Student Caucus-Crashing Debate Continues

Both Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd have backed down from their comments last weekend claiming that Barack Obama's efforts to get out-of-state Iowa students to come back for the caucus was legally and/or morally dubious.

Yesterday, the Clinton campaign issued a statement via email to a blogger at Future Majority, saying, "the Iowa caucus is so special because it is based on Iowa values. We believe that every Iowan and every student who is eligible to caucus in Iowa should do so and we hope they do."

But it took them a while to decide where students fit into those Iowa values. Just Monday, Clinton said in a speech at Clear Lake Iowa, that the caucus "is a process for Iowans. This needs to be all about Iowa, and people who live here, people who pay taxes here."

Young bloggers and activists quickly jumped on this, rightly pointing out that students do in fact pay taxes in Iowa-- sales tax, and income taxes. USA Today reported in 2003 that 77% of American undergraduates work during the school year.

Dodd's campaign has also been forced to "clarify," telling another young blogger that they think students should participate in the caucuses, but were worried Obama was busing in students who don't go to school in Iowa to campaign events. I'm a bit confused as to how that is a real threat-- supporters from out of state have long flooded early primary states before the election, but they certainly can't vote. It seems like a bit of a cop-out after his strong claim that Obama was recruiting "thousands of out-of-state residents to come to Iowa for the caucuses."

The most bothersome thing about these statements is that they are responses to individual bloggers. While it's great that campaigns are paying attention to what's being said on the web, their original statements were made in the national arena, for all to hear. The retractions aren't getting the same attention. The issue is left hanging outside of the blogosphere, covered by the mainstream media as a Clinton-Obama spat, without addressing the substance of the matter.

This shouldn't be about campaign tactics, and it shouldn't be just about Iowa. It's about guaranteeing young people the right to vote, and breaking down barriers to participation. Young voters are constantly disparaged for their apathy and low turnout, but it seems that just when youth participation start to swell, pundits and candidates start using their votes as a political football.

UPDATE: Dodd still can't come clear on this. A statement posted last night on the "Iowa for Chris Dodd" section of his website from his communications director says, "We welcome the participation of Iowa students in the process." But today's Daily Iowan quotes Dodd himself hammering away at the issue again: ""If you're from Hartford, Conn., and you're going to school at the University of Iowa, and you're paying out-of-state tuition, you're [unfairly] casting yourself as an Iowan." Why Dodd is choosing this battle is unclear--he's polling in the single digits, and Iowa won't change its voter laws before January.

Comments (7)

1. Poor CCORBELL....he got his talking point back on Monday on this...

   CANDIDATES CLASH ON IOWA STUDENT VOTE..Posted by Cora Currier at 12/02/2007 @ 11:36pm

   "This is just another example of the way Obama's claim to be the ethics candidate doesn't match his actions."----Posted by CCORBELL 12/03/2007 @ 02:50am

   Now, he has to turn around and say it's okay!

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 12/07/2007 @ 10:52am

2. I have to agree. I don't know what the details of Iowa voting laws are but to me what this is saying is if I take a trip to NYC, then the fact that I pay sales taxes on products I buy there, I should be able to vote in any NYC election? That doesn't make sense.

   Agree also about military voting. I've lived in Virginia since 1990 (of and on inbetween overseas assignments) but always had to vote via absentee ballot to my home state of Texas. When I changed my state of legal residence to Virginia, I then could vote here.

   I disagree about wanting to abolish the citizenship requirement. At least I *hope* that isn't in anyone's plans. That's probably the one area where I drift over to the Republican side.

   Posted by FritztheCat at 12/07/2007 @ 11:34am

3. I believe that the principle of in loco parentis was abandoned by most colleges and universities in the US in the 1950's.

   And yet, people seem to think that students are infants being taken care of by their schools...and it is the students with the personal independence to attend college out-of-state that are deemed the least likely to be capable of choosing which state to maintain their legal residency and voter registration in.

   WTF? When I was doing voter registration in Ithaca, NY, we managed to change the local registration procedures so that students returning for the semester could register to vote in time to vote in the primaries. The way they had it set up before was that a student returning by Labor day wouldn't even be able to respond to last years' registration maintenance notice in time to vote at all.

   As a consequence of the fact that voter registration had to be maintained at a time when most students are in their time of greatest transition, most students maintained their party affiliations in absentia in their parents' town and state of residence. Or they just didn't vote.

   We changed that, and got Ithaca's first Socialist mayor elected--during the golden GOP years of the early first Bush administration.

   That's how big a change eliminating the virtual caging of the student vote can make.

   How about THEM apples, Hil?

   Posted by seppo at 12/07/2007 @ 12:46pm

4. Posted by SEPPO 12/07/2007 @ 12:46pm

   Ithaca is "Berkeley on Beebe"...Nader beat Bush there in 2000.

   Hardly a bell-weather.

   Posted by Mask at 12/07/2007 @ 1:06pm

5. You're sharp as always, "Mask," and perhaps you'll think me petty for pointing out this little key slip, but...

   "Bellwether" should be spelled without the 'a.' The word "wether," which is nowadays never used without the "bell," means the lead ram in a flock of sheep, around whose neck the shepherd hangs a bell so as to be able to hear where the flock is headed. "Wether" is related to the German word "Widder," which means both "ram" and is the name of the astrological sign that we call "Capricorn."

   In a somewhat less trivial vein, it is worth reminding ourselves what we are really saying when we refer to a leading primary state as a "bellwether." We're saying that the primary voters in this state effectively serve as our head ram, which pretty much reduces the rest of us to the bleating flock that follows him. Not a very flattering self-portrait, is it?

   I have only two more points to add, which are familiar ones to anyone who's read what I've written before:

   (1) Electing the President by means of Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) would eliminate the need for primaries, elevate every voter's status to that of "lead ram," and incidentally solve this whole silly problem of determining whether it's right or wrong for a college student to vote in a primary in one state and in the general election in another.

   (2) The government will make mistakes no matter what we do, but if we must choose between mistakenly allowing a few voters to cast votes unlawfully or mistakenly disqualifying the votes of a few rightful voters (or a few thousand of them), then I know beyond any doubt how I will choose.

   Probably, Mr. "LVLiberty" will decide this second question in a manner contrary to mine. Sadly, this may also be true of HRC, indicating that she has no real understanding of what the word "democracy" (and by derivation the word "Democrat") ought to mean: the expansion rather than the reduction of liberties, including the right to vote.

   Posted by JakobFabian at 12/07/2007 @ 1:44pm

6. Posted by JAKOBFABIAN 12/07/2007 @ 1:44pm

   I happily accept spelling lessons, JAKOB. Especially when they seemingly find no fault in the general meaning, point, or logic of the post. (i.e. that Ithaca NY is hardly indictative of politics).

   As for Instant Run-off Voting, like much of "Voting Reform"...it's unlikely to get passed. The Repubs won't embrace it, even if they lose 2008. And the Dems won't push it if they win the White House and Congress for fear it will hurt the power of The Party (endlessly fighting off threats from the "Greens", etc.)

   Posted by Mask at 12/07/2007 @ 1:53pm

7. The Iowa law is clear. The students have the RIGHT to vote in the Caucus. You can't chnage the rules in the middle of the game. We should all be thrilled that the youth is participating in the electoral process.

   Posted by stoplying at 12/08/2007 @ 8:46pm