RNC challenges Vermont legislation giving voting rights to non-citizens

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  vic-eldred  •  4 weeks ago  •  123 comments

By:   Michael Lee (Fox News)

RNC challenges Vermont legislation giving voting rights to non-citizens
The RNC is suing two Vermont cities over new town charters that allow noncitizens to vote in municipal elections

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T




EXCLUSIVE - The Republican National Committee is suing two Vermont cities over new town charters that allow noncitizens to vote in municipal elections.

"Democrats are trying to dismantle the integrity of our elections," RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said Monday. "In addition to attacking widely supported safeguards like voter ID, Democrats also want foreign citizens to vote in American elections. Republicans are fighting back on this far-left assault against election integrity -- unlike radical Democrats, we believe that our elections should be decided solely by American citizens. This is a matter of principle and we will fight in all 50 states to ensure this remains the case."

The case centers around the Vermont cities of Montpelier and Winooski, who in May had changes to their charters approved by the state's Senate that allowed non-citizens to vote in their municipal elections.

"I believe if someone wishes to be able to vote they should be a citizen," Vermont state Sen. Brian Collamore told Fox News in an interview at the time. "The Montpelier bill allows what is defined as a legal resident of the United States to be able to vote in city elections. ... If someone is here on a permanent basis, why would he or she not want to participate in the process to become a citizen?"

Republican Gov. Phil Scott vetoed the legislation in June, citing "inconsistency in election policy" across the state.

"Allowing a highly variable town-by-town approach to municipal voting creates inconsistency in election policy, as well as separate and unequal classes of residents potentially eligible to vote on local issues," Scott said in a letter to legislators.

But the governor's veto was overridden by the Senate in a 20-10 vote, with Democrats getting just enough votes to clear the two-thirds majority needed for a veto override.

Now the RNC has promised to fight back, arguing the lawsuit is part of their "ongoing fight to secure the integrity of our elections - in this specific instance, ensuring that American elections be solely decided by American citizens.

"The suit also raises important concerns about how the laws will be implemented and whether non-citizens will end up on the same voter registration lists used for state-level and federal elections," the RNC said.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    4 weeks ago

I don't think democrats or the left are concerned about losing the 2022 midterm election. This is all they want...to get nonn-citizens voting, which will guarantee that democrats win every election.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 weeks ago

Which is worse?  Getting non-citizens to vote or doing whatever you can to make voting difficult for certain people?   Does "What's good for the goose is good for the gander" combine with "One man's fish is another man's 'poisson'" cover that?

IMO, if a person is a permanent resident of a municipality, and could even be a home-owner, I think they have every right to vote in a municipal election.  What the hell does citizenship have to do with it when it comes to voting on a municipal issue that has a direct effect on the permanent resident as much as any citizen.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    4 weeks ago

Only citizens have the right to vote.

Nobody is preventing legitimate voters from voting.


We wouldn't want fraud would we Buzz?  Which is more secure having somebody show an ID at a polling station or letting some poll station volunteer determine if a signature on a mail-in-ballot is real?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
1.1.2  Ronin2  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    4 weeks ago

Please point out one Republican voter law that makes "voting difficult for certain people".  The voting laws apply to everyone, they don't single out a specific group of people. This is a Democratic talking point that not one damn person can answer.

So Buzz does China or Canada all non citizens to vote?

Democrats are trying desperately for one party rule. We have all seen how well that works out in places like Russia and China.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    4 weeks ago
"IMO, if a person is a permanent resident of a municipality, and could even be a home-owner, I think they have every right to vote in a municipal election.  What the hell does citizenship have to do with it when it comes to voting on a municipal issue that has a direct effect on the permanent resident as much as any citizen."

EXACTLY BUZZ - THANK YOU.  That's the point I was trying to make.

It's not going to make them eligible to vote in elections.  

Plus, you're correct, certain states, gop led states, are passing voter suppression laws so that folks of a certain color, making it much, much, much harder for them to vote.  

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
1.1.4  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.3    4 weeks ago
Plus, you're correct, certain states, gop led states, are passing voter suppression laws so that folks of a certain color, making it much, much, much harder for them to vote.  

Prove it. No more BS left wing talking points. Point out the exact sections of the Republican passed laws that make it harder for anyone of a particular race to vote than anyone else. The laws apply equally to everyone. Or are you saying certain races are just inept and incompetent; and aren't able to adhere to the same rules as everyone else and need special help in order to vote?

Also, it doesn't matter what level the vote takes place at, only US citizens should have the right to vote, period. If you want non US permanent residents to have the right to vote even at the lowest level; then they must also serve jury duty. See how fast they want to register to vote then.

Only US citizens can be jurors. Both documented and undocumented immigrants often receive a summons for jury duty, as many are licensed drivers. The summons will usually ask if you are a US citizen. Immigrants can prove they are not eligible for jury duty by showing the court their green card, passport, or immigration papers.

Since everyone is so keen on giving immigrants rights- the government should be checking how many are registered for the draft; considering it is their duty for residing within the US.

Immigrants
U.S. immigrants are required by law to register with the Selective Service System 30 days after their 18th birthday or 30 days after entry into the United States if they are between the ages of 18 and 25. This includes U.S. born and naturalized citizens, parolees, undocumented immigrants, legal permanent residents, asylum seekers, refugees, and all males with visas of any kind which expired more than 30 days ago.

The few individuals who are exempt from this requirement are those on current non-immigrant visas, as long as they remain on a valid visa up until they turn 26. If you have received a letter from us requesting that you register, please send us copies of  supporting documentation  to show you are exempt.

Dual Nationals
U.S. dual nationals are required by law to register with the Selective Service System within 30 days of their 18th birthday, regardless of whether they live inside or outside of the U.S. Dual nationals residing outside of the U.S. can register using a foreign address here .

 Willing to bet that the vast majority of immigrants (especially illegal immigrants) never register for the US draft. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.2    4 weeks ago

Actually, from what I've seen and experienced here, it DOES work out pretty well, although I know it's sinful for a nation not to be like America.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.4    4 weeks ago

You have obviously forgotten, I don't waste my time reading your nonsense.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
1.1.7  Nerm_L  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    4 weeks ago
Which is worse?  Getting non-citizens to vote or doing whatever you can to make voting difficult for certain people?   Does "What's good for the goose is good for the gander" combine with "One man's fish is another man's 'poisson'" cover that? IMO, if a person is a permanent resident of a municipality, and could even be a home-owner, I think they have every right to vote in a municipal election.  What the hell does citizenship have to do with it when it comes to voting on a municipal issue that has a direct effect on the permanent resident as much as any citizen.

All of this is based upon the idea of global citizenship and a world without borders.  In a world without borders, China would have no claim on Taiwan because there would not be a China.  Or a United States or Canada, for that matter.  Sounds nice.  But it would be a return to a purely tribal global society where charismatic ideas and people are not contained by borders.  

How can someone who has touted the exquisite organizational skills of the Chinese government support unorganized and chaotic governance?  Do you actually believe that dissolving the borders of the United States would make the world safer?  Perhaps that pie-eyed optimism doesn't take into account what the American tribes are capable of.  The American hegemony doesn't depend upon borders.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
1.1.8  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.3    4 weeks ago

Oh bullshit. This simply isn't true and you can't prove otherwise.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
1.1.9  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.6    4 weeks ago

And yet you respond to his comments. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
1.1.10  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    4 weeks ago
doing whatever you can to make voting difficult for certain people?

Exactly where is this happening?

if a person is a permanent resident of a municipality, and could even be a home-owner, I think they have every right to vote in a municipal election.

If that person is NOT a citizen, they DON'T have the right to vote.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.12  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.8    4 weeks ago

It is true old man

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.13  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.2    4 weeks ago

Your usual projection, deflection, and denial.  

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
1.1.14  Ronin2  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.5    4 weeks ago

Unless you are a dissident; religious; or run afoul of the government in any way then it is the reeducation camp for you (if you are lucky).

[deleted]

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
1.1.15  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.11    4 weeks ago

How cute.  You found news articles to support your talking points.  It still doesn't answer exactly where is this happening?  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.16  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.15    4 weeks ago
You found news articles to support your talking points.

You should try it sometimes.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1.17  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.14    4 weeks ago

Your comment is ignorant of the reality of the purpose of the reeducation camps in China.  Unfortunately the promotion of those lies is detrimental more to the rest of the world than it is for China.  The only persons who are in those camps are those who are religious extremists, separatists and terrorists.  You say "religious"?  The vast majority of Uyghurs practice their religion freely, run their businesses, pray in their mosques, celebrate their festivals, educate their children and live their lives no different than anyone else as do all other Muslims and other ethnic minorities.  The most popular religion in China is Buddhism - my wife and her family are practising Buddhists and nobody is detaining them for it.   

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
1.1.18  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.16    4 weeks ago

Doesn't answer the question.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.19  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.18    4 weeks ago
Doesn't answer the question.

Not supposed to answer the question.  Just supposed to point out some (unnamed) commenters' hypocrisy.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
1.1.20  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.14    4 weeks ago
run afoul of the government in any way then it is the reeducation camp for you

You mean like Lt. Col Stuart Scheller?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
1.1.21  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.19    4 weeks ago
Not supposed to answer the question.

So reality is you can't point out exactly where is this happening (not surprise there) and you're just parroting what somebody else told you.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.22  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.21    4 weeks ago
So reality is you can't point out exactly where is this happening (not surprise there) and you're just parroting what somebody else told you.

Still refusing to read what I wrote?  Not trying to point anything out except some peoples' hypocrisy.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
1.1.23  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1.22    4 weeks ago

I read it.  And you haven't shown me anything or answered my question.  You simply can't point out exactly where is this happening and you're still parroting what somebody else told you.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.24  Kavika   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.23    4 weeks ago

It was and is happening in Montana and ND. Montana pass a law that would restrict Native American votes and the courts held that it was unconstitutional and overturned it in 2020. In 2021 Montana re introduced it with different wording and it will be challenged again. 

North Dakota passed laws that would also restrict NA voters and were sued and had to reach a settlement with the tribes in 2020.

Here is another for South Dakota. 

Over the years there have been many instances of states restricting NA voting rights. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
1.1.25  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Kavika @1.1.24    4 weeks ago

Thank you.  I'll have to read through them later.

Maybe you could teach Ozzwald how you did that.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    4 weeks ago

make sure you tell all your latino acquaintances nunca votas por un republicano.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
1.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @1.2    4 weeks ago

You have it wrong again. What we are telling latinos is "Los demócratas te joderán cada vez".

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

"The suit also raises important concerns about how the laws will be implemented and whether non-citizens will end up on the same voter registration lists used for state-level and federal elections," the RNC said.

NOT GONNA HAPPEN!

I'm sure this has to do with folks voting in their districts regarding their children in school and what is going on in their municipalities and nothing else.  Interesting how it doesn't say. . . . but it is Fox 'news' so no surprise.  

And so two cities in Vermont are doing this so that will lead to non-citizens voting EVERYWHERE?????????????????????????????????????????????

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @3    4 weeks ago

Only citizens have the right to vote, no matter what the election is.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
3.1.1  SteevieGee  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    4 weeks ago

Actually, in San Francisco non-citizen parents have been allowed to vote in school board elections for several years now.  They have to have children enrolled in the school district and their ballots only show candidates for school board.  It gives them a chance to influence policy that directly affects their children who are often American citizens.  I don't believe in your slippery slope bs.  This is a good thing.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  SteevieGee @3.1.1    4 weeks ago
Actually, in San Francisco non-citizen parents have been allowed to vote in school board elections for several years now. 

I know. So does a county in MD. CA is a lso a sanctuary state. All of it illegal and wrong.  And of course, political

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  SteevieGee @3.1.1    4 weeks ago

Gee, one might think that an illegal alien concerned with his child's education enough to vote on it might be concerned enough to actually obey the laws of the nation he chose to live in illegally.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
3.1.4  SteevieGee  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.2    4 weeks ago

I believe that all children, and many of these children are American citizens, deserve the best parenting that they can get.  Having parents who are involved in their kids' schooling is good parenting.  Giving parents the tools they need to help is good for the children and our country.  Bad parents who refuse to get involved in their kids' education won't go vote anyway.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  SteevieGee @3.1.4    4 weeks ago

They can get involved all they want they just can't have rights reserved for citizens.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
3.1.6  SteevieGee  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    4 weeks ago
Gee, one might think that an illegal alien concerned with his child's education enough to vote on it might be concerned enough to actually obey the laws of the nation he chose to live in illegally.

Not everyone is illegal.  Most non-citizen residents are here legally.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  SteevieGee @3.1.6    4 weeks ago
Not everyone is illegal.

Agreed. Why state the obvious that no one disagrees with?

Most non-citizen residents are here legally.

I would love to see stats on that.

Of course, stats for illegal aliens are always suspect.

But feel free to link the stats for legal non-citizen residents.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.8  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    4 weeks ago
Gee, one might think that an illegal alien

A little racist there?  Only right wingers immediately associate "Non-citizens" with "illegal aliens".  There are millions of LEGAL non-citizens in this country.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.8    4 weeks ago
A little racist there? 

Not at all, only in certain minds.

No one denied there are people living here legally who are not citizens.

So, how many millions here legally compared to those here illegally?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.10  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.9    4 weeks ago
Not at all, only in certain minds.

Article refers to "non-citizens", guess who jumped on only illegal immigrants?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.10    4 weeks ago

Guess who is pretending that no illegal aliens are here.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.12  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.11    4 weeks ago

Guess who is pretending that no illegal aliens are here.

Right on time.  Lost the argument so you're changing the subject....typical.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.12    4 weeks ago

Sorry, I can't understand it for yoy.

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
3.1.14  dennis smith  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    4 weeks ago

Children learn much from their parents. If the parents came here illegally what do you think the children will do, follow the laws or not?

 
 
 
squiggy
Freshman Quiet
3.2  squiggy  replied to  Tessylo @3    4 weeks ago

It matters as soon as local voting results generate one nickel in federal funding.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  squiggy @3.2    4 weeks ago

As usual, you have no clue what you're talking about.  

 
 
 
squiggy
Freshman Quiet
3.2.2  squiggy  replied to  Tessylo @3.2.1    4 weeks ago

Ooooo, look - tomorrow's the end of the month. Happy [deleted Day.]

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
4  charger 383    4 weeks ago

This lowers the value of citizenship

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  charger 383 @4    4 weeks ago

They want to diminish it and give residency equal status.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
4.1.1  SteevieGee  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1    4 weeks ago

How about having one elected official who has the power to overturn an election?  Does that diminish the value of citizenship?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  SteevieGee @4.1.1    4 weeks ago
How about having one elected official who has the power to overturn an election? 

How would that be done?

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
4.1.3  SteevieGee  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.2    4 weeks ago

It's happening right now in several states.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  SteevieGee @4.1.3    4 weeks ago

I asked you to explain how one elected official overturns an election.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
4.2  XXJefferson51  replied to  charger 383 @4    4 weeks ago

That is the point.  The goal of our secular progressive elites.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

According to who?  So do you view these non-citizens as feral cats?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
5.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @5    4 weeks ago
According to who? 

Everyone. Why work toward citizenship when they are going to "award" you rights only citizens should have? Strange you couldn't discern that............and yes they are considered feral cats.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.2  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @5    4 weeks ago

I was talking to charger.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
5.2.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @5.2    4 weeks ago

Then you should address him directly and let everyone know. Your little tactic of not responding directly is childish at best.

 
 
 
Kathleen
Professor Principal
5.2.2  Kathleen  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.2.1    4 weeks ago

Exactly... and he is not the only one. 

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
5.3  charger 383  replied to  Tessylo @5    4 weeks ago

According to principals of mathematics and civics. 

Feral cats is a good name for outsiders  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.3.1  Tessylo  replied to  charger 383 @5.3    4 weeks ago

Gee what a shocker you view 'outsiders', your fellow human beings, no matter WHERE THE FUCK THEY'RE FROM, as feral cats.  

Principles of mathematics and civics - WHATEVER!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

"I don't think democrats or the left are concerned about losing the 2022 midterm election."

We're not.  We know who is though.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
6.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @6    4 weeks ago

Obviously that went right over your head. What was meant was the fact they keep pulling stupid shit like this which doesn't bode well for them getting votes. California cities are trying the same shit.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.2  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @6    4 weeks ago

i sure hope you come here the day after the midterms.

Will you be wanting any fries with your crow?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2    4 weeks ago

Not worth a penny.  I bet  you have to pay them

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.2.2  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @6.2.1    4 weeks ago
I bet  you have to pay them

Please make some sense.

 
 
 
Kathleen
Professor Principal
6.2.3  Kathleen  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.2    4 weeks ago

You’re asking for too much.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  Kathleen @6.2.3    4 weeks ago

I know!

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
7  charger 383    4 weeks ago

Does News Talkers let non-members comment here? 

Can somebody who does not own stock in a company vote at the stockholders meeting? 

As a citizen of Virginia could I vote by mail in one of these Vermont towns?  

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  charger 383 @7    4 weeks ago

Come on Charger, you can't equate public and private.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1    4 weeks ago

Exactly!  

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
7.1.2  charger 383  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1    4 weeks ago

No, it shows that outsiders don't get to determine the course of the group

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
7.1.3  charger 383  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1    4 weeks ago

Do you have full rights where you live?  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  charger 383 @7.1.2    4 weeks ago

That's not what's going on in Vermont or anywhere.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.4    4 weeks ago

No?  What is going on in Vermont?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.6  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  charger 383 @7.1.2    4 weeks ago

It's unfortunate, then, that a person who has lived in a country for years, runs a business that employs people, owns a home, would be considered an "outsider".  I know that Canadian rock star Neil Young lived in California for decades before he finally decided to apply for American citizenship, and I don't think most Americans, especially the Farm Aid people, considered him an "outsider".

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.7  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  charger 383 @7.1.3    4 weeks ago

No. I'm not considered a permanent resident.  I'm a Canadian citizen.  Even though I'm married to a Chinese citizen I have to renew my residency visa every three years, I don't own property, I'm fully retired, so I don't expect to have the same rights as a Chinese citizen.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.8  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.6    4 weeks ago

Oh, he applied for citizenship?  Ya that's the idea. 

Voting is a key benefit of citizenship.

Do you think people who enter a country illegally should have citizenship?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.9  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.7    4 weeks ago
so I don't expect to have the same rights as a Chinese citizen.

Now you got it!

That's the way it works.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.10  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.8    4 weeks ago

LOL  If he obtained citizenship because he wanted to vote it was probably to vote against Trump who he almost sued for using his music without permission. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.11  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.10    4 weeks ago

That's fine. What we don't want is non-citizens voting.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.12  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.9    4 weeks ago

Stop twisting my words to suit what YOU want them to mean. Obviously I am NOT considered a PERMANENT resident here, whereas my argument has been that a PERMANENT resident with roots such as a business and a home and kids (maybe born in the USA) should be able to vote on municipal issues that affect him, his business, his home and his kids. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.13  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.12    4 weeks ago

Residency and citizenship are two different things and that difference must remain.

In particular, those who entered illegally must not be allowed to vote in any kind of election.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.14  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.13    4 weeks ago

It will be interesting to see how the Vermont experience ends up.  What is legal is one thing, and what is fair is another in my opinion. 

But I will tell you.  Although there has been discussion about municipal voting recently, in Canada only citizens can vote in municipal, provincial and federal elections. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
7.1.15  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.12    4 weeks ago

Nope. All ill gotten gains. And due to the circumstances, practically stolen. Sorry.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
7.1.16  Snuffy  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.12    4 weeks ago
whereas my argument has been that a PERMANENT resident with roots such as a business and a home and kids (maybe born in the USA) should be able to vote on municipal issues that affect him, his business, his home and his kids. 

Well if the person was born in the USA then they would already be a citizen.  

But to look at the rest of your statement. I'm concerned that it goes back against the Voting Rights Acts. Prior to the 1828 presidential election, only property holding white males could vote.  This 1828 election was the first election where non-property-holding white males could also vote.  Voting by women and other races came later.  But by allowing a non-citizen who happens to own property or a business the right to vote are we going backwards with voting rights?  Are we putting the ability to own property as more important here than citizenship?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.17  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.14    4 weeks ago
It will be interesting to see how the Vermont experience ends up. 

If it goes to the Court, the Constitution will prevail.

What is legal is one thing, and what is fair is another in my opinion. 

Fair being what?  Having a political party allowing migrants to illegally enter a country, allowing them to have benefits and then finding a way for them to vote knowing that they will vote for them as appreciation. Is that what fairness means to you?


But I will tell you.  Although there has been discussion about municipal voting recently, in Canada only citizens can vote in municipal, provincial and federal elections. 

As is true in most functioning democracies.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.18  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @7.1.15    4 weeks ago

I have no idea what you mean and how it relates to what you replied to.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.19  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.17    4 weeks ago

I just realized.  I think the Republicans/conservatives/right-wingers are scared shitless that if such a benefit is obtained by permanent residents, that it will lead to their party and their beliefs being turned into dust.  

"So come all you maidens, and listen to me.
Never place your affections on a green willow tree,
The leaves they will wither, the roots they will die,
You'll all be foresaken and never know why."

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.20  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.19    4 weeks ago
I think the Republicans/conservatives/right-wingers are scared shitless that if such a benefit is obtained by permanent residents, that it will lead to their party and their beliefs being turned into dust.  

It is a fact, that is the game and we all know it, in addition to being unconstitutional, undemocratic and wrong.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.21  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Snuffy @7.1.16    4 weeks ago
"Are we putting the ability to own property as more important here than citizenship?"

Maybe a person who isn't a citizen but is a resident who owns property has more of an interest in local issues that can affect that property than a resident citizen who doesn't own property.  An alcoholic destitute homeless citizen has a vote and a person who owns a business that gives jobs to people, owns a home, sends his American-born kids to school, gives to local charities, can't vote on local issues that can have a great effect on his life and holdings.  There is something about that that kind of confuses me. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.22  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Snuffy @7.1.16    4 weeks ago
"Well if the person was born in the USA then they would already be a citizen."

I think you misunderstood me - I said his KIDS may have been born in the USA.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.23  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.13    4 weeks ago
"In particular, those who entered illegally must not be allowed to vote in any kind of election."

I agree that persons illegally in the USA should not be allowed to vote.  I was only thinking of legal residents.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.24  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.23    4 weeks ago
I was only thinking of legal residents.  

I understand and I don't think they should have that sacred right either.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.25  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.24    4 weeks ago

Getting late, so I'm checking out now.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
7.1.26  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.18    4 weeks ago

Here illegally. Never should have been any property or business without proper identification and process for citizenship. Ill gotten gains.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.27  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.25    4 weeks ago

Have a good night

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
7.1.28  Snuffy  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.22    4 weeks ago

yeah, I did misunderstand.  Still don't think it's a good idea to give the right to vote to someone just because they own property, or because they have children who are citizens. The children when they are of age can legally vote.  How many DACA children are in this country?  While something needs to be done to fix their situation and to fix the immigration process, i do not agree with giving their parents the right to vote just because they came here without following the law or process and have children who were born here.  That's two different issues.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
7.1.29  Snuffy  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @7.1.26    4 weeks ago

No, there are a lot of foreign nationals who own property in the USA.  That's capitalism. Sell to the highest bidder. I have no issue with who owns what property, but I don't believe that owning property should provide any elevated rights that the person otherwise would not have.  

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
7.1.30  Snuffy  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.21    4 weeks ago
"Are we putting the ability to own property as more important here than citizenship?"
Maybe a person who isn't a citizen but is a resident who owns property has more of an interest in local issues that can affect that property than a resident citizen who doesn't own property.  An alcoholic destitute homeless citizen has a vote and a person who owns a business that gives jobs to people, owns a home, sends his American-born kids to school, gives to local charities, can't vote on local issues that can have a great effect on his life and holdings.  There is something about that that kind of confuses me. 

If this person is legally in the country, owns property and perhaps a business or two and has American-born children going to local schools and is involved in his local community, then he (she) has put down roots and perhaps should be looking into citizenship. IMO allowing someone to vote just because they own property here is sliding back to early days and goes against the Voting Rights Acts. What should be done next?  Should people who come here but believe that women are at best second class citizens be allowed to lock the women-folk away? Should we go back to the days of segregation? 

No. IMO if a person wants to come to America to live they need to follow the process and laws on immigration.  And if they want to vote they should work to become citizens of this country. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
7.1.31  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Snuffy @7.1.29    4 weeks ago

Guess I can't disagree with your opinion.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.32  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @7.1.18    4 weeks ago

Neither does he

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.33  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.27    4 weeks ago
"Have a good night"

I did, thanks.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.34  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Snuffy @7.1.28    4 weeks ago
"i do not agree with giving their parents the right to vote just because they came here without following the law or process and have children who were born here."

Snuffy, all along I have been talking about long time resident LEGAL immigrants, ones who followed the law or process but do not happen to have become citizens. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.35  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Snuffy @7.1.29    4 weeks ago
"No, there are a lot of foreign nationals who own property in the USA."

I owned (shared with my brother) a golf condo in Florida for a number of years, so I was a foreign national owning property in the USA, but I was NOT a permanent resident for a number of years, so I would not even have dreamed about voting even in an American municipal eleciton.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.36  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Snuffy @7.1.30    4 weeks ago

Okay, Sniuffy, I realize that my opinion about fairness isn't even followed in my own country of citizenship and there is too much opinion here contrary to mine to continue with my discussion about it.  Thanks to all for making it a civil discussion. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
7.1.37  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @7.1.26    4 weeks ago

So non-citizens are not allowed to own property in the USA?  I did, and there was no problem with that.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

All stupid examples.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
8.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @8    4 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
9  charger 383    4 weeks ago

If this stands, I live in town A and also own property in towns B and C then I should get to vote in 3 local elections

 
 
 
Gazoo
Sophomore Silent
9.1  Gazoo  replied to  charger 383 @9    4 weeks ago

Only if you’re a democrat.

 
 
 
Baron Creek
Junior Participates
10  Baron Creek    4 weeks ago

I don't quite get the uproar. Vermont has a right to determine voting within its borders for anything other than federal elections. 

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
10.1  charger 383  replied to  Baron Creek @10    4 weeks ago

        "Vermont has a right to determine voting within its borders for anything other than federal elections. "

if that is correct, a state could deny any group the right to vote in local and state elections and say federal voting rights acts are null and void

 
 
 
Baron Creek
Junior Participates
10.1.1  Baron Creek  replied to  charger 383 @10.1    4 weeks ago

Allow me to be clearer. The U.S. Constitution forbids restricting citizens over the age of 18 to vote, which would include Vermont, unless certain conditions are met, such as being a convicted criminal, etc.

The U.S. Constitution does not specifically forbid non-citizens from voting, even though it may have been the intent. Federal Law does prohibit non-citizens from voting in Federal Elections, as passed in 1996. This law cannot be contested in the Federal Courts. 

As for Vermont...

Article 8. [Elections to be free and pure; rights of voters therein]
That all elections ought to be free and without corruption, and that all voters, having a sufficient, evident, common interest with, and attachment to the community, have a right to elect officers, and be elected into office, agreeably to the regulations made in this constitution.

Vermont is within its rights. Granted everyone thinks you must be a citizen to vote, but that depends on several factors.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
11  charger 383    4 weeks ago

So if this stands, all the illegal aliens could go to Vermont and take over the state. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
11.1  Tessylo  replied to  charger 383 @11    4 weeks ago

What utter nonsense!

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
11.1.1  charger 383  replied to  Tessylo @11.1    4 weeks ago

If something bad is allowed to start there is reason for concern on where it will go  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
11.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  charger 383 @11.1.1    4 weeks ago

There is nothing bad 'being allowed to start' here.  It's utter nonsense.  

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
11.1.3  charger 383  replied to  Tessylo @11.1.2    4 weeks ago

it is very bad and hurts confidence in elections and government 

Allowing non citizens to vote is utter nonsense 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
11.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  charger 383 @11.1.3    4 weeks ago

No, you are spouting utter nonsense.  

It's not 'very bad' and 'doesn't hurt confidence in elections and government' (it's a non-issue except to supporters of whatshisname and alleged conservatives)

These non-citizens are not voting in elections.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
12  charger 383    4 weeks ago

If illegal aliens were not allowed and encouraged to be here and those here without legal permission were removed this would not be a problem at all.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
13  XXJefferson51    3 weeks ago

There is no way a non citizen should have a vote anywhere but their country of origin.  Only US citizens should be allowed to vote in the USA.  

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

JohnRussell
Hallux
Gordy327


56 visitors