and you
learn it. I think it would be a good idea to get that done and
they can help us set up the election process. Have you been
addressing that?
Mr. Segal. Yes, Sujatha and I both, both our organizations
have worked really hard to make sure that poll workers are
young and that young people who have grown up in this age of
technology are the ones overseeing many of the electronic
voting systems, and that young people are helping the elderly
carry the ballots in the different boxes and the voting
equipment at the polling place. So we have found that they have
a great relationship. We are trying to get young people to take
ownership of elections as administrators, and both the PIRGs,
SAVE, and a host of other youth organizations have poll worker
programs currently in place.
Ms. Jahagirdar. And we do believe there is a legitimate
need at the local level for greater resources to administer
elections, and among those are poll workers. So from a pure
manpower perspective, we are very active in recruiting. In
fact, next Wednesday we are sending out an e-mail blast to
250,000 of our student members recruiting, actively recruiting
poll workers for the upcoming election.
The Chairman. That would be helpful for a lot of reasons.
Also, it is helpful to have these hearings to make it visible,
bring to light a whole lot of issues that are happening. It
would be good if you can get me or get the committee some of
the things. We have got a flier that was out there that was
completely erroneous. Any other things that they are doing, we
would like to know about that. We may be able to stop it or
maybe let other people know that we know about it and educated
before it happens. After it happens, that ship sails. It is
really tough to bring it back in again. But we have still a
little bit of time, 40 some days, to try to hopefully stop it
and the propaganda issues is what I am really speaking of. Let
people know that we know that and make them know that you don't
lose your driver's license, you don't lose your student loan or
you don't lose your residency.
In the City of Philadelphia you can't get locked up for
parking tickets. I don't know where else, but not in
Philadelphia. But if you let us know more of those things, it
would be helpful.
So thank all of you.
Mr. Ehlers.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. During your testimony
a number of you listed a lot of different things that happened
that you thought were bad and terrible, and they probably were.
I just have to tell you that that it is not necessarily
malicious. We just went down to vote. We spent 45 minutes
casting one vote, 15 minutes, or probably 10 minutes,
discovering that there was an error in the bill. We then had to
proceed to unvote and then send it back up to the Rules
Committee, and then we finally voted on an inconsequential
bill. So in 45 minutes we accomplished one very minor task.
People make mistakes.
I do have to admit I get a little nervous when you talk
about people 72-years-old making a lot of mistakes, since I am
older than that and I might take that personally. But in fact a
lot of people----
The Chairman. He is directing that at me. You are fine.
Mr. Ehlers. No, no, everyone.
At any rate, the point is don't always assume that people
are out to deliberately restrict your right to vote. Clearly
some are, but not necessarily all. There were a lot of
misunderstandings that have taken place, largely because poll
workers, bless their souls, they are wonderful people, they
work very hard, but they do this only a couple times a year.
And when you do something just a couple times a year, it is
very easy to make mistakes.
Ms. Jahagirdar, you talked about the problems with photo
ID. I take it you were talking about Indiana.
Ms. Jahagirdar. Yes.
Mr. Ehlers. I was a bit puzzled by that, because I don't
know the exact requirements of the law there. But isn't a photo
ID issued by the university adequate to establish?
Ms. Jahagirdar. Yeah. Well, there actually ended up being a
distinct, quite a bit of a discrepancy, in a student's ability
to vote based on that particular provision, because if you went
to a public university that did count because it had a photo ID
and it was issued by the State. But if you went to a private
institution it wasn't issued by the State. And so where we
found instances of students not being able to vote were largely
around Notre Dame and other private universities. And I don't
believe that that was an intention of the law. I don't think
they were intending to try to create a separate set of criteria
for students who attend private schools, but that is what
happened.
Mr. Ehlers. Okay. Ms. Vi, I was very impressed with your
testimony, and I hope you have a very successful career in the
Foreign Service.
Ms. Vi. Thank you.
Mr. Ehlers. I do appreciate the point you make and that is
partly because it emphasized the point I was making earlier. No
one should try to force students into either mode. They have
the right to vote either in their place of residence, their
home, or where they are attending school. I think they should
have that choice because, as I said, my first few years I chose
my home, I was familiar with it. Later on I chose the place
where I was going to school because I had become familiar with
that. And so I think the real issue here is to make sure that
students have the right to vote, that they can vote and that
they have a choice of which jurisdiction they want to vote in,
and I think that is about all we can do here.
We are writers of the law. We are not implementers of the
law. And so even though we like to hear the stories about what
has gone wrong so we can try to correct it, we can't directly
correct it other than by rewriting the law.
Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions.
The Chairman. Thank you. And again thank all of for your
interest, your participation. Someone made a point earlier that
when you deter a young voter, especially a first time voter, a
college voter, from voting it is really hard to get them back
interested again. So hopefully this hearing will bring some
light to that and hopefully we will be able to avoid all that.
Ms. Jahagirdar. I apologize. I request permission to enter
the campaign tool kit for the New Voters Project into the
record.
The Chairman. Without objection, you may.
[Whereupon, at 4:19 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you all again. And without objection
all members will have 5 legislative days to submit to the Clerk
additional written questions for the witnesses or to submit any
additional material for inclusion in the record. Again, I thank
all of you, and this hearing is now adjourned.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]