Noncitizen Bill Makes Aliens and Diplomats D.C. Voters
By: The Editorial Board (WSJ)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Hard as it is to believe, the mayor of Washington, D.C., might soon be elected with votes from illegal immigrants or the staff at the Chinese embassy. Last month the D.C. City Council passed a bill to expand the franchise in local elections to any adult with 30 days of residency. Mayor Muriel Bowser did not sign or veto it, so the bill was officially enacted Monday without her signature.
A few jurisdictions have moved to let noncitizens vote in local races, but the D.C. plan stands out, given how it follows progressive ideas to a bizarre conclusion. New York City passed a noncitizen voting law that a court ruled this year was a violation of the state Constitution. But that proposal at least required noncitizen voters to have U.S. work authorization. No such limitation appears in the D.C. bill, meaning illegal aliens and foreign college students would be able to vote, and that's not all.
“There’s nothing in this measure to prevent employees at embassies of governments that are openly hostile to the United States from casting ballots,” the Washington Post reported. A writer at the lefty New Republic agreed with that assessment : “A Russian diplomat could live their entire life in Moscow or St. Petersburg, take a job as a cultural attaché at Russia’s D.C. Embassy in August 2024, move into their new apartment that September, and cast a ballot in D.C.’s local elections that November.”
It reads like a bad parody of progressive decadence. Try to imagine American diplomatic personnel showing up to cast ballots for the mayor of Beijing or Moscow. Beyond that, the standard objections to noncitizen voting apply. It weakens the incentive to naturalize. Only U.S. citizens can vote in federal races, so including noncitizens in local races would force election officials to manage two voter lists and two sets of ballots. It’s begging for a fiasco.
These arguments didn’t persuade the D.C. City Council, which passed the bill 12-1 on first reading. Because the district is a federal enclave, acts of the council are subject to review by Congress, and the bill now goes to Capitol Hill. Lawmakers have 30 legislative days to object via a joint resolution.
Republican Sens. Tom Cotton and Ted Cruz have said they will seek to block the noncitizen voting proposal. Will Democrats stand in the way of that attempt? Let’s see the roll call.
Perhaps this is also a moment to think bigger. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has suggested “a constitutional amendment, a U.S. constitutional amendment, that only American citizens vote in our elections.” A 2024 presidential candidate who takes up that call might find a receptive public.
As for D.C., if the passage of this bill with little dissent reflects the rest of its governance, maybe Congress is overdue to consider some deeper reforms in how America’s capital city is run.
Tags
Who is online
611 visitors
Citizenship is what makes a Republic.
Authoritarian regimes have no need for it.
Didn't such a thing happen elsewhere a couple of years ago and it was reversed as not being Constitutional?
They tried it in NYC and it was struck down.
Other places have found ways to get away with it.
No matter what some say, it is time to nationalize voting laws.
You mean the Democrats version of it? Would it pass Constitutional muster?
Draconian measures are not the way to go either.
Either we have uniform laws or shit like this will continue.
I am still for giving people a voter id when they turn 18. Like registering for the draft.
Giving. Cannot force someone to vote.
No one should have to pay for the ability to vote.
Desperation to maintain and/or increase their voter base perhaps?
Because they know US Citizens know they are garbage. it's better to gaslight the illegals.
But voting ID's, for elections, are racist. Any other time there isn't a single problem with them.
It all costs. It costs for a DL.
Many states offer free non-driver licenses that can be used as voter ID. As Texan said, some personal effort is all that's required.
No one would have to prove anything if everyone was given a card.
I don't see why this is so hard or such a big deal. The government already has national lists of people, either through work, paying taxes or getting a passport.
Having a national standard is not that big of a deal.
Instead of talking about what I proposed you all have to go off on a tangent and complain about id.
If one needs to get a copy of a birth certificate or jump through other hoops to prove who they are it can cost.
The government already knows everyone through social security. We all have a number.
My mother legally emigrated to the US. When she was applying for US citizenship, she had to have her birth certificate translated into English, and it was a very lengthy, costly process. If someone truly wants to be fully assimilated and participate in voting, one will jump through hoops.
I am not talking about immigrants. One should not have to jump through hoops just to vote.
Especially when the government already knows who we are.
Not all states are the same, my whole point.
Given by the government?
Q: Does the government know who the 30+ million illegal aliens in this country are?
A: No.
Legal immigrants have legitimate paperwork and the government knows who they are.
Foreign workers can apply for one. Still wouldn't hamper going by the numbers. Like the government wouldn't know the difference...
Are these illegal aliens voting? I would have to say no...
I helped a friend whose wife took all his identification records when she left him out of spite. We started by getting a copy of his out of state birth certificate, which was exceedingly difficult. By the time he had all his cards and ids the expense and time spent doing so was ridiculous...
My ancient Mom was born on the farm and never had a birth certificate. It had not been a problem getting her driver's license in the 1940s or attending college or being an officer's wife overseas or teaching public school for forty years.
But, the way Oklahoma wrote its new voter ID law she had to get a lawyer and go to court to get a legal order allowing her to get a state voter ID. The judge accepted her son's birth certificates as proof she was a legal citizen. Of course this would be financially unfeasible for a much poorer person without her connections.
And you'd be wrong. Maybe read the article? From the seeded article:
Illegal immigrants are not voting all over the country.
She says you can, "Buzz Right Off, fella".
They did not let her vote in 2012 because she didn't have the required ID. Pretty sad for the daughter of local pioneers whom they all knew lived there over eighty year.
Every person working the polls knew her.
She now has the damn ID but it was lots of aggravation for such a very old lady...
The old and the poor were marginalized.
In comment 2.1.35 I didn't say that they are, so stop accusing me of something I never said.
Same old meme...
Non-citizens cannot vote in any state or federal elections and they never will...
If some localities vote to allow local non-citizens to vote in their local elections for school boards or city council that is none of your business, if you don't live there...
Then stop it. NOW.
No, there are no efforts to allow any non-citizens to vote in state elections, despite the rank hyperbolic nonsense spouted by your far rightwing cranks on the fringe..
Yet, Logic 101 precludes proving something that is not happening is not happening...
It is impossible to prove a negative fact.
Those claiming something is happening must prove that it actually is happening.
Butt, you knew this. Right? I mean right?
Yep, legally and illegally.
Stop what. Try being direct for once.
Exactly jbb, they refuse to see the truth of that
They're pretending that's the reason Democrats win, because of alleged immigrant voters
What do you mean, "Right Off, fella"?
"Buzz Off" means go away. You bother me!
"Especially when the government already knows who we are."
That's the problem....they don't
If you have a SS number they know you are there. If you pay taxes they know where you work. If you own a home they know where you are...
Heard of identity theft? Government aides and abets all the time with it. So no, the government doesn't know who you are and doesn't give a shit.
[Deleted]
We all know it wouldn't. But that hasn't stopped the Democrats from trying it over and over.
My gut feeling is that I prefer citizens - or at least people in the country with permission - be the ones allowed to vote.
Still, I see the logic behind a law like this. If you live in a place and are subject to its taxes, it does seem fair that you should get to vote. The call for “no taxation without representation” is at the very core of who we are, as a nation.
Immigrants are free to leave the country at any time if they don't like it. They are here by their own choice.
It is their choice to live by the laws in the state and city/township they live in. They are free to move about the country if they don't like local laws; especially under this administration.
Giving them the right to vote, even in only local elections, diminishes the voting rights of US citizens there.
Allowing noncitizens to vote invalidates the war in Ukraine. If citizenship does not matter then national sovereignty and national borders do not matter.
What government by noncitizens ultimately means is that government, at any level, does not have any jurisdiction defined by borders. The Washington D.C. mayor does not have any legitimate sovereign authority.
“…invalidates the war in Ukraine.”
An invasion by Putin into a sovereign nation and it is somehow equated to a separate countries’ voting rights?
That’s a bridge too far, nerm, even for you. Pick a lane.
Really? What is the purpose of that Russian invasion? According to the D.C. voting law it should only be necessary to establish residency to accomplish the same purpose. If Ukraine had only adopted enlightened liberal voting laws, as D.C. has done, then a war would not have been necessary.
According to the D.C. council, claiming that Russians are not Ukrainian citizens is no excuse for trying force Russians out of Ukraine. Russians are attacking the civil population the same way Democrats do in the United States. Russians are destroying cities the same way Democrats do in the United States. Russia isn't employing any more violence than have Democrats; the Russians only have bigger guns.
The war in Ukraine is about which government has jurisdiction over a boundary drawn on a map. Citizenship and residency really doesn't matter. Voting doesn't matter. The people don't matter.
You do have to establish residency as per their law. You can’t just pass through and vote.
Russians have resided in Crimea for eight years. They haven't been passing through. Why should Kyiv or Moscow have anything to say about Crimea?
Why are you asking me about Crimea? (that’s rhetorical, btw; there’s no good reason to assume I was referring to anything else) This seed is about a law in Washington D.C. Try sticking to the topic.
I did not ask you anything about Crimea. The topic is the importance of citizenship. The D.C. counsel passed a law that says citizenship is unimportant. And Washington D.C. is unique because it is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Congress. So, this law really does make the issue of citizenship important for the national government.
What is our national government claiming to be supporting in the Ukrainian war? What is the point of national sovereignty if citizenship is unimportant?
Does reality even matter for you?
***
No, it does not say that, but I think I take your point. It makes citizenship less important, but not unimportant.
As a citizen of the United States, you have particular rights - e.g., the right to vote in federal elections, the right to apply for federal employment, to run for federal office, to obtain a U.S. passport, and to be admitted to the country (or alternately, not deported).
Voting in local elections has always been regulated by the local jurisdictions, and US citizenship is sometimes not required. That wouldn’t be my first choice, but I am open to the possibility depending on the details.
Okay, I missed that one. My goof. Sorry about that.
Within the context of voting and selecting who will run the D.C. government only residence matters; citizenship does not matter. The only requirement to be eligible to vote in D.C. is to occupy space for a length of time. It's not much farther down that slippery slope to allow non-citizens to hold elected office in D.C.
If this keeps going the whole world will be able to vote in US elections
Welcome to the New World Order.
States can be bullies over the over the ID thing. I’ve had no problem getting US issued credentials, (security clearance, ID, passports) yet have had an awful time with Pennsylvania being dicks over Real ID. There are two flaws on my birth certificate and they told me I had to have them corrected, as if I’m going to get a seventy-year-old mistake corrected from four states away - something done in an era of typewriters and carbon paper. Think about that one - what’s the authority for taking the contemporaneous word of a newborn to change what was done back then? They’ll tell me to fuck off, too.