Election Day
You learn something new everyday. (Well, I seem to.) There’s an article in Time Magazine this week that discusses voting rights of American noncitizens.
Voting rights? I had no idea that noncitizens could vote, but here are the facts as laid out by Time:
• “The Constitution leaves voting rules up to states and cities…”
• “…from 1776 to 1926, 40 states and territories allowed noncitizens to vote in local and even federal elections…”
• “…the aftermath of World War I created a mistrust of foreigners that lead all states to make voting the sole privilege of U. S. citizens.”
• “The rules started changing again in the late 1960s…”
Noncitizen voting rights often involve school board elections, but it is wider in some cities. Most areas, however, report that relatively few noncitizens take advantage of these laws. Some immigration activists seek to expand these rights, “so that politicians would be more responsive to noncitizens’ concerns.”
Like I said, this issue surprised me. My immediate reaction is that voting is a right/responsibility for citizens only. If I moved to another country, I wouldn’t expect to vote there unless I became a citizen. It’s something that seems to go along with citizenship…one gets a voice in how things are run.
But maybe I’m missing something…what are your thoughts on noncitizen voting rights? Any other views on the topic?
Be brave. Be human.
Susan
April 23rd, 2007 11:57
Hello all,
Hmmm…
This surprised me as well, and I have to admit that my immediate gut reaction was that it’s a bad idea. If you’re not a citizen you don’t get a vote. Period. But on reflection I can see a strong argument for allowing legal immigrants to vote in local elections. If a community has a large legal immigrant population, those folks SHOULD have a voice on issues concerning that community. It seems just as reasonable, however, to restrict voting in state and federal elections to citizens.
April 23rd, 2007 12:25
Hi Grant-
I can see your point about local elections, allowing legal immigrant to vote on issues that affect them on a daily basis.
But certainly there are state and national issues that directly affect them as well. I’m not trying to be argumentative, I’m just having trouble sorting this out. How do we justify one and not the other?
Susan
April 23rd, 2007 12:35
If you’re not a citizen, then foreign influence is impacting local elections. Who knows, it may some day affect state and national elections, too. We complain about foreign monies impacting elections; this is a different angle on the same problem.
Qualifications must be in place:
1. Did the non-citizen renounce all their other countries’ rights to citizenship?
2. Are they actively working to become American citizens?
3. Are they in good standing legally in their prior countries of citizenship?
(Isn’t this already the law? I’m ignorant in this area.)
If so, then they should be patient and become naturalized. Then, they will be voting citizens; they just can’t become President.
Rick
April 23rd, 2007 12:41
Hi Rick-
I think you make a good point about potential foreign influence.
Your question about qualifications is a good one; I don’t know the answer to that…maybe someone out there…?
Susan
April 23rd, 2007 12:58
Just my two cents on this. I would be happy with non-citizen residents voting on referendums. For example, zoning issues, school taxes, etc. Non-citizens who live in my community and pay their taxes are a part of my community, and should have a say in local governance on that level, I think. I would also keep that separate from general elections. Citizens should have the say on who governs, and elective office should be restricted to citizens.
April 23rd, 2007 14:20
Brian - you raised the issue of taxes, and suddenly the slogan “No taxation without representation” popped into my head. I realize this is a different situation than when the slogan was coined, but I think there may still be some application here. If a legal immigrant is working and paying taxes, shouldn’t he or she get to vote on how those taxes are used? I think certainly legal immigrants whose naturalization is in process should have this right.
April 23rd, 2007 16:00
Yes, I am surprised too! It didn’t cross my mind that it could be possible. When the various issues are explored, I can see how it would make sense in some cases.
Just a point about “renounce all their other countries’ rights to citizenship” — the US allows dual citizenship with many countries — so many new citizens would not have to renounce other rights in order to exercise citizenship rights in the US. Wikipedia has an article that refers to this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_citizenship
All in all, I would be in favour of maintaining the citizenship process — legal immigrants who want full citizen rights (at any level of govt) have the pathway for gaining that by applying for citizenship. Of course, given the weight of bureaucracy, patience will be needed, as Rick notes.
The taxation issue doesn’t carry much weight for me. Illegal immigrants pay taxes too (e.g. sales tax).
April 23rd, 2007 17:28
Gillian, I was referring to taxes taken out of wages that support local, state and federal government programs (and wars). Tourists pay sales tax - that’s not something that comes into play here.
April 23rd, 2007 20:23
True, sales tax is not a good example.
I think I have a hazy recollection that many illegal immigrants in the US pay a range of taxes, including income tax and local land taxes. Because they have been in the country a long time, they own property and so forth.
Maybe I’m wrong and all of them are entirely outside the tax system.
I didn’t mean to suggest that ‘no taxation without representation’ is irrelevant to this discussion. I think it is one of the issues that should be on the table. I was just wondering (a bit clumsily) whether the taxation issue would then lead to those contentious issues about legalising the status of illegal immigrants.
April 23rd, 2007 22:01
Gillian,
Yes, I see your point, and I agree with your skepticism (if I’m reading you right) that the issue of taxation will seriously come into play. It was just my observation about the fairness of the situation (paying taxes and voting).
At this point I’m so tired I can barely remember my name, so I’ll leave it at that.
OH and now the site is making me do math for spam protection? I’m lucky I can add 5+8 at this point.
April 24th, 2007 12:30
Brian,
I see your point regarding local referendums. Not sure I like the setting of legal precedent allowing foreigners to vote, but I understand where you’re going.
My localities often include referendums on the state and federal election ballot; I think I’ve only seen one single-issue ballot in my entire voting experience.
To make this allowance would require drastic change in voter registration and voting processes, which as we all know, are already out of whack in the U.S. - poor governance, politics, ineptitude, etc.
Rick