Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Voting Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House committee hears opponents say residency bill could disenfranchise students; sponsor says it only clarifies law
Summary
Representative Jane Gillette said House Bill 413 simply defines 'temporary' residency for voting to include temporary work, training or educational programs. Student groups and tribal representatives urged rejection, saying the change could unintentionally disenfranchise campus communities and is redundant with existing statutes.
Representative Jane Gillette introduced House Bill 413 on the House State Administration Committee floor, saying the measure ‘‘clarifies the definition of temporary residency in relationship to determining who is qualified to vote.’’ Gillette told the committee the proposal codifies language already in law and would add that ‘‘temporary means temporary work, training or an educational program.’’
Opponents from student organizations and tribal communities urged the committee to reject the bill. Patrick Yawake, representing the Blackfeet, Chippewa Cree and Fort Belknap communities, called HB 413 redundant and noted existing Montana law and criminal penalties that prohibit voting in more than one place and prohibit fraudulent registrations. ‘‘House Bill 4 13 is redundant due to these laws already being in place,’’ Yawake said.
Student leaders said the bill would create an arbitrary test that could deny campus residents their right to vote. Isabelle Watson of the Associated Students of Montana State University said the measure ‘‘denies voting rights to anyone relocating to Montana for temporary purposes, including education’’ and warned that intent is difficult to judge fairly. Hope Morrison, speaking for the Associated Students of the University of Montana, said many students live, work and contribute in their college towns and would face practical barriers if forced to re-register in their home counties.
Committee members asked the sponsor whether the bill imposes a fixed time threshold or relies on intent. Gillette answered the existing statute already bars individuals who relocate ‘‘for temporary purposes’’ from gaining residency absent intent to make the county their home and said this bill only clarifies what ‘‘temporary’’ entails. Gillette acknowledged there is no set-duration in the bill and that determinations rely on a registrant’s intent.
No formal action or vote was recorded at the hearing. The committee closed the public hearing after follow-up questions and the sponsor’s closing remarks that the bill is intended to reduce confusion about who qualifies to register and vote.
