An individual who is not a citizen of the United States may not vote in an election for public office in the District of Columbia or in any ballot initiative or referendum in the District of Columbia.
D.C. passed a bill to allow resident non-citizens to vote in local elections. Current federal law disallows non-citizens from voting in federal elections.
During the first 150 years of the U.S., 40 states at various times permitted noncitizens to vote in elections. That came to a halt in the 1920s when nativism increased and states began making voting a privilege for only U.S. citizens. Read more about the history before and after here.
The nativism continues today as shown by the House bill passed yesterday, an excerpt found above. As annoyingly usual, coverage does not include a link to the legislation, including a vote breakdown. For instance, I wanted to know the fifty-two Democrats who voted for this measure.
Who are these people who are supporting part of the effort "to amplify false claims" of Trump and other Republicans of the danger of non-citizen voting? The evidence of non-citizens voting illegitimately is slight:
In 2020, federal investigators charged 19 noncitizens for voting in North Carolina elections. A national database run by The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, shows that there have been fewer than 100 cases of voter fraud tied to noncitizens since 2002, according to a recent count by The Washington Post.
Only a few places now allow non-citizens to vote in local elections. As noted by the first link, very few non-citizens vote when they are given the chance. New York City gave non-citizens the right but the law is currently held up because of a negative lower court decision based on state constitutional claims. The case has been appealed.
D.C. has the right, along with other localities, to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections. The current House bill overrides a 2022 measure. Congress currently has the power to interfere with their local sovereignty. They rarely did so though there were various attempts over the years, one succeeding not too long ago involving a criminal justice reform measure.
Interference with D.C. sovereignty adds to the argument for D.C. statehood. A member of Congress can think non-citizens voting is a bad idea and respect home rule. There is also the duty to avoid this b.s.:
“The city council has decided they want noncitizens and foreign actors deciding who will serve as mayor and the local, attorney general here. As the body in charge of overseeing DC, Congress will not support such lawless behavior,” Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said during a press conference Wednesday.
What "lawless" behavior is involved? D.C. passed a law allowing non-citizens to vote. The federal law against federal elections does not apply or a new bill would not even be necessary. A lawsuit against the law failed.
As noted above, non-citizens voting was a long tradition in this country. Millions of documented non-citizens reside in this country, paying taxes, and being part of the community. Why should they not have a chance to vote for local leadership and ballot measures? An absolute rule against voting is dubious. What about non-citizens voting in school elections when they have children that go to a local school?
Shame on the Democrats who voted with the Republicans here. I checked and my representative did not vote. AOC also did not vote. Maybe, both were in the Bronx at the counter-rally to respond to a Trump rally that took place there. I hope so. They should have voted if they were present.
The criminal measure cited above had broad opposition, including by the D.C. mayor. The "election fraud" bullshit is also less likely to be aided and abetted by Democrats though unfortunately some went along here. It is unlikely that this House bill will pass the Senate and be signed (or left alone) by President Biden. I surely hope that is the case.
Bottom line: D.C. statehood is a good idea and limiting voting rarely is.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your .02!