Voting Rights, Part 2

On Sunday July 31, the Westerly Sun ran an editorial (behind its odious paywall) entitled “If you pay taxes, you have rights.”

The editorial cited a recent meeting DEM held with Misquamicut residents about the mandates of the state’s Cesspool Act. Cesspools and any failing septic system must be replaced with new DEM-approved denitrification systems. These properties could also comply if the Westerly sewer system is extended into the area – something Westerly voters would have to approve.

Many of those present at the DEM meeting were summer residents – out of state owners of summer homes at Misquamicut. They were not happy with the prospect of paying for an expensive denitrification system (who is?). They were also uncomfortable with the idea of hoping Westerly’s voters approve a sewer line extension, since they, as non-residents, were not eligible to vote. One man yelled out this was taxation without representation.

And the Westerly Sun thought the man was right. “We think everyone who pays property taxes deserves the right to vote on economic issues that will affect their tax bills. And we hope the legislature sees fit to take up this issue to ensure it gets the open debate it deserves.”

Except this issue has already been thoroughly debated and renounced. Former state Representative Matt McHugh (DINO-RISC/CCA) made voting rights for millionaire absentee property owners the center-point of his unsuccessful political career. He carried that banner first for the RI Shoreline Coalition, later for them under their new name, the RI Statewide Coalition and in 2008, as the Charlestown Citizen Alliance’s endorsed candidate to run against Rep. Donna Walsh (D-36).

RISC and other proponents of voting rights based on property often cite neighboring Connecticut as a beacon of democracy for allowing such voting. CT non-residents who own at least $1000 in property DO have the right to participate in fiscal town meetings under Section 7-6 of the Connecticut General Statutes, but do not have the automatic right to vote in fiscal elections. Non-residents can vote in local financial special elections only if such rights are granted by the municipal charter. State law prohibits non-residents from voting in any other type of state or local election.

Rhode Island has a very different tradition than Connecticut when it comes to property and the right to vote. Rhode Island had its own mini-civil war, the Dorr War (1841-2), that pitted the working class against the wealthy Providence oligarchs. Those wealthy white aristocrats did not relish the prospect of working people, especially recent Irish immigrants, gaining the vote. Sound familiar? So they imposed property ownership restrictions on the franchise. Under the law, 60% of free white men were disenfranchised (joining the 100% of blacks, Indians and women who also could not vote).

When the Dorr rebellion broke out, militia troops were sent up to Chepachet to confront the working class rebels at Acotes Hill. The Dorr Rebellion was broken, but the property ownership requirement was repealed.

One of the great ironies about the Westerly Sun’s editorial is that non-residents in Westerly already have full voting rights.

And they didn’t ask for permission or for passage of a state law or local ordinance.

The US Census shows 14,149 full-time residents in Westerly over the age of 18. Assuming each one is a citizen and a non-felon, that is the maximum number of possible voters in Westerly. Yet there are 16,438 registered voters on the rolls. So there are already 2,289 non-resident voters on Westerly voting rolls than the maximum number of possible voters.

So, Westerly Sun, problem solved, except that you have a lot of people who are Westerly residents when it comes to voting but residents of somewhere else when it comes to paying state income tax.

Three other coastal communities have the same problem – more voters than actual full-time adult residents. And again, figure that each group of adults will include non-citizens or persons who have lost voting rights due to a criminal conviction.

Charlestown is not on that list, though we do seem to have a very high level of voter registration. According to the Town Clerk’s office (thank you, Amy Rose), Charlestown has 6,321 permanent resident over the age of 18 and 5,464 registered voters. That's 86% of all potentially eligible voters are registered.

There is a time-honored way for a responsible adult to gain the right to vote in a community: LIVE THERE. Full-time. Permanently. Not in Florida. Not in Connecticut. Not in Texas. Not in North Carolina. Not in New York. If you want to vote in Charlestown or Westerly or any other community, live there. Otherwise, shut up and pay your taxes.

Author: Will Collette