Should legal immigrants w/o citizenship be allowed to vote?

A place for intelligent and well-thought-out discussion involving politics and associated topics. No nonsense will be tolerated at all.
User avatar
dusred
Posts: 3856
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 3:23 pm
Car: Previous Q45 owner, 09 Corolla, Ford F250 Diesel truck

Post

Should they? Maine thinks they should. Here is the article: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10 ... zens-vote/

If you don't want your cookies dirtied with Fox here it is in it's entirety:
Fox Article wrote:PORTLAND, Maine -- Like his neighbors, Claude Rwaganje pays taxes on his income and taxes on his cars. His children have gone to Portland's public schools. He's interested in the workings of Maine's largest city, which he has called home for 13 years.

There's one vital difference, though: Rwaganje isn't a U.S. citizen and isn't allowed to vote on those taxes or on school issues. That may soon change.

Portland residents will vote Nov. 2 on a proposal to give legal residents who are not U.S. citizens the right to vote in local elections, joining places like San Francisco and Chicago that have already loosened the rules or are considering it.

Noncitizens hold down jobs, pay taxes, own businesses, volunteer in the community and serve in the military, and it's only fair they be allowed to vote, Rwaganje said.

"We have immigrants who are playing key roles in different issues of this country, but they don't get the right to vote," said Rwaganje, 40, who moved to the U.S. because of political strife in his native Congo and runs a nonprofit that offers financial advice to immigrants.

YOU MIGHT ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
Fox Networks Pulled From Cablevision As Contract Ends
Chavez Rejects Obama's Nuclear Stance
American Al Qaeda Spokesman Urges Attacks in U.S.
National Politburo Radio
Oil Giants Ready to Take the Stage

Opponents of the measure say immigrants already have an avenue to cast ballots -- by becoming citizens. Allowing noncitizens to vote dilutes the meaning of citizenship, they say, adding that it could lead to fraud and unfairly sway elections.

"My primary objection is I don't think it is right, I don't think it is just, I don't think it is fair," Portland resident Barbara Campbell Harvey said.

In San Francisco, a ballot question Nov. 2 will ask voters whether they want to allow noncitizens to vote in school board elections if they are the parents, legal guardians or caregivers of children in the school system.

Noncitizens are allowed to vote in school board elections in Chicago and in municipal elections in half a dozen towns in Maryland, said Ron Hayduk, a professor at the City University of New York and author of "Democracy for All: Restoring Immigrant Voting Rights in the United States."

New York City allowed noncitizens to vote in community school board elections until 2003, when the school board system was reorganized, and several municipalities in Massachusetts have approved allowing it but don't yet have the required approval from the Legislature, he said.

The Maine ballot questions asks whether legal immigrants who are city residents but not U.S. citizens should be allowed to vote in municipal elections. If the measure passes, noncitizens would be able to cast ballots in school board, city council and school budget elections, as well as other local issues, but not on federal or statewide matters.

The Maine League of Young Voters, which spearheaded the drive to force the question on the ballot, estimates there are 5,000 to 7,500 immigrants in Portland, roughly half of whom are not U.S. citizens. They come from more than 100 countries, with the two largest groups from Somalia and Latin America.

On a recent day in a small lunchroom at the Al-Amin Halal Market, a group of Somali men ate lunch and talked in their native language. A sign advertised the day's offerings, including hilib ari (goat), bariis (rice) and baasto (spaghetti).

Abdirizak Daud, 40, moved to Minneapolis 18 years ago before coming to Portland in 2006. He hasn't been able to find a job. Some of his nine children have attended Portland schools, and he'd like to have a say in who's looking over the school system and the city, he said.

But between his limited English and the financial demands, Daud hasn't been able to become a citizen.

"I like the Democrats. I want to vote for Democrats, but I don't have citizenship," he said.

To become a citizen, immigrants must be a lawful permanent resident for at least five years, pass tests on English and U.S. history and government, and swear allegiance to the United States.

Supporters of Portland's ballot measure say the process is cumbersome, time-consuming and costly. The filing fee and fingerprinting costs alone are $675, and many immigrants spend hundreds of dollars more on English and civics classes and for a lawyer to help them through the process.

Allowing noncitizens to vote fits with basic democratic principles, Hayduk said.

Historically, 40 states allowed noncitizens to vote going back to 1776, but an anti-immigrant backlash in the late 1800s and early 1900s resulted in laws that eliminated their voting rights by 1926, Hayduk said.

"We look back in history and we say that was a bad thing that we didn't allow African-Americans to vote, or we didn't allow half the population, women, to vote, or we didn't allow younger people to vote," he said. "We've modified our election laws to become more inclusive to incorporate more members of society."

The Federation for American Immigration Reform, a Washington, D.C., group that advocates tougher immigration enforcement, says voting is a privilege and should be limited to citizens.

"People who are legal immigrants to the United States after a five-year waiting period can become citizens and become enfranchised," spokesman Ira Mehlman said. "But until then, being here as a legal immigrant is a conditional agreement, sort of like a trial period. You have to demonstrate you are the type of person we would want to have as a citizen, then you can become a citizen and vote."
I'm a little torn on this one. "No taxation without representation" comes to mind. But then again if they are here they partake of the public services like roads, parks, schools, food stamps, ect. So obviously they need to pay taxes and pull their own weight.

When I read this:
"Abdirizak Daud, 40, moved to Minneapolis 18 years ago before coming to Portland in 2006. He hasn't been able to find a job. Some of his nine children have attended Portland schools, and he'd like to have a say in who's looking over the school system and the city, he said."

my first thought was how are you supporting your 9 children without a job? Government aid would be my guess.

I know it's much harder for an immigrant to get a job. The language barrier and lack of understanding of the culture may make it difficult for them to get the feel for the way of things. My current opinion is that they should become a citizen before being allowed to vote so that they have to stay and live with the laws and politicians they vote for.

Feel free to convince me otherwise.


User avatar
heliochrome85
Posts: 3048
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 8:18 pm
Car: 2006 G35 Sport Coupe Athens Blue/Slate with Sport and Premium Packages--SOLD

Post

i read it wrong initially. illegal immigrants definately not. legal immigrants, i dont see why they shouldnt for the reasons you stated. they cant opt out of paying taxes, they use services, and attend schools. they are obviously on the path to becoming citizens.

User avatar
dusred
Posts: 3856
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 3:23 pm
Car: Previous Q45 owner, 09 Corolla, Ford F250 Diesel truck

Post

heliochrome85 wrote:i read it wrong initially. illegal immigrants definately not. legal immigrants, i dont see why they shouldnt for the reasons you stated. they cant opt out of paying taxes, they use services, and attend schools. they are obviously on the path to becoming citizens.
I know. Every once in a while I have to remind myself that there are such things as legal immigrants. :)

In this example of Mr. Daud he has been here for 18 years and as the article says "But between his limited English and the financial demands, Daud hasn't been able to become a citizen." Possible translation: Because he's still learning English and working to feed his 9 kids he hasn't made citizenship a priority. If a legal immigrant is here and can enjoy all the rights of a citizen without actually spending the time, effort, and money to become a citizen then why make the effort?

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

[Full disclosure: My girlfriend wants to get a green card eventually, but she said she has no interest in citizenship. Unless we move to Maine (maybe) or one of those cities out in California, she won't be allowed to vote. She understands this, and it's her decision. I haven't really gone into it with her to find out why she doesn't want to become a citizen, but I respect that she's got her reasons.]

I personally don't have a problem with it. The reason we don't allow noncitizens to vote in Federal elections is because they're not federal citizens (though, admittedly, they are subject to federal income tax and selective service). They're not actively participating on the federal level. When we start to talk about local elections and local policy, this reasoning crumbles. They are in the community. They are working (as much as most anyone can) and they are contributing to the local society. Given that reasoning, I have absolutely no objections to allowing them to have some control over it.

There are sure to be some cries about Sharia (not here, but I bet if I took a glance at the FoxNews comments...), but that to me is just an incentive for people to take a greater interest in their local policies and elections. If they care so much about the neighborhood, act like it.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 Nissan Versa SL hatch w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

My personal feeling is no. I believe those whose allegiance is here are the ones who should vote here. Your argument that immigrants don't actively participate on a federal level but do on a local level doesn't strike me as true. They participate exactly the same on a federal level as they do on a local level. Additionally, without arguing the rights or wrongs of the funding of things, many of the dollars funding the local programs those legal residents are taking advantage of and/or voting on are federally supplied.

I have so many thoughts about this racing through my head right now I'm having a difficult time organizing and expressing them. I'll try to slowly get them in order since far too many people around here are only interested in ripping a few words out of an entire post instead of having a general discussion.

Bottom line: I'm fine with people getting citizenship and then voting to make this like the old country, wherever that is. Then I'm losing to a majority vote of my fellow citizens. However, if you're going to allow noncitizens to vote you may as well eliminate the United States as a sovereign entity and let the United Nations run the place.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

But no one's talking about giving them a vote for the United States. They're talking about giving them a vote for San Francisco, or Portland, Maine.

I think...? Maybe the issue of federal voting was put in play.

And I don't think that simply relying on a federally-subsidized program makes you a participant of the United States. I'm talking about the things that they actually go out and do on a local level - work their local job, send their kids to the local schools, etc. The local politics affect them probably to a much greater degree. Maybe they have to negotiate zoning laws, maybe they have to deal with local police policies (there was a debate in my town, not long ago, about the Police installing cameras outside of certain neighborhoods), maybe they have a complaint about the way their child is (or isn't, as the case may be) educated.

You suggest that they'd use this vote to turn it into the old country, when I'm saying maybe they'll use it exactly in the way that everyone else in the new country does.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54538
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

srellim234 wrote:Bottom line: I'm fine with people getting citizenship and then voting to make this like the old country, wherever that is. Then I'm losing to a majority vote of my fellow citizens. However, if you're going to allow noncitizens to vote you may as well eliminate the United States as a sovereign entity and let the United Nations run the place.
This.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 Nissan Versa SL hatch w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

IB- Even on a local level those people would not have as deep a commitment or responsibility to their fellow voters and area. A student taking advantage of our public colleges and working a job paying taxes isn't going to vote with a long term interest if as a non-citizen they can simply go home after they graduate. If you limit voting to those who simply own businesses, have taxpaying jobs or some other criteria aren't you in effect creating a poll-tax type situation?

Local jurisdiction always will have more involvement in one's life than federal. It is those local interactions, however, that make up the federal involvement for the vast majority of people. Heck, the majority of American citizens don't even vote in national elections so they are not even involved in a direct federal way. Our voting record in this country is a disgrace but it is what it is. We shouldn't allow non-citizens to dilute the power of the few citizens who do take their civic duty seriously.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

What makes you think it's just students we're talking about? There's a whole host of other visas (H1, refugee, etc) that will allow you to reside legally in the country without having full citizenship.

You appear to take the approach that because there are people who are arguably not worthy of having the vote, no non-citizen should have it. Could we apply that same theory to citizens?

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 Nissan Versa SL hatch w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

Who said anything about "just students?" They are just one subset of the people you are trying to justify giving the right to vote to. Yes, there are all types of methods for non-citizens to be legally in this country. As such, rather than differentiate between non-citizens who are "worthy" and those who aren't, we should just leave the criteria at age and citizenship and not even open the can of worms you are proposing.

User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54538
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

Again, ^ THIS.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

Again you're missing my point. I'm not proposing that we ought to distinguish between "worthy" or "not worthy." I don't see a problem with giving legal residents a right to vote in local elections, if that's what the locality wants, regardless of the purported worthiness (in your eye) of those residents. We don't look to worthiness for any other purpose, so we needn't look to it now. If they're members of the community to be controlled by its will, I don't have a problem with giving them a share of that will.

We don't need to consider how a population will vote in order to determine whether they should be allowed to vote. In fact, that seems terribly myopic. How we think a student will vote today may not accurately represent how we think they'll vote tomorrow, especially given the amount of uncertainty there exists for world events at any given moment.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 Nissan Versa SL hatch w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

Voting is privilege and a right that, in my opinion, must be earned. Earned through citizenship. I understand where you're coming from and I also accept that we disagree on this subject with no hostility on the part of either party. I see we will beat on each other about this topic and get nowhere. I'm willing to admit what when it comes to allowing non-citizens to vote I am closed-minded about it. Sorry, IB, but that's just the way I am.

While we're discussing, though, where do you happen to draw the line between local and federal? According to the Constitution, if you are eligible to vote for the larger of your houses of the state legislature you are eligible to vote federal. Geographically many of our state representatives in densely populated areas represent smaller areas than a city or county and are thus more "local". You could make a case that immigrants should be allowed to voe for those representatives. Would you even draw a line there?

User avatar
audtatious
Moderator
Posts: 25014
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2002 5:31 pm
Car: 2017 Q60 Red Sport. Gone: 2014 Q50s, 2008 G37s coupe, 2007 G35s Sedan, 2002 Maxima SE, 2000 Villager Estate (Quest), 1998 Quest, 1996 Sentra GXE
Location: Stalking You
Contact:

Post

Those with citizenship = right to vote
Those without = no right to vote until they become legal citizens

Pretty simply and accurate, IMO.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

I don't necessarily draw a line between federal and local - we, as a country, haven't always drawn a line at all. I concede that citizenship in a foreign country indicates allegiance to that foreign country, and thus against this country. It is not, however, necessarily allegiance against one's neighbors. We all make distinctions between local and federal in our daily lives; I see no reason to ignore that fact.

User avatar
audtatious
Moderator
Posts: 25014
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2002 5:31 pm
Car: 2017 Q60 Red Sport. Gone: 2014 Q50s, 2008 G37s coupe, 2007 G35s Sedan, 2002 Maxima SE, 2000 Villager Estate (Quest), 1998 Quest, 1996 Sentra GXE
Location: Stalking You
Contact:

Post

I would not necessarily state "against this country".

I don't think we need to make the distinction. Leave well enough alone and keep it as requiring citizenship.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

But it hasn't always been this way.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 Nissan Versa SL hatch w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

Agreed that it hasn't always been this way but I still see no compelling reason, need or argument to return to that earlier time.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

And I see no compelling reason to reject the will of those who do. Like, perhaps, those in San Francisco or Portland. If it comes up in your district, vote against it.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 Nissan Versa SL hatch w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

I agree.

Interesting thought just occurred to me as a result of this discussion: this may well be one of the strongest defenses of the argument for retaining the Electoral College a person could have.

User avatar
heliochrome85
Posts: 3048
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 8:18 pm
Car: 2006 G35 Sport Coupe Athens Blue/Slate with Sport and Premium Packages--SOLD

Post

srellim234 wrote:I agree.

Interesting thought just occurred to me as a result of this discussion: this may well be one of the strongest defenses of the argument for retaining the Electoral College a person could have.

isnt that a left turn no one expected at the outset of this thread.

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 Nissan Versa SL hatch w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

Just trying to look at the big picture. We could conceivably wind up with different standards for the electorate in different states as a result of this and the Electoral College balances that out.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

Srellim, I'd love to read your elaboration on it, but I'm headed to bed. If you wouldn't mind posting it, I'll gladly read it in the morning. A conversation about the electoral college would be a welcome shift from the kinds of conversations that usually come up in the last week of October.

User avatar
heliochrome85
Posts: 3048
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 8:18 pm
Car: 2006 G35 Sport Coupe Athens Blue/Slate with Sport and Premium Packages--SOLD

Post

srellim234 wrote:Just trying to look at the big picture. We could conceivably wind up with different standards for the electorate in different states as a result of this and the Electoral College balances that out.
i understand your concern. its a valid one for sure. i also think though that the people who are contributing to the services provided by their state by being of legal status, should have the ability to have a voice in how their taxes are used. if one wants to restrict those voting rights on an opt in sort of way, so that cities or states can vote to allow legal aliens to vote, thats something that is entirely a states rights issue. they would be barred from voting for anything on the federal level. on its face, it seems fairly straight forward. but like i said, your argument is not without merit.


Return to “Politics Etc.”