Voter outrage
Re: Riding confusion gives first-time voters a lesson in bureacracy, Oct. 6
I was disgusted when I read the article “Riding confusion gives first-time voters a lesson in bureaucracy” in today’s Varsity. The fundamental issue in where someone votes is where the voter considers to be his or her home. To claim “The place where your family lives is your permanent residence until you move elsewhere with the intention of making that change permanent” is simply ridiculous. The only “permanent change” of address I ever intend to make is when I am buried deep in the cold, cold ground. Until then, I have the intent to bounce to several different addresses around Toronto and (hopefully!) elsewhere. Does this mean I am never allowed to vote?
The riding officers who refused to allow students to vote were no-doubt singling out those students who live in residence. I was allowed to vote, despite being a student, because I am able to afford to live off-campus, and thus have a “permanent” address. Even though my driver’s license and passport, used for ID, both bear the address of my family’s old home, my lease of a non-government assisted dwelling was taken to be proof of a permanent change of address. Truly, what we have here is discrimination based on socio-economic status. Those students with fewer resources were not allowed to vote in an election where the party in power draws its greatest support from among people with the greater of resources.
Your article has uncovered the foul stench of election tampering, my friends. It’s time to call for a criminal investigation.
Daniel Wigdor
