Comments on: Let Legal Immigrants Vote?

By: Carter

Carter — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 16:38:52 +0000

We tax legal immigrants yet we don’t allow them to vote. That does not seem fair. Taxation without representation was one of the major grievances which caused our country to declare its independence. Many other countries, such as the UK, allow legal immigrants to vote.

By: Bob Aman

Bob Aman — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 01:52:49 +0000

If indeed true, it should not be considered a precedent so much as a mistake we eventually fixed. As Rich and James already pointed out, the potential for abuse is much, much too high, and such an action would greatly reduce the incentive to become a citizen. If anything, we need to be doing the opposite and making it so that citizenship is not a birthright (like the vast majority of other countries have done). As it stands right now, immigration, both legal and otherwise, has become a major problem that is demonstrably putting excessive strain on the economic stability of the United States.

By: GN

GN — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 01:10:10 +0000

Ummm … What’s next? Degrees issued upon matriculation?

By: GN

GN — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 00:28:43 +0000

What James said!

By: James

James — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:06:55 +0000

I don’t buy it.

These people are working to become citizens. Why is it so important that they be given citizen privileges BEFORE they finish earning that right?

If you afford them the rights before they complete the process then WHY BOTHER?

By: bob in fl

bob in fl — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:11:17 +0000

The idea of legal immigrants who are not citizens voting make less sense than a bank giving credit cards to illegal immigrants w/o SS cards, like Bank of America is doing. If a legal residents choose not to become a citizen or do not qualify, they should not have the right to our most basic right of voting. period. The whole idea sounds like a scheme to gain political advantage for someones gain.

By: Rich Horton

Rich Horton — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:27:50 +0000

I think this chart from the Census Bureau blows the "It's a racist conspiracy" part of teh article out of the water. it isn't until the 1960's that immigrants from palces like Asia and Africa and Latin America start increasing in large numbers. In 1920 85% of the immigrants came from Europe, and in 1930 it was 83%. (These numbers were 87% in 1910 and 85% in 1900.) So the claim that some change was instituted in 1926 based on skin color seems to be demostrably false.

By: Rich Horton

Rich Horton — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:59:12 +0000

Methinks I smell a little BS here, but I’ll have to dig a bit to be sure. For starters 1776?? Who exactly counts as a “immigrant” in 1776? And what sort of “national elections” were they having?

My guess is they mean there were no Federal Statutes covering or defining immigrant voting rights until the 1920’s, when it was proscribed. I find it odd, given how important immigrant votes (and the buying and selling thereof) were to the urban machine politics of the 19th century that this wasn’t something addressed by the progressive era reforms. (It may have been on the local level as opposed to the Federal.)

It must also be remembered that for much of the period covered from 1776-1926 you needed to be a freeholder to vote, and since immigrants were not “propertied” they couldn’t vote anyway.

Funny how a CUNY Prof doesn’t seem to know that.