McClatchy + PFAW: Making you Vote where you claim residency, pay taxes = Tax Increase








The Crayon Corps in the newsroom at The McClatchy School of Creative Writing’s Raleigh Campus never ceases to amaze me.   The good soldiers of the Corps reported this morning on a release issued by People for The American Way, even going as far as including PFAW’s language in the headline:

People for the American Way objects to tax increase for

students’ voting

People for the American Way, a liberal advocacy group, opposes a bill that would erect financial hurdles to families of college students when the kids vote in the cities and towns where they attend school.

Senate bill 667 would prevent parents from claiming their children as tax exemptions if their children are registered to vote at an address other than their parents’ address. Voting addresses would have to match vehicle registration addresses.

It blows my mind hearing PFAW  express outrage over a tax increase.  Especially when we’re not talking about a tax increase.

Let’s see here.  Parents are claiming these kids on tax returns as “dependents” at a specific address in North Carolina or another state.  In other words, they are declaring that the kids are residents of a specific address in that specific place.  The cars are registered there.  That address is on the driver’s license.  If you are claiming residency somewhere for tax purposes, you need to utilize all of the rights and privileges that come with residency there.  Everybody else has to vote where they maintain their permanent residence.  So should college kids.  Lefties are upset with this bill because it is going to deprive them of a lot of sheep — er, lemmings, um, “followers” on election day.

In a letter to bill sponsors, Sens. Bill Cook, Norman Sanderson, and Ronald Rabin, PFAW said the bill “puts the rights of North Carolinians under attack.”

Really? Who’s being deprived of their right to vote?  Get an absentee ballot from your home county — like I did, and like MILLIONS upon MILLIONS have before. 

“Youth and student voters who move frequently already have to navigate a confusing patchwork of voting laws. Those choosing to reregister while living and learning at institutions of higher education should not face a tax penalty for participating in our democracy, nor should their parents.”

Wow.  Just — wow.  If you are taking a tax credit by declaring a kid as a dependent in your jurisdiction,  you can’t very well have them voting and claiming residence in another city, county or state.   This legislation is a NO-brainer.  Pass it. Sign it.  Make it SO.

5 thoughts on “McClatchy + PFAW: Making you Vote where you claim residency, pay taxes = Tax Increase

  1. Nope! Tillis has already said that SB 666 will “not be well received” in the House. In addition he’s made comments today that the voter ID bill will be watered down even MORE. Once again he has caved to McClatchy, Barber, and co. Their strategy of throwing a temper tantrum until they get their way has been vindicated.

  2. Watered down even more???? And that fool thinks he can win a statewide Republican primary. Bring in the Club for Growth and lets burn him a new one!

    Do the rules allow ousting a Speaker in the middle of a sesseion? What vote does it take?

  3. Beautifully written commentary once again! I am more than a little baffled myself at the behavior by Speaker Tillis and other Republicans in our Legislature. We elected them to fix the corruption and ills inflicted on this great state by 140 years of uninterrupted one-party left-wing rule. The other side never concedes to us — they only take what they can and then fight for ever more. Why won’t Republicans stand fast on principle?

  4. Well, let’s see: If my son or daughter is going to college in South Carolina, should s/he be able to register to vote there? According to what is being proposed, the answer would be yes. So now, s/he would be voting in local, county, state and federal elections of South Carolina officials, not North Carolina. In that case, why should I have any tax benefit (North Carolina and Federal) here? I think not. One must decide whether your children (are they really children when away from home and in college?) are part of your household and dependents or they are out on their own. Voting is one factor that determines that, you cannot have it both ways. Well, yes you can, on Obama Care until age 26. Just does not seem right to be a dependent in one location and vote in another. It will be interesting to see this one through.

  5. Thank you for this article, I am totally in agreement with it! I would really like to get some more information on this issue. I would love to know what states already have these kinds of laws already on the books….I only know of Idaho.

Comments are closed.