8 ms·

New York City will allow 800k noncitizens to vote in local elections

44 points by mgh2 5y ago

hogrider 5y ago
Glad to see this, tying up voting rights with citizenship is a weird hang up, specially in local elections. I'm sating this from a south american country that gets a lot of immigrants, the only people not ok with this here are race nationalists.
DamnYuppie 5y ago
- teaearlgraycold 5y ago
  The definition is citizenship is arbitrary. It seems reasonable to have different regions apply different definitions that work for them. Your opinion seems to be that people always votes selfishly? That everything is zero sum? If that’s the case then why did the people with power in NYC choose to give up power to those without a voice? Democracy is a force for good when done right.
- acdha 5y ago
  If they live and vote in your city, shouldn’t they have a voice in the place they live? > Those who are here illegally and will vote for more free stuff and those who are incredibly wealthy and will vote for more tax breaks for themselves and their properties. The wealthy are already doing a fine job on tax evasion, I’m deeply skeptical that there are a game-changing number of wealthy non-citizens in that group. As for the “free stuff” argument – even liberal U.S. cities rarely give things away without many strings and historically this has always been a net economic win because people who aren’t in poverty participate more in the economy. I’d be shocked if it cost the city even half of what, say, the hundreds of millions of dollars spent annually due to lawless behavior by the NYPD.
- naturalauction 5y ago
  >Those who are here illegally The article explicitly states that only certain legal residents will be allowed to vote. Also, green card holders and immigrants with other statuses in NYC have significantly less income than both naturalized and U.S. born citizens(see figure 8 in [0]). I’m currently living in a jurisdiction that allows most immigrants to vote. All resident EU citizens can vote in local elections in the UK, and all resident Commonwealth citizens can vote in all elections. I don’t think members of these groups vote overwhelmingly for free stuff or for tax breaks. [0]. https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/opportunity/pdf/immigrant-poverty-report-2017.pdf https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/opportunity/pdf/immigrant-povert...
  - democratsassho 5y ago
    [flagged]
  - blibble 5y ago
    > All resident EU citizens can vote in local elections in the UK no longer the case from Jan 1 2021 (except for those grandfathered in) it's now dependent on bilaterals with individual countries (e.g. Spain, Poland and others have mutual arrangements with with the UK) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-voting-rights-for-eu-citizens-living-in-the-uk/local-voting-rights-for-eu-citizens-living-in-the-uk https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-voting-righ...
- orf 5y ago
  > Here are people who are not citizens of your country and they get a vote in how things are run. gasp - people living in and contributing to a country getting to voice their democratic opinions on how things are run? what an absolutely terrible idea! they will just vote for more free stuff, everyone knows this! the party that doesn't get their vote told me so.
  - democratsassho 5y ago
- entropyie 5y ago
  Everyone can vote in local elections in Ireland, no matter their citizenship. In fact everyone can run for local election too... If you live in a place you should have some say on how it is run, how your taxes are spent. It causes no problems. National and constitutional votes are a different story... I am much less in favour of letting citizens who live abroad vote... at the end of the day, they have no skin in the game.
  - democratsassho 5y ago
mcstafford 5y ago
At first glance, the headline sounded likely to be a conspiracy theory from the other side, not something from NPR.
- democratsassho 5y ago
- detaro 5y ago
  why? Giving residents voting rights in local elections is not exactly a totally new and unimaginable proposal.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >not exactly a totally new and unimaginable proposal that's not exactly contradictory with "conspiracy theory from the other side".
    - detaro 5y ago
      If something isn't a new proposal, but rather something that's been proposed and debated in multiple places, it seems kind of odd to automatically assume it passing somewhere is a conspiracy theory.
theknocker 5y ago
locallost 5y ago
The EU already has this albeit only for citizens of other EU countries. One of the important things a government does is allocate tax money, and sets priorities. If you pay taxes you should have a say in how this money is spent. I also think it's really weird that I get to vote in my home country and decide what the people there should do without having to live the consequences of those decisions or even pay for them.
- rendall 5y ago
  As a legal resident of Finland, from NYC, I can vote in local, municipal elections here, too. I think it actually makes sense to let people who pay tax have a say in how it is spent.
  - Proven 5y ago
- klipt 5y ago
  > The EU already has this albeit only for citizens of other EU countries. Seems about the same as US states allowing people from other US states to vote.
  - rendall 5y ago
    > Seems about the same as US states allowing people from other US states to vote. That's not a correct analogy. The EU is a voluntary economic coalition of multiple sovereign nations while US States are administrative districts of a single sovereign nation. EU nations allow residency status to citizens of other EU nations, but it's definitely still "moving abroad" not like "moving from California to Texas"
    - klipt 5y ago
      But the EU wants to move in the direction of a single sovereign nation, doesn't it? Letting citizens vote for EU level elections is a step towards that. But most EU countries won't yet allow EU citizens from other countries to vote for, e.g. president of that country, to my knowledge.
duped 5y ago
Personally I'd rather we make citizenship easier to attain but NYC doesn't have power over that and I doubt Congress will ever fix our broken system. Ultimately there's nothing wrong with self determination. I don't live in NYC but I'm glad they're making their own decision to become more Democratic.
democratsassho 5y ago
greatpostman 5y ago
Say what you want about this, the end result will always be a political tipping towards whichever party favors immigration. A voting law like this done nationally can permanently change American politics
- zaik 5y ago
  > whichever party favors immigration Should be 'whichever party does not disfranchise a large group of people living within its jurisdiction'.
  - thunkshift1 5y ago
    Should be ‘whichever party does not disfranchise a large group of TAX PAYING people within its jurisdictions’
  - greatpostman 5y ago
    I wasn’t aware non citizens have a right to move here and start demanding changes in laws
mbfg 5y ago
I'm fine with this effort, but curious how they came up with the 800K number? Is that a capped number? Is that a real estimate of number of non-citizens?
- wutbrodo 5y ago
  My read of the article is that it's the latter
999900000999 5y ago
The way our federal government originally worked, with a weak central government, I imagine each state could run it's own affairs in regards to voting. Only folks who make at least 6 million a year can vote, under the original constitution a State can make this rule. Of course various Supreme Court rulings disallow this today. I'm not okay with this though, since once you have different standards for who can vote depending on where you live , you open up an argument to have your electoral college votes voided. Even if you claim non citizens can only vote in X,Y,Z elections, what are you doing to ensure these same people aren't ' accidentally' voting in national elections.
- hbrav 5y ago
  I'll note that in the UK eligibility to vote in local, national (and formerly EU) elections were different from each other. I assume the electoral register kept track of which criteria you met, and only sent you a polling card for the relevant elections.
coolso 5y ago
“We only want to let them live here”, they said.
AnnoyedComment 5y ago

44 points by mgh2 5y ago

Glad to see this, tying up voting rights with citizenship is a weird hang up, specially in local elections. I'm sating this from a south american country that gets a lot of immigrants, the only people not ok with this here are race nationalists.

DamnYuppie 5y ago

teaearlgraycold 5y ago
The definition is citizenship is arbitrary. It seems reasonable to have different regions apply different definitions that work for them. Your opinion seems to be that people always votes selfishly? That everything is zero sum? If that’s the case then why did the people with power in NYC choose to give up power to those without a voice? Democracy is a force for good when done right.
acdha 5y ago
If they live and vote in your city, shouldn’t they have a voice in the place they live? > Those who are here illegally and will vote for more free stuff and those who are incredibly wealthy and will vote for more tax breaks for themselves and their properties. The wealthy are already doing a fine job on tax evasion, I’m deeply skeptical that there are a game-changing number of wealthy non-citizens in that group. As for the “free stuff” argument – even liberal U.S. cities rarely give things away without many strings and historically this has always been a net economic win because people who aren’t in poverty participate more in the economy. I’d be shocked if it cost the city even half of what, say, the hundreds of millions of dollars spent annually due to lawless behavior by the NYPD.
naturalauction 5y ago
>Those who are here illegally The article explicitly states that only certain legal residents will be allowed to vote. Also, green card holders and immigrants with other statuses in NYC have significantly less income than both naturalized and U.S. born citizens(see figure 8 in [0]). I’m currently living in a jurisdiction that allows most immigrants to vote. All resident EU citizens can vote in local elections in the UK, and all resident Commonwealth citizens can vote in all elections. I don’t think members of these groups vote overwhelmingly for free stuff or for tax breaks. [0]. https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/opportunity/pdf/immigrant-poverty-report-2017.pdf https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/opportunity/pdf/immigrant-povert...
- democratsassho 5y ago
  [flagged]
- blibble 5y ago
  > All resident EU citizens can vote in local elections in the UK no longer the case from Jan 1 2021 (except for those grandfathered in) it's now dependent on bilaterals with individual countries (e.g. Spain, Poland and others have mutual arrangements with with the UK) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-voting-rights-for-eu-citizens-living-in-the-uk/local-voting-rights-for-eu-citizens-living-in-the-uk https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-voting-righ...
orf 5y ago
> Here are people who are not citizens of your country and they get a vote in how things are run. gasp - people living in and contributing to a country getting to voice their democratic opinions on how things are run? what an absolutely terrible idea! they will just vote for more free stuff, everyone knows this! the party that doesn't get their vote told me so.
- democratsassho 5y ago
entropyie 5y ago
Everyone can vote in local elections in Ireland, no matter their citizenship. In fact everyone can run for local election too... If you live in a place you should have some say on how it is run, how your taxes are spent. It causes no problems. National and constitutional votes are a different story... I am much less in favour of letting citizens who live abroad vote... at the end of the day, they have no skin in the game.
- democratsassho 5y ago

mcstafford 5y ago

At first glance, the headline sounded likely to be a conspiracy theory from the other side, not something from NPR.

democratsassho 5y ago
detaro 5y ago
why? Giving residents voting rights in local elections is not exactly a totally new and unimaginable proposal.
- gruez 5y ago
  >not exactly a totally new and unimaginable proposal that's not exactly contradictory with "conspiracy theory from the other side".
  - detaro 5y ago
    If something isn't a new proposal, but rather something that's been proposed and debated in multiple places, it seems kind of odd to automatically assume it passing somewhere is a conspiracy theory.

theknocker 5y ago

locallost 5y ago

The EU already has this albeit only for citizens of other EU countries. One of the important things a government does is allocate tax money, and sets priorities. If you pay taxes you should have a say in how this money is spent. I also think it's really weird that I get to vote in my home country and decide what the people there should do without having to live the consequences of those decisions or even pay for them.

rendall 5y ago
As a legal resident of Finland, from NYC, I can vote in local, municipal elections here, too. I think it actually makes sense to let people who pay tax have a say in how it is spent.
- Proven 5y ago
klipt 5y ago
> The EU already has this albeit only for citizens of other EU countries. Seems about the same as US states allowing people from other US states to vote.
- rendall 5y ago
  > Seems about the same as US states allowing people from other US states to vote. That's not a correct analogy. The EU is a voluntary economic coalition of multiple sovereign nations while US States are administrative districts of a single sovereign nation. EU nations allow residency status to citizens of other EU nations, but it's definitely still "moving abroad" not like "moving from California to Texas"
  - klipt 5y ago
    But the EU wants to move in the direction of a single sovereign nation, doesn't it? Letting citizens vote for EU level elections is a step towards that. But most EU countries won't yet allow EU citizens from other countries to vote for, e.g. president of that country, to my knowledge.

duped 5y ago

Personally I'd rather we make citizenship easier to attain but NYC doesn't have power over that and I doubt Congress will ever fix our broken system. Ultimately there's nothing wrong with self determination. I don't live in NYC but I'm glad they're making their own decision to become more Democratic.

democratsassho 5y ago

greatpostman 5y ago

Say what you want about this, the end result will always be a political tipping towards whichever party favors immigration. A voting law like this done nationally can permanently change American politics

zaik 5y ago
> whichever party favors immigration Should be 'whichever party does not disfranchise a large group of people living within its jurisdiction'.
- thunkshift1 5y ago
  Should be ‘whichever party does not disfranchise a large group of TAX PAYING people within its jurisdictions’
- greatpostman 5y ago
  I wasn’t aware non citizens have a right to move here and start demanding changes in laws

mbfg 5y ago

I'm fine with this effort, but curious how they came up with the 800K number? Is that a capped number? Is that a real estimate of number of non-citizens?

wutbrodo 5y ago
My read of the article is that it's the latter

999900000999 5y ago

The way our federal government originally worked, with a weak central government, I imagine each state could run it's own affairs in regards to voting. Only folks who make at least 6 million a year can vote, under the original constitution a State can make this rule. Of course various Supreme Court rulings disallow this today. I'm not okay with this though, since once you have different standards for who can vote depending on where you live , you open up an argument to have your electoral college votes voided. Even if you claim non citizens can only vote in X,Y,Z elections, what are you doing to ensure these same people aren't ' accidentally' voting in national elections.

hbrav 5y ago
I'll note that in the UK eligibility to vote in local, national (and formerly EU) elections were different from each other. I assume the electoral register kept track of which criteria you met, and only sent you a polling card for the relevant elections.

coolso 5y ago

“We only want to let them live here”, they said.

AnnoyedComment 5y ago