Prevent the Veto of Youth Voter Registration Reform in Rhode Island
June 26th, 2007
Paul Fidalgo
Paul Fidalgo is Communications Director at FairVote.
Chances are you never even heard about it, but the Rhode Island state legislature overwhelmingly passed a bill sponsored by Rep. Edwin R. Pacheco that allows 16 and 17-year-olds to pre-register to vote, making them automatically eligible once they turn 18. The bill was passed without fanfare at the last minute before the legislative session ended, but pass it did, and now it is up to Governor Donald Carcieri to sign it into law.
But we have been down this road once before. This time last year, Gov. Carcieri was given the chance to sign this very bill when it passed the legislature, but he instead opted to exercise his veto. Fortunately, the state legislature has found the wisdom to offer the bill a second time, and now everyone is watching.
This bill, if enacted, will prevent a lot of bureaucratic headaches by spreading new registrations out over time, rather than dealing with a glut of new voters’ registrations immediately before a deadline. Most importantly, however, it will be a message to the young people of Rhode Island from their government that it understands that the policies of the state directly effect their lives, and that it welcomes their voices in how those decisions are made.
There’s no time to lose! This bill will likely be decided upon by the end of the week, and is in danger of being vetoed at any moment now. Click over to the Rhode Island’s Future blog to see how you can send a message to Gov. Carcieri. Tell him how much it means to you and the young people of Rhode Island. Tell him how much it will ease the burden on government officials in processing registrations. Tell him states like Florida are already moving ahead with advance registration. Tell him you think it’s the right thing to do.
Other posts by Paul Fidalgo
- Gibbs: Obama is "committed" to DC Voting Rights - July 2nd, 2009
- In this same interlude it doth befall / That the spectator states do present a wall - June 18th, 2009
- Major Parties Coordinating on 2012 Presidential Primary Reform - June 17th, 2009
- With a Three-Way Tie in VA Primary, Consensus is Off the Radar - June 5th, 2009
- NJ Gubernatorial Primary Turnout Lowest in Years - June 4th, 2009
- FairVote Editorializes on IRV for Primaries in The State - May 21st, 2009
- California Assembly Unanimously Passes Ranked Ballots for Overseas Voters - May 15th, 2009
- Connecticut House Passes NPV - May 13th, 2009
- Nomination by Attrition - October 25th, 2007
- Cary Voters Sing the Praises of IRV - October 25th, 2007
June 26th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
I’d like to ask a question about New Hampshire.
Does anyone know what key event or series of events led to New Hampshire allowing its citizens to vote on so many of its spending bills directly? Was there some kind of huge tax that led to many getting voted out the next year? Was there some kind of wasteful spending? Or is it the fact that since there are over 400 reps in the NH house, (1 rep=3000 roughly, better than many municipalities), and that likely the rep feels very loyal to the opinions of their constitutients? Or has New Hampshire law always been like this, or is it the fact that their house represenatives earn very little annual salary that they don’t want to waste their time governing? The state motto has also made me wonder.
Anyone with thoughts? If we crack the New Hampshire formula, would it work with the United States as a whole if we used that model on the country?