New York City Council Moving to Allow 800,000 Non-Citizens to Vote in Local Elections
“provided they are green card holders or have the right to work in the United States”
New York City Council is preparing to allow almost a million non-citizens to vote in local elections. How is this supposed to work in federal election years? Separate ballots for local and national elections?
A cynical person might think that this is just a first step to ultimately allowing all illegal immigrants to vote in all elections.
The New York Times reports:
New York Moves to Allow 800,000 Noncitizens to Vote in Local Elections
For decades, lawmakers and immigrant advocates in New York City have pushed for legislation that would allow legal residents who are not citizens to vote in municipal elections, a right they had in school board elections until the boards were abolished in the early 2000s.
Now city lawmakers are moving to make noncitizen voting a reality — over the objections of Mayor Bill de Blasio.
The City Council is planning to approve a bill that would allow more than 800,000 noncitizen New Yorkers to register as members of political parties and vote in municipal elections, provided they are green card holders or have the right to work in the United States.
The measure is expected to be approved on Dec. 9 by a veto-proof margin. It would allow noncitizens to vote in local elections, and would not apply to federal or state contests. But the measure raises longstanding questions about who should be allowed to participate in the country’s democratic process.
A single Republican on the council, who represents Staten Island, opposes the measure, along with Mayor Bill de Blasio, if you can believe it:
Mr. de Blasio, speaking at a news conference on Tuesday, said he would not veto the legislation. But he expressed concern that the bill would undermine the “value of citizenship” if it dissuaded residents from seeking it. Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat, also said he believes only the State Legislature can grant noncitizens the right to vote — a view many experts dispute.
A leading opponent, Joseph Borelli, a Republican councilman who represents Staten Island, went further, saying the bill would “weaken” citizens’ votes.
“Someone who has lived here for 30 days will have a say in how we raise our taxes, our debt and long-term pension liabilities,” he said. “These are things people who are temporary residents should not have a say in.”
Borelli recently appeared on Newsmax to discuss his opposition. He suggests that once this is in place in New York, other cities and eventually state legislatures will be pressured into passing similar measures:
NYC is set to grant over 800,000 non-citizens the right to vote, even Mayor Bill de Blasio opposes the measure.
New York City Councilman @JoeBorelliNYC blasts the proposal, "It dilutes the voting power of the 5.6 million registered voters in New York City." pic.twitter.com/y2Lbm2ikXx
— Newsmax (@newsmax) November 24, 2021
Isn’t it obvious what’s really going on here?
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
No non citizen should be allowed to vote in any election They have not earned that right Such legislation will lead to definite challenges as to its constitutionality and dilute the votes of citizens who understand appreciate the meaning of American citizenship
In what way has an alien who is a permanent NYC resident, works and pays taxes here and has to obey the local laws, not earned the right to representation in setting those taxes and making those laws? Since no national security issues are at stake, how is US citizenship relevant? I’m actually surprised more cities don’t already allow this.
Because a resident is not a citizen of the US. They are in fact citizens of other countries where oh by the way, they still have the right to vote.
Want to vote here? Make the commitment to become a naturalized citizen. Otherwise shut up and enjoy the ride.
It’s a matter of sovereignty.
How is it relevant that they are not citizens of the US? They’re not being allowed to vote in US elections. They are residents of NYC. Why should that not be enough to vote in NYC elections? Why should they become US citizens, just to be able to vote in their city which is their home? What has sovereignty got to do with it? NYC is not a sovereign state.
Not being allowed to vote in US elections… yet! Give it time, and somebody will bring it up as a racial issue. When that happens the alleged conservatives and the alleged constitutional constructionists will wilt like a flower in the hot sun.
New York is not a sovereign state?
Of course someone will. When (not if) that happens, we can have that debate. But it will be in Congress, not in the states or cities, because it’s federal law that prohibits aliens from voting in US elections. What any city does with its elections will have no effect whatsoever on that debate or its timing. Those who are against it will still be against it, and those who are for it will still be for it, and the congress of the day will decide. That’s not an argument against NYC doing this now.
The sheer brazen dishonesty here speaks for itself.
“sovereign State”
Per SCOTUS – you can be prosecuted for the same crime by both a State and the Federal government and it is not “double jeapardy”, because the State and the the Federal Government are “separate sovereignties”.
Sigh. And, once again, NYC is not a sovereign state. The whole issue of sovereignty is therefore irrelevant.
It appears that the whole issue of citizenship is irrelevant in NYC.
Hard to believe that there are people in NYC to the left of socialist DeBlazio.
So can an absentee property owner vote as well? They certainly pay taxes and obey local ordnance and laws. They pay for maintenance and repairs contributing to the local economy. Individually speaking they don’t use city services nor contribute to pollution or drain natural resources; water in desert climates.
They can’t though. Nor can these other non citizen folks unless the NY State Constitution allows that discretion for their political subdivisions which I doubt. To my knowledge no State does so.
It isn’t that hard to become a naturalized Citizen and Citizenship should maintain it’s distinctive set of rights and responsibilities. The more this distinction is weakened or lessened the sooner it will erode entirely. Which is exactly what our political opponents desire. IMO, we shouldn’t help them erode our civic heritage and ttraditions.
In some places absentee property owners can vote. Not here, but perhaps that should be changed too. In any case, while absentee property owners have to pay property taxes, they don’t pay other taxes and they don’t have to obey city laws, except of course when they drop in for a visit like any other tourist. Residents pay taxes and have to obey the laws, so their case for voting is stronger.
Please provide some examples and explanation of situations where absentee property owners can vote.
There are cities that allow it. I don’t know exactly where, but I do know that they exist. It’s not an unheard of concept.
Where can absentee property owners vote in municipal and county or State elections?
Tell you what, once we resolve the taxation without representation issues that have prevented absentee property owners from having a vote in local issues and let them vote for a period of time equivalent to the amount of time they were prevented then we can discuss non citizen voting.
@ milhouse – please revisit definition of a country. And government.
Government is meant to serve its citizens. There is a reason we have borders.
Your logical is faulty. Best test of faulty logic is to take your slipper slope to its logical extreme – which is to let everyone in the world vote for our elected representatives. because once you remove citizenship as a requirement – that is what you get.
So do you really want argue that non-citizens should decide your tax rates and your laws ?
Let’s not. I have already pointed out why the case for resident aliens is much more compelling. They have to obey the laws, and pay all the taxes; property owners do not have to obey the local laws because they don’t live here, and the only tax they have to pay is for their property. So their case for a vote, while good, is less compelling than that of aliens. So first give the aliens the vote, and then discuss property owners..
Ben, NYC is not a country, and its government is meant to serve all New Yorkers, not just those who are also Americans.
Why don’t you revisit the definition of a citizen. The word means someone who lives in a city. Any dictionary will tell you that. An Italian who lives here is an NYC citizen; an American who lives somewhere else is not. So yes, the city government is meant to serve its citizens, and that means they should be able to choose that government, regardless of what country they hold citizenship in. The relevant citizenship here is of the city, and they have that.
It’s your logic that’s faulty. Everyone in the world can’t vote here, for the same reason everyone in the country can’t — because they don’t live here. The relevant criterion is residence, not nationality. As I said, those who live here are citizens of the city, even if not the country.
Non-citizens of the city? No. And nobody is suggesting they should. But aliens who are citzens of the city, in the sense that this is their home, and they have to pay those taxes and obey those laws, the burden is on you to show why they shouldn’t have the same right to decide those things as I do.
So flo0d the state/city with “grateful” illegals, and you can do whatever you want.
Sounds like the invasion/occupation of Tibet all over again.
I have worked with green-card holders. Many of them are fine people, but the question is over divided loyalties. As a citizen of another country, they may remain loyal to that country rather than to the US. Their votes might reasonably be expected to support the national interest of their native country.
Many Chinese green-card holders for example are in the US. There could be a local initiative to require utilities to avoid Chinese IT used for hospitals and power plants to reduce the likelihood of hacking. Would foreign nationals vote in the best interest of their local community or for their native country? Who really knows? And that is the problem.
Green-card holders should not vote in US elections at any level.
How is loyalty to the US or China relevant in municipal elections? The example you give is not only very unlikely, it’s also a red herring because the exact same considerations would apply if the proposal were, e.g., against using Microsoft products. Some people would feel an affinity for Microsoft and vote that way; that would be their right.
If NYC was literally an island devoid of political ramifications for the rest of the country …knock yourself out. There is always this argument about accepting federal funds … and in this case money going to NYC should not be essentially foreign aid. Politico decisions at the local level do spill over. Of course, illegals should vote also…it’s THEIR city also.
Illegals is a different story because they shouldn’t be here. They don’t have the legal right to be here. So their actual presence is a legal nullity, a temporary phenomenon. They can’t be said to be permanent residents when the law says they must leave immediately.
And federal funding is given to the city as a whole, which is an American city, regardless of how many of its residents happen to be Americans. And it certainly makes no difference whether they vote or not. They’re still entitled to all of the city’s services, because they have the same 14th-amendment protection as citizens.
Leftist incrementalism will extend this to the federal level. It is in their playbook.
Oh, I forgot: they will blame the Republicans (and President Trump) for the consequences.
Let the Rats vote too.
They already do.
Oh, you mean the actual rattus rattus. Since none of them is over 18, or even 15, that’s not a consideration.
I believe Elzorro meant Homo rattus, aka Democrats.
There are no federal elections on the same day as local elections, so that’s not an issue. Being eligible to vote in only some elections is completely not an issue, since we have the same thing with primaries.
(And as a poll worker I’ve had people absolutely outraged at being told that they can’t vote in a Democrat primary because they’re not registered as Democrats, or even that they can’t vote at all because the Ds aren’t having a primary in their district. They claim it’s discrimination, but all I can do is offer them an affidavit ballot — in the latter case, in some other party’s primary! I tell them up front that the affidavit will be thrown out, but some people insist. Idiots.)
How does anyone downvote that? Does anyone dispute anything I wrote? How can they? Is anyone seriously claiming that federal elections are ever held on the same day as NYC elections?! They’re just not. That’s a fact, not an opinion, and you’re not entitled to your own.
And it’s also a fact that we already handle elections in which some people are on the roll but can’t vote.
They downvote you for two reasons. 1, even if it’s fact, they don’t like it. So they downtick you because of it.
2, they do it because you are Millhouse.
“…There are no federal elections on the same day as local elections, so that’s not an issue…”
tt
Day? DAY? Since when in the days of holy hades do we have an election day anymore? Only White people can figure out a calendar, I’m told by the CRT mongers, and vote on an exact day.
https://www.voting.nyc/how-to-vote/early-voting/
Lame BIPOC people, I’m told by their self-anointed White Saviors need something like a month either side of the mark just to get close to a legal vote.
Fine, the same month, if you like. It’s irrelevant how early people can vote.
And most people still vote on the day. If only because they’ve been putting it off till then.
Where I live, South Florida, we have local elections and issues on the ballot with federal offices. Voting would probably go a lot faster if we did separate the two.
What has citizenship got to do with that? Green card holders are permanent residents. And citizens can move away just as easily as aliens; look at how many are now doing just that.
Citizenship grants the right to vote. Non-citizenship doesn’t. Want to fix that? Become a citizen.
That’s stupid. Who says citizenship grants the right to vote? Right now, the city says, that’s who. But there’s no reason the city has to keep on saying it. If the city chooses to say otherwise, then it’s no longer true. You don’t get a say in the matter.
@ Milhouse – what then is the point of citizenship ?
What is the point of having a comb if you have no hair?
The point of US citizenship is the desire to be a USAn, to be a part owner of this wonderful country, a family member rather than merely a guest. And of course once you’re validly a citizen you can never have that taken away, you can never be deported, you can never be denied re-entry, you can be elected to national office, and you can vote in national elections. Those are all important considerations. But the main reason to become naturalized is simply to become one of us.
While citizen and non citizen renters can move from anywhere pretty easily property owners face more barriers. They usually need to sell the current property before they can purchase and move elsewhere. These property owners are more likely to be parents with addition ties to the community; kids in school, alums of the local schools themselves, members of the PTA, donate money for new band uniforms or whatever. Due to these ties they volunteer locally and don’t duck jury service. All in all property owners have a greater personal stake in the well being of the community.
Which makes a good case for these property owning Citizens who exercise the responsibilities of citizenship retaining the privileges of citizenship; voting. Personally I would be in favor of a property qualification to vote in local elections as long as there was a way for non property owners to qualify based on a community service criteria or veteran status or what not.
Can’t wait for the ballot propositions making Sharia Law the legal standard of nyc.
Or genital female mutilation legal.
We should be able to not only send the illegal aliens back from where they came, but we need to send these idiots making this kind of shit legal back with the illegal aliens.
They can take Milhouse with them
How about they take you? You belong there. In fact those places are too good for you.
“The City Council is planning to approve a bill that would allow more than 800,000 noncitizen New Yorkers to register as members of political parties and vote in municipal elections, provided they are green card holders or have the right to work in the United States.”
Now, far be it from me to assume that any statement that appears in the NYT is by any means rigorous… but what I don’t see in here is any requirement that the person needs to prove residency anywhere in NY.
What happens if 20,000 right-wingers register to vote from “no fixed abode,” show up on election day, and vote?
That’s a stupid objection. What’s stopping them now? The standard for proof of residence would not change at all. It’s pretty low now, but it wouldn’t get any lower.
And what’s the standard where you live? I doubt it’s any higher than here. The Board of Elections sends you mail, and if it bounces repeatedly they consider the possibility of perhaps thinking about one day removing you from the roll. But they can’t do it too quickly, in case it was just the post office messing up, or in case the address is still your legal residence, but you’re temporarily away somewhere. So what do they do where you live, to make sure all voters live where they say they do?
They require you to show a driver’s license with photo at the polls.
Which is odd, because they also offer official Voter ID cards, which nobody ever requests.
Now, you may not live where your DL says, but if you don’t, you’re walking a tightrope.
OK, so how does allowing aliens to vote affect that? In a city where everyone has a driver’s license they do too. To the extent that this prevents 20,000 right-wingers registering to vote from “no fixed abode,” showing up on election day, and voting, the same would be true if aliens were allowed to register.
Of course here in NYC many have no driver’s licenses. But other forms of ID are available, and almost everyone has one because you need it for so many things. Unfortunately not for voting; but that’s a completely separate issue, and this change doesn’t affect it.
How hard is this, Milhouse? Alien. Not from here. Owes allegiance to another. That is literally what alien means in the Latin.
It is wrong, leftist, to let aliens to vote on any level. Apparently I have to explain to you why it’s not a good idea to allow Chinese nationals here on student visas vote the communist party line in municipal elections, but that’s just how you roll.
We were pushed into the voter ID cards, and “vote by mail” and all the rest of the Bravo Sierra “because of the elderly and those who “couldn’t get to the polls” (except those who were bused into Oregon from California).
I agree: let’s change the voting laws. Anyone who wants to vote has to show up at the polls with a valid passport. Of course, by that time the Marxist destroyers will allow total amnesty (citizenship) for anyone (not necessarily already here on U.S. soil) who wants to come in.
Passport?! Do you have any idea how many Americans have a valid passport? This is one of the thing the left elite use to look down their noses at Americans and boast of how much more cultured Europeans are, since such a higher percentage of them have passports. Of course the answer is that Europeans often need passports just to travel 100 miles, whereas Americans can spend a lifetime traveling to interesting places without ever needing a passport. If Europeans could travel anywhere in Europe and the Mediterranean without a passport the percentage of them that have one would look more like that for America.
But yes, voting should require the same ID that you need to cash a check or enter a federal building, or board a plane. Not because it would prevent a lot of fraud, but because it would cost almost nothing and would prevent some fraud at the margins. Requiring it would not be a major blow against fraud, but not requiring it is a statement that we welcome fraud. Voter ID is a bare minimum, not something that we should be happy with if and when we achieve it.
Nice trick the Marxists are pulling there, first a local election, but once the line has been blurred every election.
Make no mistake illega l s are voting in nation elections already but this is legalizing that.
And when that happens – America is finished.
The Disunited States of No Country to which we Shall pledge allegiance.
These are the very Marxists who wish to destroy our constitutional republic: Senator McCarthy was not wrong
The people the city council wants voting never learned how to use a toilet in their country; now they’re doing the same thing to ours
It’s also highly likely that those non-citizens don’t speak or understand English. Even more likely that they don’t know or understand the issues being voted on.
No worries though, the leftists have people who will fill out and harvest the ballots for them.
That’s just not true. Legal resident aliens are no less likely than citizens to speak and understand English, let alone to know and understand the issues being voted on. You do know, don’t you, that there are millions of US citizens who don’t speak much English? Besides those who live in ethnic enclaves where they don’t need much English to get along, there’s Puerto Rico. And how many citizen voters have any idea about the issues they vote on? Certainly less than half.
The Dems/Progs in New York must fear running out of native fools to keep the Leftists in power. Wonder why Biden and his Bimbo in Waiting have thrown open the southern border?
Bingo.
Resident aliens are more likely than US citizens to vote Republican, or at least for saner Democrats.
AOC
NYC gets the assholes they deserve. I do not miss it at all.
Poll Worker “Hola, You can vote only for local candidates. So when you’re in the polling location by yourself DO NOT fill out the front of the ballot. No one is allowed to look at your ballot so we’d never actually know about it but you look trustworthy. Enjoy your consequence free vote”