Editor’s Correction: We incorrectly stated that Vermont is not a member of the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC). In fact, Vermont has been a participating member of ERIC since July 2019, utilizing its services to maintain voter roll accuracy and prevent duplicate registrations across states. We regret the error and appreciate our readers bringing this to our attention.
For additional research and data, you can explore the following resources:
Vermont Voter Registration Statistics
Voter Purge Project – Vermont Data
Ethan Allen Institute Commentary on Victory, Vermont
In Vermont, voting rules reflect a strong tradition of accessibility but bring some significant challenges, particularly around residency requirements. The state’s approach to voter residency is lenient, allowing newcomers, including students, to vote with minimal verification. This open policy, while promoting inclusivity, raises concerns about election integrity and whether voting laws accurately reflect Vermont’s constitutional mandate for residency oversight.
Vermont’s Open Residency Policy
Vermont’s residency policy for voting is straightforward: if a person declares Vermont as their primary residence and intends to stay, they can register and vote immediately. 17 V.S.A. § 2122, Vermont’s statute on residency for voting, doesn’t require proof beyond a declaration of intent. This makes it easy for new residents to quickly participate in Vermont’s elections, but it also introduces questions about whether this honor-based system fully supports election integrity, especially for populations like out-of-state students who may not have long-term ties to the state.
The Student Voting Influence
College students have had expanded voting access in Vermont since the 1980s, largely due to advocacy from leaders like Bernie Sanders. Sanders, during his early career in Vermont politics, was a vocal proponent of encouraging student participation in local elections. His advocacy aligned with a broader national movement to reduce barriers to voting for students, resulting in Vermont’s flexible residency policy. In Burlington—a progressive-leaning college town—student voting has notably shaped local elections, and over time, this trend contributed to the state’s overall political shift toward progressivism.
However, reports from institutions like the University of Vermont (UVM) suggest that many out-of-state students don’t settle in Vermont after graduation. According to data from UVM’s Office of Institutional Research and related sources, a significant percentage of out-of-state students—possibly as high as 70%—leave Vermont after graduating. This raises questions about whether transient student voting reflects the long-term interests of Vermont residents, given that many of these students participate in Vermont’s elections but may not remain to experience the policies they help shape.
With mail-in voting now widely available across the U.S., students from other states have more options than ever to vote in their home states. This raises a pertinent question: should transient students vote in Vermont, or remain engaged in their home communities? As mail-in voting becomes increasingly accessible, Vermont’s current policies on student voting residency may need re-evaluation, especially for those likely to leave after college. This shift underscores the growing need for enhanced voter verification to ensure students vote in only one jurisdiction, whether in Vermont or back home.
Legislative Responsibility and the Role of the Secretary of State
The Vermont Constitution entrusts the state legislature with defining voter qualifications, yet much of the responsibility for overseeing residency standards has been effectively delegated to the Secretary of State’s Office. The Secretary of State’s office interprets and implements guidelines on residency, while town clerks execute these policies at the local level.
Without specific statutory guidelines from the Legislature, residency requirements remain flexible, placing a heavier burden on town clerks to determine residency based on broadly interpreted criteria. This approach introduces inconsistencies in how voter residency is verified across towns, especially in areas with high student populations. Introducing more concrete guidelines, such as requiring town clerks to confirm with previous jurisdictions that a registrant has changed their primary voting residency, would help ensure consistency and reinforce residency standards.
The Potential for Double Voting
Vermont’s open residency policy poses an additional risk of double voting. Though it’s illegal to vote in more than one state, without a system to cross-check voter registrations nationwide, enforcement is challenging. An out-of-state student could, intentionally or inadvertently, vote both in Vermont and their home state.
Currently, Vermont lacks an automated means to prevent double voting, relying instead on voters’ adherence to residency requirements. As election laws evolve to accommodate more transient populations, an honor-based system alone may be insufficient. Implementing a data-sharing program could help mitigate the risk of double voting and support town clerks, who often lack the resources for extensive residency verification.
How ERIC Could Help
The Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) is a non-partisan, multi-state partnership designed to improve the accuracy of voter rolls and facilitate secure data sharing across states. Through ERIC, member states can cross-reference voter registration data to identify potential duplicate registrations and update records for voters who have moved or passed away. ERIC’s secure, centralized system notifies election officials when a voter is registered in multiple states, providing an efficient tool for reducing voter roll discrepancies.
For Vermont, which faces challenges related to transient voting populations and high inbound migration, ERIC’s data-sharing could help local officials ensure that voters registered in Vermont are only casting ballots there. Membership in ERIC would also alleviate the administrative burden on town clerks, who are responsible for managing and updating voter rolls while verifying residency.
Why Has Vermont Not Joined ERIC? What’s the Price Tag?
Vermont’s decision not to join ERIC has raised questions among those concerned with election integrity. Vermont’s absence may stem from budgetary constraints, data privacy concerns, or reluctance to adopt additional bureaucratic steps for voter verification. However, the benefits of joining ERIC could outweigh these concerns, especially given the program’s cost-effectiveness.
ERIC membership requires a one-time initial fee, typically ranging from $25,000 to $50,000, depending on a state’s population, along with an annual fee based on data volume and usage, which averages between $15,000 and $30,000 per year. Given Vermont’s smaller population, costs would likely fall on the lower end, making it an affordable option for enhancing voter integrity. ERIC’s services—such as reducing administrative burdens, supporting accurate voter rolls, and preventing double voting—would benefit both Vermont’s election system and its local officials.
Joining ERIC would allow Vermont to catch potential errors in real time and increase public confidence in election integrity. Vermont’s current system, while accessible, could benefit from the additional structure and data-sharing capabilities ERIC provides, helping the state uphold its commitment to transparent and accurate elections.
Balancing Accessibility with Integrity
Vermont’s accessible voting system is a point of pride, reflecting the state’s emphasis on inclusivity and community trust. However, as Vermont’s political landscape continues to evolve, the need for stronger checks and balances becomes more pressing. Joining ERIC and introducing policies requiring proof of residency would help Vermont strike a balance between easy access to voting and safeguarding election integrity.
These steps would also demonstrate a proactive approach from Vermont’s Legislature, addressing residency verification in a way that aligns with the Vermont Constitution’s principles. By implementing these measures, lawmakers would fulfill their constitutional responsibility to define and enforce voter qualifications, ensuring Vermont’s democratic process remains fair, transparent, and reflective of its permanent residents.
Dave Soulia | FYIVT
You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Parler (@fyivt) | Gab | Instagram
#fyivt #VermontVoting #ElectionIntegrity #StudentVoters
Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!
Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!
Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!
Leave a Reply