New Hampshire Republicans Are Close to Passing Their Trump-Inspired Poll Tax

CPO (Join to see) - ...to the exclusion of all others..."

Maj John Bell - Again, the statue you're quoting is subordinate to the NH State Constitution and in 2015 the NH Supreme Court ruled against the exact argument you are trying to make now when deciding a case over the Republicans' 2012 voter suppression attempt.

CPO (Join to see) - - I have read the NH State supreme court decision now, and The NH RSA 654:1 I as amended to comply with the Court decision. It seems to me the NH Supreme Court was essentially saying "this is really screwed up language...UNSCREW IT." As amended, a student does not have to be a citizen, however, that student does not automatically qualify to vote. "..having a single established domicile for voting puposes." Should a student maintain their registration to vote in another state. they are disbarred from voting in NH elections.

Although not a legal requirement to re-plate a vehicle to NH, having decided to vote in NH, is most certainly a tax dodge. If my read is correct the NH legislature needs to get their ducks in a row and amend the State Constitution so that the vote is restricted to those who are citizens of NH.

I think the amendment is the "proper" way to go and gives legitimacy to their actions when/if the voters approve the change. ( 2/3 "of the qualified voters present and voting" )

Since you mention taxes: In 1968 the NH Constitution was amended to add "The right to vote shall not be denied to any person because of the non-payment of any tax." to Art 11. I don't know how it is in NH, but some states view veh lic plates as a tax, while others consider it a fee. My veh registration consists of both a tax and fee.

Like most Americans, I dislike partisan politics; which is one reason I think the number of registered Independents is larger than either the Dem or Rep and continues to grow.

It looks like Democrats are definitely gaming the system in NH to their advantage. But the Republican's REDMAP Project has gamed the system in many other states to their advantage. (Not to mention the use of dark money.) (note the popular vote levels in the first image)

https://rslc.gop/news/2014/11/11/the-other-gop-wave-state-legislatures/
"Republicans also spent money on the right races at the right moment. In 2010, they funneled over $30 million into the Redistricting Majority Project, also known as REDMAP. REDMAP funds helped the party candidates win a majority in Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and elsewhere, giving the GOP greater control over the decennial congressional and state-level redistricting process.

This gave Republicans the opportunity to draw advantageous political boundaries. Most analysts have focused on congressional gerrymandering, so it is difficult to determine exactly how much or how little Republicans benefited from controlling the state legislative redistricting process. That being said, there are examples of both Republican- and Democratic-controlled state chambers benefiting from redrawing their own districts."

https://rslc.gop/news/2015/07/16/rslc-launches-redmap-2020-sets-125-million-investment-goal/
"Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) – in partnership with its strategic policy partner, the State Government Leadership Foundation (SGLF) – launched REDMAP 2020 with a $125 million investment goal through 2022. REDMAP 2020 is modeled after the RSLC’s successful REDistricting MAjority Project (REDMAP) program in 2010 that was instrumental in Republicans picking up 21 new legislative majorities that year and putting Republicans in a strong position before the decade’s redistricting. Similarly, REDMAP 2020 will prioritize electing Republican legislators in states across the country in an effort to keep and expand Republican-controlled legislative chambers in advance of 2020 redistricting. Also as part of REDMAP 2020, the SGLF will now help the Republican redistricting data acquisition efforts and provide targeted legal strategic advice in redistricting cases."

So is the thrust of this post about registering to vote as a NH resident...? or establishing residency for tuition purposes? The original post claimed that NH was pulling some sort of hijinks to suppress voting amongst college students. If they claim NH residency, they are subject to NH taxes and fees. Their status as students is irrelevant to their tax liability. Is their a claim that the "Trump inspired" poll tax is aimed a drivers, because that is still a false claim, but holds more water than the college vote being suppressed by vehicle licensing fees.

CPO (Join to see) - From the article you provided... "Republicans also spent money on the right races at the right moment. In 2010, they funneled over $30 million into the Redistricting Majority Project, also known as REDMAP. REDMAP funds helped the party candidates win a majority in Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and elsewhere, giving the GOP greater control over the decennial congressional and state-level redistricting process.
This gave Republicans the opportunity to draw advantageous political boundaries. Most analysts have focused on congressional gerrymandering, so it is difficult to determine exactly how much or how little Republicans benefited from controlling the state legislative redistricting process. That being said, there are examples of both Republican- and Democratic-controlled state chambers benefiting from redrawing their own districts."

There is a chicken or the egg question here. If their was not a realignment to the Republicans at the state level, the Republicans would not have been in control of the redistricting process. The Democrats would have been. This all strikes me as another check and balance. If the Democrats don't like the way the Republicans redrew the districts, they should obtain a clear and convincing majority at the state level, and redraw the districts to their liking. The ship of state is purposely slow to respond to the helm and the electorate has to really mean it.

Maj John Bell - That is one of the same Republican quotes I provided in my reply... However it appears Republicans previous gerrymandering and voter suppression attempts have enable them to retain power in spite of the popular vote. The 2016 vote was about 51% to 49% statewide, so you would expect seats to be divided rather evenly among the two parties. However the gerrymandering handed Republicans extra seats. The same thing happened in 2012 when Democrats won the majority of votes but Republicans retained the majority of seats. IMHO this is another voter suppression attempt (

The gerrymandering provides Republicans an advantage. Allowing students to vote in-state provides Democrats an advantage in their gerrymandered districts. The Republicans are trying to eliminate the college student advantage while the Democrats are trying to retain the college student advantage. Even if the college students paid all the fees and changed all their paperwork to become "residents" to vote, they would still be charged the non-resident tuition fee.

Before you say 'So. That's how we do it in my state." You need to consider NH's laws and NH history. The NH Constitution says "All elections are to be free, and every inhabitant of the state of 18 years of age and upwards shall have an equal right to vote in any election. Every person shall be considered an inhabitant for the purposes of voting in the town, ward, or unincorporated place where he has his domicile." SO you do *not* need to be a "resident" to vote, you simply need to establish "domicile". According to the NH Sec of State "An inhabitant's domicile for voting purposes is that one place where a person, more than any other place, has established a physical presence and manifests an intent to maintain a single continuous presence for domestic, social, and civil purposes relevant to participating in democratic self-government."

This gives me the impression the Republicans are playing dirty in trying to eliminate the college student advantage. If they were proposing a State Constitutional Amendment to change the wording from "inhabitant" to "resident" then I would view their efforts as more legitimate.

Besides, they party that wins in a zero year (2010, 2020) is the party that gets to draw the lines for the next 10 years. In such a situation it is a bit of an oxymoron to say Democrats should obtain a clear and convincing majority. They won the majority vote in 2012 but the Republicans maintained control. Now the Republicans are trying to eliminate college students that tend to vote Democrat, which makes a Democratic victory in 2020 that much less likely. Change the state constitution if you want to eliminate college student inhabitants from voting; don't just try to pass a law to make voting more expensive than most college students are willing to pay.

See Article 11: https://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html

Sec of State College Voters: http://sos.nh.gov/nhsos_content.aspx?id=12816

http://nhpr.org/post/how-gerrymandering-skewed-2016-elections#stream/0
https://interactives.ap.org/redistricting-gap/
http://nhpr.org/post/new-hampshire-shifts-swing-state-why-do-legislative-lines-still-favor-republicans#stream/0
http://nhpr.org/post/how-few-lines-map-hold-so-much-power-nh-politics#stream/0