Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Noncitizens have the obligations of citizens

Posted by Jan Frel at 11:53 PM on April 27, 2006.


So why not the right to vote?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Echo Chamber in your
mailbox!

 

From the History News Network, by Ron Hayduk:

The growing immigrant rights movement has brought immigrants' struggle for political power center stage. The way to give non-citizens more political power would be to give them the vote. But voting is only for citizens, right? Not really.

Although it's not widely known, noncitizen voting is as old as the Republic itself and as American as apple pie and baseball. Noncitizens voted from 1776 until 1926 in forty states and federal territories in local, state and even federal elections. Noncitizens also held public office. In a country where "no taxation without representation" was a rallying cry for revolution, such a proposition was not far-fetched. It was common sense that government should rest on the consent of the governed. The idea that noncitizens should have the vote is older, was practiced longer, and is more consistent with democratic ideals than the idea that they should not.

Historically, voting and citizenship worked both ways. The right to vote has never been intrinsically tied to citizenship, which is why women and African Americans -- who were citizens -- were widely denied the vote until 1920 and 1965, respectively. Voting has always been about who has a say and who will have influence over the actions of government.

This historical precedent is making a comeback in some circles today. Currently, noncitizens vote in local elections in six towns in Maryland and in Chicago school elections. Over the past decade, noncitizen voting campaigns have been launched in at least a dozen jurisdictions from coast to coast, including Washington D.C., California, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, North Carolina, Colorado, Texas, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

Most recently, New York City Council members submitted a bill that would grant the right to vote to legal noncitizens in all local elections. This legislation is gaining significant support and is feeding another avenue of debate about the newcomers, the nature of citizenship, and the future of democracy in America.

Non-citizens work in every sector of the economy, own homes and businesses, attend colleges and send children to schools, pay billions in taxes each year and make countless social and cultural contributions. They're subject to all the laws that govern citizens, serve in the military and die defending the United States.

Their numbers are staggering. Nationally, about 23 million adults are barred from voting because they lack U.S. citizenship. In some districts -- and whole cities and towns -- non-citizens make up 25 to 50 percent of all voting-age residents. Adult non-citizens in Los Angeles make up more than a third of the voting-age population; in New York City, they're 22 percent of adults. In many places immigrant political exclusion approximates the level of disenfranchisement associated with women prior to 1920 and African Americans before the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Discriminatory public policy and private practices -- in employment, housing, education, healthcare, welfare and criminal justice -- are the inevitable by-products of immigrant political exclusion, not to mention racial profiling, xenophobic hate crimes and arbitrary detention and deportation. Non-citizens suffer social and economic inequities, in part because policy-makers can ignore their interests. Denying immigrants local voting rights makes government officials less accountable and undermines the legitimacy of public policies. Immigrant voting rights would help reverse inequities and make the American political system more democratic. Most immigrants want to become U.S. citizens, but the naturalization process can take eight to ten years. That's more than the cycle for two-term mayors, governors and state and local representatives. Moreover, not all immigrants are eligible to become U.S. citizens, unlike earlier times when nearly every immigrant could naturalize.

Advocates of noncitizen voting support opening up the naturalization process and creating new pathways to citizenship. Noncitizen voting would facilitate civic education and participation and better prepare incipient Americans for eventual citizenship. This burgeoning movement to create a truly universal suffrage calls forth America's past and future as an immigrant nation.

The right to vote ensures that American democracy is inclusive and fair. Extending the right to vote to noncitizens would help keep government representative, responsive and accountable to all. It would not only restore a tried and true American practice but would also update our democracy for these global times. The immigrant rights movement is today's civil rights movement and noncitizen voting is the suffrage movement of our time.

Mr. Hayduk, a writer for History News Service, teaches political science at the Borough of Manhattan Community College (CUNY) and is the author of "Democracy for All: Restoring Immigrant Voting Rights in the United States" (2006).

Digg!


Peace in Lebanon -- now!
The USA has a moral obligation to resolve the conflict raging in Lebanon and rest of the Middle East -- and it can.
Post by Rep. Dennis Kucinich. July 24, 2006.
President Bush sent me an internet
Democrat v. Democratic and the Iraq War
Post by Evan Derkacz. July 24, 2006.
A new kind of money
Today's money is based on the belief that it's worth something. Crazy, no? Why not back your dollar in sustainable energy produced in your hometown?
Post by Julian Darley. July 20, 2006.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Power
Posted by: benzene on Apr 28, 2006 8:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From the perspective of power, the comparison of noncitizen suffrage to womens' suffrage or african-american suffrage is rather interesting. In each of these instances, the party without suffrage was held at a distinct disadvantage to those with suffrage. In the case of womens' suffrage they were subject to the control of men with more power than they, often in financial as well as political terms. Therefore they were also subject to the fear that the men upon whom they were financially dependent would cut them off. In the case of the african-american suffrage movement, they were subject to the control of the white majority, and as such also the fear of racial violence. And today, noncitizens are subject to the power of citizens. Should a citizen lodge a complaint or file a charge against a noncitizen, then that noncitizen is subject to Immigration and Naturalization Services and will more than likely also face the threat of deportation. Conclusively, similar fears and threats have been conquered before by disadvantaged minorities, so it seems rather inevitable that it will happen again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Agreed! Everyone who is here should have the right to vote
Posted by: cry0fan on Apr 28, 2006 11:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the immigrant non voting underclass in one reason why our country is so conservative.

But then again, less than half of all American citizens vote.

We need to pay people to vote, pay ordinary citizens to help run our country.

There are a LOT of things that we need to do. Just look at European nations. In the recent Italian elections, 84% of all eligible voters voted.

You pseudoLiberals and PseudoPopulist rightwingers need to understand that America aint much of a country, compared to the west euro countries.

THere are so many policy improvements that need to be made. But at this point in time, talking about this stuff is pie in the sky. We have NO HOPE of implementing ANY of this.

The Dems are stabbing us in the back just as bad as the GOP.

You need to start at a more fundamental level. Much mroe fundamental. You are like a man with a broken down junker of a car planning to go the moon!

Nothing can be done to improve this country until you start putting political scripts into people's head dealing with economics issues that touch the bottom 70% equally.

What issues? Progressive taxation, universal healthcare, mandatory 6 weeks vacation yearly for all workers, etc.

And you have to get the white lower class back on the side of populist leftism.
Yet all I hear from the PseudoLeft is all about dem vs gop politcal gossip, race, gender, and gay rights politics, pseudoEnvironmentalism, help-the-poor, etc.

Why is it that you cannot see that the reason the welfare state is there for the poor in Europe is because there for the NONpoor, too. It is there for the bulk of the population first, and so therefore the overclass cannot demonize the welfare state poor because the middle class is there first.

Why is is that you pseudoLiberals cannot have an orginal thought at all?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Mandatoriness Posted by: benzene
» RE: Mandatoriness Posted by: sapatatanka
» RE: Wrong, wrong, wrong Posted by: doinaheckuvajob
» RE: Wrong, wrong, wrong Posted by: DavidByron
17 days ago, less than 20% of eligible voters in my city of 600,000 voted.
Posted by: Sojourner on Apr 28, 2006 4:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My city has a large population of undocumented folks, so the size of the city alone is not the issue. But the fact is that three elections (out of about a dozen) were, last I heard, too close to call and a couple others decided by a handful of votes.

Only some 18+% of eligible voters turned out. Local elections. City council, city officials, mayor, etc.

Americans are sheep, and we (not 'you' cryofan) deserve to be led to the slaughter. "All it takes for evil to triumph is for enough good people to do nothing" said Edmund Burke.

That's where we're headed, to the tune of sit coms and revivalists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obligations?
Posted by: YogiBear on Apr 28, 2006 4:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't one of a citizen's biggest obligations obeying the law? Doh!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Obligations? Posted by: andyc
» RE: Obligations? Posted by: Ian MacLeod
Non-citizen voting, a non-starter, an O'Reilly snarker, a gauranteed Republican backlash winner
Posted by: doinaheckuvajob on Apr 29, 2006 2:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nothing could be worse politically than this idea which I think honestly seems so factually sensible yet is so counter to the values and history and political consciousness of our country.

The Left, in its worthy compassion for downtrodden immigrants, falls right into the trap of not recognizing that A) yes illlegals take jobs from Americans who b) won't do those jobs because they're not being paid a living American wage.

The Left, in its admirable tendency to want to help falls into the trap of making things a gazillion times worse with an idea like this that O'Reilly would get endless mileage with, and Republicans could win elections for a century out of the backlash against it.

This is a facts versus values confusion conundrum the Left is vulnerable to. This country has been built by immigrants, so we want to welcome people here and give them rights. But the right to vote is not the correct one to give.

The immigration debates we're having lately are a huge distraction from the real immigration problems-- the conduct of mismanagement and deliberate, cruel malfeasance in the Bush administration that harasses, detains, and will not process the papers of immigrants who have been trying to become legal for years and only due to the govt.'s foot dragging, are in limbo. That is a huge undereported, under debated problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's start with the basics, shall we?
Posted by: Longdream on Apr 29, 2006 10:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And without splitting hairs about voting rights, because it's a fringe issue.

The Bill of Rights covers persons, not only citizens. Under its provisions the country has an obligation to treat all foreign nationals--diplomats, 'bad actors', mothers, anarchists with bombs, Mexican migrant workers, as though they have the same, to reference the Declaration of Independence, self-evident, inalienable human rights as U.S. citizens have. That's HUMAN rights--not every right and privilege accorded citizens.

So, immigrants, legal or illegal, start out with rights.

All the nasty policies, laws, institutionalized discrimination, arbitrary detention, profiling, torture and criminal deportation are not "by-products" (??) of not extending the vote to non-citizens. The policies are the result of unchecked, profit-motivated, self-aggrandizing, self-preserving actions by a majority faction in government, bent on keeping power for as long as possible.

If we want the Bill of Rights to again inform and limit the behavior of our elected officials toward citizens and foreign nationals, then we need to assert that necessity, not only at the polling place, but with our alert, assiduous, public protest of every deviation from right conduct. Concerned citizens must raise their voices demanding justice and protection for vulnerable people in this country, in the loudest form they can tolerate, not quieting until they echo in local forums and in the media. Aside from voting with informed conviction, every single citizen must inspire, educate, interest and assist in any way necessary, people who do not vote to get to the polls.

As for the rest--hate crimes, discrimination, economic inequities, bigotry--I'm afraid they are problems which are, for the most part, already subject to law, but which can't be totally legislated away.

I consider myself a progressive, personally and politically, but I believe that the achievement of citizenship should involve a person's meeting certain, sometimes difficult, but not insurmountable obligations of residency, necessity and demonstrable knowledge. I am attentive to the plight of people who come here in need, and I welcome them in my heart, but I know that we do not hold dear that which comes cheap. The right to vote is a by-product of citizenship.

Sounds simple. I know it's not. For the people who do surmount natural and physical obstacles and stay ahead of the law and survive to become citizens, I wish we had more real equality, justice and opportunity to offer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]