• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should non-citizens be legally able to vote in Wash. DC?

Should non-citizens be legally able to vote in Wash D.C.?

  • Total voters
    48
  • Poll closed .
Bob Blaylock said:
My wife and I run our household, according to our mutual will. It's our household to run.

We might invite you in as a guest, and offer you whatever hospitality we have to offer. You may even do things that are helpful to us. But at the end of the day, you are only a guest, and not a member of our household; and you have no say as to how my wife and I choose to run it.

Same thing with a country in which you are a guest, and not a citizen. .
Click to expand...

A private house hold is not analogous to a nation by any stretch of the imagination.

As long as you are not a citizen, it's not your country, and you're not entitled to any say in how it is governed. It is a foolish nation that allows foreigners any such voice in its governance, and a nation whose sovereignty is compromised
Click to expand...

I disagree and you failed to answer my question which shows a glaring logical gap in allowing felon citizens a vote but not positive tax paying permanent residents a vote.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I disagree and you failed to answer my question which shows a glaring logical gap in allowing felon citizens a vote but not positive tax paying permanent residents a vote.
Click to expand...

Even felon citizens are still citizens. It's their country as much as that of their law-abiding countrymen.

The same is not true of foreigners. It's not their country, they have no right to any say in its governance, and it is foolish of any country to surrender any measure of its sovereignty to foreigners.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
Even felon citizens are still citizens. It's their country as much as that of their law-abiding countrymen.

The same is not true of foreigners. It's not their country, they have no right to any say in its governance, and it is foolish of any country to surrender any measure of its sovereignty to foreigners.
Click to expand...

They aren't "foreigners"... they are people with visa's, permits and in my case, permanent resident status.

And you still haven't answered the essence of my question. What value does a felon have that a positive tax-paying non-citizen have that you think merits the felon, a citizens that violates the laws and morals of the nation in which you want them to be able to vote, the right to vote but not the non-citizen resident that obeys the laws, contributes to the economy, etc.?? ? ?
 
HorseLoverGirl said:
How long does it take to obtain citizenship anyway? I'm a natural born citizen so I never had to go through that rigmarole
Click to expand...

If no one answered yet, this might have relevant info: U.S. Citizenship | USCIS

Actually the practice naturalization self-test on there is kinda interesting...and I didn't get all the questions right.
 
Last edited:
Peter King said:
Everyone who lives in a Dutch city has to register at city hall. And if you qualify for participating in elections, you get a voter card sent home, you then go with that card and your identity card to the local voting office and vote for your favorite candidate or your favorite party.
Click to expand...

What!!! Voter ID?!? How barbaric! </sarcasm>
 
Manc Skipper said:
Do they pay taxes? Then yes.
Click to expand...

Well that would depend upon the kind of taxes they pay. Sales tax? No because that is charged to all, regardless of status. Can't think of a single country that uses sales tax or VAT (pretty much the same thing) that grants voting rights because of it. Income tax. Now you're at a point where you have some grounding. However I am willing to,bet there are many, maybe even most, that will charge income tax regardless of citizenship. What about people who are here on say a 5year visa? If they have a job they pay income tax, but should they be allowed to vote for the 5 years?
 
Rentoc said:
That is part of the problem, it CAN take a VERY long time to become a citizen. Longer than 5 years in some cases.
Click to expand...

Which argues more for fixing the immigration system, not giving non citizens the right to vote. I think most of us can agree on this being the problem, just not on what the solution is. Might I suggest that actively and legally working towards citizenship is also a qualifier.
 
maquiscat said:
Which argues more for fixing the immigration system, not giving non citizens the right to vote. I think most of us can agree on this being the problem, just not on what the solution is. Might I suggest that actively and legally working towards citizenship is also a qualifier.
Click to expand...
This. This. THIS!!!
 
maquiscat said:
What!!! Voter ID?!? How barbaric! </sarcasm>
Click to expand...

here everybody already has an ID, they do not need to get one purely to vote.

And the voter ID laws is in place because everybody gets a voting card in their mailbox and they are made out to name. The ID is only there to make sure the right person who is on the voting card is there to use that card.
 
Peter King said:
here everybody already has an ID, they do not need to get one purely to vote.

And the voter ID laws is in place because everybody gets a voting card in their mailbox and they are made out to name. The ID is only there to make sure the right person who is on the voting card is there to use that card.
Click to expand...

Which is my understanding of the basic intent behind attempts at voter ID laws in the US.

The issue being with implementation - not all citizens have ID
 
Bodhisattva said:
I disagree and you failed to answer my question which shows a glaring logical gap in allowing felon citizens a vote but not positive tax paying permanent residents a vote.
Click to expand...

I am going to have to go with Bob on this specific point. If you are a citizen, then you enjoy certain benefits. To lose those benefits, it either needs to be part of the base law or you include a process to remove citizenship. I do not disagree that the system needs to improve, in reguards to who contributes and who doesn't. But to note an error within the system argues for fixing the system not necessarily something outside the system.
 
I don't have a problem with it in non-national elections if the people of that community want to extend that right. It isn't like there is such a thing as a city citizenship. You're just a resident.
 
The Mark said:
Which is my understanding of the basic intent behind attempts at voter ID laws in the US.

The issue being with implementation - not all citizens have ID
Click to expand...

from what I understand, it is to prevent in person voter fraud although there is no evidence that it was ever a problem.

And with a lot of minorities and poorer people not having ID's, makes it something that favors one party over another party, for a problem that really does not exist. Also Americans do not get voter cards at home which allows someone to vote because no voter card means no vote.
 
Peter King said:
here everybody already has an ID, they do not need to get one purely to vote.

And the voter ID laws is in place because everybody gets a voting card in their mailbox and they are made out to name. The ID is only there to make sure the right person who is on the voting card is there to use that card.
Click to expand...

While most here in the U.S. Have some for of government ID, not all do. And I fully agree that obtaining the ID should never cost one financially. But here you talk voter ID somehow you are suppressing the vote.
 
Peter King said:
from what I understand, it is to prevent in person voter fraud although there is no evidence that it was ever a problem.

And with a lot of minorities and poorer people not having ID's, makes it something that favors one party over another party, for a problem that really does not exist. Also Americans do not get voter cards at home which allows someone to vote because no voter card means no vote.
Click to expand...
Yep.

The problem is they're (we're?) trying to implement part of a system that is interdependent without bothering with the rest of it.

Effectively...
 
maquiscat said:
While most here in the U.S. Have some for of government ID, not all do. And I fully agree that obtaining the ID should never cost one financially. But here you talk voter ID somehow you are suppressing the vote.
Click to expand...

Because of the reality how it is in the USA, here it is simple, everyone needs an ID and to get one is dead easy. Take your old card, go to the city hall where you live with a new set of passport photo's and you get one, or at least you get one after you sign the form you get fully printed out of the computer there. You sign, you pay and 5 work days later you pick it up. No filling out forms anywhere, dead easy. If there are not a lot of people waiting in line you can be out of there in 5 minutes or less.

And for people who cannot go to city hall due to physical inability, someone from city hall will come to where you live.

This is all possible because everyone in the Netherlands is registered in the basic administration. The people from city hall can verify your identity in a flash and no paperwork whatsoever has to be filled out, if I remember correctly all you need is your signature.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
So, what?

There is no right for any noncitizen to be given citizenship. As a sovereign nation, we are under no obligation ever, to allow any foreigners to enter our country at all, much less to grant them citizenship.

These are not rights that belong to any foreigners, these are privileges which, as a nation, we may choose to grant or not to grant.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you. I agree that only citizens should be able to vote. I also believe that anyone who desires to vote should have a photo ID. I was just answering a question about how long it takes to achieve citizen status.
 
maquiscat said:
Which argues more for fixing the immigration system, not giving non citizens the right to vote. I think most of us can agree on this being the problem, just not on what the solution is. Might I suggest that actively and legally working towards citizenship is also a qualifier.
Click to expand...

This is where they should look to fix the immigration problem. It is ridiculous that it can take so long in some areas. However, allowing a non citizen to vote is not the answer.
 
Rentoc said:
This is where they should look to fix the immigration problem. It is ridiculous that it can take so long in some areas. However, allowing a non citizen to vote is not the answer.
Click to expand...

What about that last part in my post? Is there any good reason why a person on the legal track, after say a 5 year period, should not be allowed to vote if the process is taking a long time? As noted some people are stuck in the system for a couple of decades.
 
Once they make up their minds to become citizens and pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, sure, absolutely.
If they can't do that and hold allegiance elsewhere, no.
 
maquiscat said:
What about that last part in my post? Is there any good reason why a person on the legal track, after say a 5 year period, should not be allowed to vote if the process is taking a long time? As noted some people are stuck in the system for a couple of decades.
Click to expand...
Being a committed slippery slope theorist, I say no. One exception leads to another, which leads to another, and so on. Having set standards and sticking to them is not a bad thing.

Having said that, I do agree that the process for legal immigration and/or citizenship needs serious overhauling and streamlining. Five years is too much. By that point we should know whether or not we are willing to accept them as a citizen.
 
maquiscat said:
What about that last part in my post? Is there any good reason why a person on the legal track, after say a 5 year period, should not be allowed to vote if the process is taking a long time? As noted some people are stuck in the system for a couple of decades.
Click to expand...

I've never read of it being decades, but as I stated, allowing a non citizen the right to vote is not the answer. To me, that is the crown jewel of citizenship.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom