Tangle - Should noncitizens be allowed to vote?

Episode Date: January 13, 2022

Starting next year, 800,000 legal permanent residents will be eligible to vote in New York City, despite not being citizens. The measure applies to legal residents, including those with green cards, and Dreamers who were brought here illegally as children under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). These residents will not be allowed to vote in state or federal elections, but will be allowed to vote in citywide contests.You can read today's podcast here.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here.Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and produced by Trevor Eichhorn. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, a place where you get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking without all that hysterical nonsense you find everywhere else. I am your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we're going to be talking about non-citizens voting and a new law that was passed in New York City. Before we jump in, though, as always, we'll start with some quick hits. First up, the U.S. Army raised the maximum bonus for new recruits to $50,000 as it struggles to recruit new soldiers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Number two, the Ohio Supreme Court rejected a new statehouse map that strongly favored Republicans and gave the panel 10 days to fix it. Number three, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said he won't cooperate with the January 6th committee after it requested to interview him. Number four, a Quinnipiac University poll has President Biden at 33% approval and 53% disapproval. Number five, a New York judge rejected Prince Andrew's request to dismiss a sexual abuse lawsuit filed by Virginia Jeffrey, who says the prince assaulted her at Jeffrey Epstein's home when she was 17. All right, that's it for our quick hits today, which brings us to our main topic, non-citizens voting. Mayor-elect Eric Adams is coming out of the gate with a controversial move, saying he supports a citywide initiative to give non-citizens the right to vote. And he told CNN's Jake Tapper why.

Take a look. I think it's imperative that people who are in a local municipality have the right to decide who's going to govern them. And what do you say to all the people who went through the process, the difficult process of becoming an American citizen? I say to them, keep doing it. You know, membership has its privileges. Starting next year, 800,000 legal permanent residents will be eligible to vote in New York City despite not being citizens. The

measure applies to legal residents, including those with green cards and dreamers who were brought here illegally as children under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. These residents will not be allowed to vote in state or federal elections, but will be allowed to vote in citywide contests. There was some doubt about whether the bill would become law after Eric Adams won New York's hotly contested mayoral race. Adams had concerns about a clause that allowed non-citizens to vote after 30 straight days in the city, a period of time he believed might be too short, according to the New York Times. The law was passed in December, and Adams had 30 days to veto it, but he chose not to. He told reporters that he changed his mind after consulting with colleagues and advocates. I believe that New Yorkers should have a say in

their government, which is why I have and will continue to support this important legislation, the mayor said in a statement. I look forward to bringing millions more into the democratic process. statement, I look forward to bringing millions more into the democratic process. An estimated 808,000 adults will be eligible to vote starting January 9, 2023. The Republican National Committee responded by filing a lawsuit against the mayor, city council, and city board of elections, challenging the law as unconstitutional. The original bill passed 33-11, with some Democrats opposing it on the grounds it was unconstitutional or would discourage immigrants from seeking citizenship. The bill's importance nationally is why we're covering it today. New York City is part of a growing trend. Similar policies have been enacted in Maryland and Vermont and are now being considered in Maine, Massachusetts, and Illinois.

The passage of the bill set off a wave of commentary about the right of non-citizen residents to vote. Below, we'll look at some arguments from the left and the right, and then my take. Alright, first up, we'll start with what the left is saying. So the left argues that non-citizens voting is actually part of America's history. They say it will create incentives for civic engagement, and they argue taxpaying members of society should get to have a say in our government. In July, Atusa Araxia-Brahemian, a Swiss citizen who has lived in New York since 2004, made the case for 15 million

non-citizens voting nationally. It's easy to assume that restricting the franchise to citizens is an age-old non-negotiable fact, but it's actually a relatively recent convention and a political choice, Abrahamian said. Early in the United States' history, voting was a function not of national citizenship, but of gender, race, and class. As a result, white male landowners of all nationalities were encouraged to play an active role in shaping American democracy, while women and poor indigenous and enslaved people could not. That wholesale discrimination is unquestionably worse than excluding resident foreigners from the polls, but the point is that history shows how readily voting laws can be altered, and that restrictive ones tend not to age well. Another misconception is that citizen voting

rights have always been the prerogative of the federal government, Abrahamian wrote. In fact, states have largely decided who had a say in local, state, and national elections. Arkansas was the last state to eliminate non-citizen voting in 1926, and it wasn't until 1996 that Congress doubled down with the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which made voting in federal elections while foreign already not permitted because of state-level rules, a criminal and deportable offense. This means that congressional Democrats working on immigration and election reform can reverse the 1996 sanctions the same way they voted them in.

In CNN, Raul Reyes gave New York City a bravo for its decision. There are about 15 million legal non-residents in the country and about 800,000 in New York City. These are our neighbors who pay taxes, send their children to public schools, start businesses, and contribute to their communities. They should be able to elect leaders and have a say in local politics just like anyone else. There is a practical component to the case for allowing non-citizens to vote, too. If a green card holder wants to naturalize and become a citizen, it takes money for fee and legal expenses and, most importantly, time. In 2019, the New York Times reported it took an average of 10 months for aspiring Americans to go through the naturalization process,

and that is on top of the at least five years green card holders must wait before they can apply for naturalization, Reyes said. It is not fair that these potential citizens should go so long without any civic voice as their cases wind their way through our backlogged immigration system. Consider that our country was founded upon the idea of no taxation without representation, or that the Declaration of Independence states governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Barring non-citizens from voting would seem to violate both of these principles. In the Boston Globe, Marcela Garcia said Boston should follow New York's lead. Most opponents of granting even limited voting rights to legal immigrants see it as fundamentally

wrong and unconstitutional, a right that only U.S. citizens should have, Garcia wrote. They deem it a slippery slope that would invite electoral fraud. The argument that remains unspoken is fear of enfranchising the other, that is, giving immigrants more power than they currently have. Yes, federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal and statewide elections. However, jurisdictions are allowed to change their local electoral rules. Consideration on Beacon Hill would probably lead to broader debate and ammunition for GOP scare tactics, Garcia said, but the underlying question would persist. Do we enfranchise newcomers or do we fear them? New York's answer? As legal taxpayers, non-citizens should have a say.

Alright, so that's it for what the left is saying, and here is the right's take. The right says it is unconstitutional and reduces the desire to become a citizen. They worry about dual loyalty and voters who are transient, and they say it's a clear power play from Democrats to gain power. Make no mistake, John Fund said in the National Review, the new New York law is part of a nationwide push to blur the very meaning of citizenship and promote non-citizen voting everywhere and for all offices. New York City's law was promoted by former councilman Edanus Rodriguez, who immigrated to the city from the Dominican Republic and is now the commissioner of the New York City

Department of Transportation fund, wrote. If non-citizens pay their taxes as I did when I had a green card, he says, then they should have a right to elect their local leaders. He notes that the new law will limit the right to vote

to legal residents and green card holders, but that's only because an earlier version of his legislation from 2013 that would have given the vote to illegal aliens simply generated residents and green card holders, but that's only because an earlier version of his legislation from 2013 that would have given the vote to illegal aliens simply generated too much political heat. Few experts believe that in a place where non-citizen voting is allowed, there would be effective enforcement of laws still barring illegal aliens from voting, Fund said. They already can

choose to vote without much fear of detection. A 2014 study by two Old Dominion University professors based on survey data from Cooperative Congressional Election Study indicated that 6.4% of all non-citizens voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election and that 2.2% did in the 2010 midterms. Given that 80% of non-citizens lean Democratic, They cite Al Franken's 312 vote to win in the 2008 U.S. Senate race in Minnesota as one likely tipped by non-citizen voting. That election also had profound consequences. As a senator, Franken cast the 60th vote to break the filibuster, a vote that was needed to make Obamacare law.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The Wall Street editorial board said almost anyone can vote in New York now. New York's constitution guarantees citizens the right to vote, provided that such a

citizen is 18 years of age and has been a resident for 30 days. The progressive argument is that this language doesn't explicitly exclude non-citizens so New York City can grant them the franchise. But think what else this implies. The Constitution only specifically says that a citizen must be 18 to vote. So could the city expand local elections to 12-year-old non-citizens? Ditto for the Constitution's 30-day residency rule. Could the city let non-citizens cross the Hudson River, declare residency, and vote the next day? As legal analysis, this isn't what New York's Constitution means. Because non-citizens can't participate in federal or state races,

a practical problem is that the city's Board of Elections, which is legendary for ineptitude, would have to manage a second voting list and set of ballots, the board said. What about people who don't speak the basic English required by the citizenship test? Councilman Mark Trager, a Brooklyn Democrat who abstained on the bill, said he once asked for a law requiring interpreters at polling sites, end quote, I was told that we didn't have the authority, end quote. In the New York Post, Michael Goodwin said one of the rights that has universally distinguished citizens from non-citizens is the right to vote. Unfortunately, we can now add that distinction to history's trash heap thanks

to the far left's war on the nation's culture and legal systems, Goodwin said. Under the measure, in addition to meeting rules for age and registration, the only other requirement is that the immigrants must either be lawful permanent residents or authorized to work in the United States. In either case, they can vote starting next January after living in New York for as little as 30 consecutive days. Yes, 30 days, which is the equivalent of a drive-by vote from people who have sworn allegiance to another nation. The issue is not the right of immigrants to voice opinions, Goodwin wrote. For there to be a fair and functioning democracy, large groups of voters cannot have the right to privileges of citizenship without the commitment. Otherwise, what is the point of citizenship, a question that future immigrants might ask themselves.

citizenship, a question that future immigrants might ask themselves. All right, that is it for the left and the right's take, which brings us to my take. So I'll be honest, of all the issues I've covered in Tangle, this is probably in like the top 10 of ones I came in most close-minded on. The idea that American citizens should be determining who our politicians are seems about as straightforward as any part of U.S. politics that I can imagine. And yet, there were some convincing arguments made by the left that surprised me. Perhaps the best argument, in my mind, is the civics one. It's hard to get American citizens to vote, so the idea of opening the doors to legal residents to invoke a sense of commitment

and investment in their communities is compelling. I like the thought of drawing investment from non-citizens by allowing them to vote, and would like it even more if it prompted more actual citizens to start showing up for elections, even if it is out of fear. I also found the right-wing fears of dual loyalty to be a bit absurd. Dual citizens are allowed to vote right now, many from abroad, and I don't think a wave of non-citizen immigrants are going to turn out to vote in an effort to damage America. Nearly all of them are living here because they want to live here, and they have the incentive to make the communities they're living in better. I'm also acutely aware that many laws are currently

being run through state legislators by Republican politicians, which would make voting less accessible and more difficult and complicated in an effort to improve their odds of holding onto power, which is just to say they're guilty of many of the things they're accusing Democrats of here. And yet, I'm left wondering how this is the story we're grappling with. The idea that non-citizens who have been living in New York for 30 days should be able to vote doesn't pass the basic sniff test. Let me give you a parallel. I lived in Israel for six months. Not once did I ever feel the entitlement to vote in an election there, even though some non-citizens in Israel can actually vote. Nor did I come remotely close to grappling with the country's issues in a way that would have prepared me to vote. I couldn't speak the language, and I

was still learning how to use the public transportation when I left, and that was after six months. Six months where I was doing my best to immerse myself in the country, the culture, and the politics. To acknowledge this reality is not racist or xenophobic. It never occurred to me that I should have the right to vote in an Israeli election, despite the fact I'm a Jew and it's supposed to be my homeland. And in retrospect, I still believe I never should have been granted that right. On top of the fundamental things I was missing to qualify me as an Israeli voter, the stakes simply weren't as high for me as lifelong citizens. Now, I'm sympathetic to the immigrant argument specific to the United States.

Our system is broken, expensive, and citizenship is very difficult to attain. I'm a border-loving, pro-immigrant American who believes the vast, vast majority of legal immigration is an economic net positive as well as a cultural one too. I also have long advocated for voting to be easier and simpler in the U.S. because most of the solutions for that, like paper ballots and mail-in voting, are actually also the most secure ways to vote. On paper, you might think I'm a prime candidate to support a measure like this, but I'm not. Along with the pro-immigration case to oppose this bill, namely that incentivizing citizenship is a good thing, and the obvious legal hurdles, which could very well sink the bill regardless,

the proposal specific to New York has far too short a period of time required and is such an obvious play to expand the democratic power in the city it's nearly laughable. One councilwoman, Lori Cumbo, actually said the quiet part out loud and conceded she opposed the bill because the top three ethnic groups who would benefit were the Dominican Republic, China, as well as Mexico, who are increasingly Republican. I love the goal to expand voting and create more people invested in our democracy, but this isn love the goal to expand voting and create more people invested in our democracy, but this isn't the way to do it. All right, that's it for my take. That brings us to your question's answer. This one is from Anne in Tucson, Arizona. She said, so disappointed that in your reporting on the Supreme Court

Justice's comments on the vaccine mandates, you failed to mention the huge faux pas made by Justice Sotomayor. She is reported to have stated that there were 200,000 children in the hospital with COVID-19, many of whom were on ventilators. This egregious error was corrected by both Anthony Fauci and Rachel Walensky. My understanding is that Sotomayor, as a Supreme Court Justice, has many employees at her disposal to conduct research. How could she make such a mistake? Is she fit to be on the court? How did you miss this? Okay, so let me just break something down here. Most tangled newsletters clock in somewhere between 3,000 and 4,000 words. We have long distinguished ourselves as something separate from what you might get at the SCIM or the Flipside or Axios.

We try to go long on single issues, going more in depth, adding more information, more nuance and presenting a lot of compelling arguments. But we're still limited to space. All that's to say, I didn't miss it so much as I didn't find it particularly relevant to the debate at hand. Yes, Sotomayor said 100,000 children were in the hospital. She said 100,000, not 200,000, and that they were in serious condition. Yes, this number is absurd, and it was fact-checked to the moon and back. Anyway, the number one reason I'm not reporting it is because

it seemed distracting, and Supreme Court justices say silly, stupid, and wrong things that need to be fact-checked all the time. They are human, after all. The other reason is that there is enough unjustified fear about COVID-19 and children out there, and I saw no reason to add to it. I have no idea how Sotomayor came to believe something so far from the truth, but I don't think it makes her unqualified for the court, so much as it is a good reminder justices are not infallible.

Alright, that brings us to our story that matters. Used car prices are continuing to surge according to Axios Markets. In December, used cars were up 37% compared to the previous year. Now they've become a microcosm of the inflation challenges that the U.S. is facing at the intersection of supply chain issues and booming demand. Behind housing, U.S. car prices were the second biggest driver of inflation in December, responsible for almost a quarter of the change. Axios has the story. And that brings us to our numbers section. 71% is the percentage of respondents who opposed a San Francisco effort to pass a bill that allowed non-citizens to vote. 29% is the percentage of respondents who supported a San Francisco effort to pass a bill that allowed non-citizens to vote. 29% is the percentage of

respondents who supported a San Francisco effort to pass a bill that allowed non-citizens to vote. 44.8 million is the number of people in the United States who were born in another country as of 2018. 77% is the percentage of those immigrants who are here legally, according to Pew. 45% is the percentage of those immigrants who are naturalized citizens now as of 2017. All right, that brings us to our have a nice day section. This one is about California Governor Gavin Newsom, who recently signed an executive order that outlawed price gouging of COVID-19 kits. The step was one of the first in the nation to slow down the practice of price gouging, which has run rampant as COVID-19 testing kits are in short supply.

Per the governor's executive order, sellers who have not previously sold at-home COVID-19 kits may not sell testing kits for a price that is greater than 50% of what the seller paid to get the testing kit. Fox Business has the story. You can check it out. There's a link to it in today's newsletter. All right, everybody, that's it for our podcast today. As always, if you want to write in and give me some of your thoughts, Isaac, I-S-A-A-C at readtangled.com. Also, please check out that episode description. You can find ways to support our work. We are off tomorrow from the podcast because we have a special Friday edition coming out. You'll get a newsletter if you're subscribed. And we're off Monday because it's Martin Luther King Day, a national holiday.

So you'll hear from us again on Tuesday. Hope you have a good one. Peace. Our newsletter is written by Isaac Saul, edited by Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and produced in conjunction with Tangle's social media manager, Magdalena Bokova, who also helped create our logo. The podcast is edited by Trevor Eichhorn, and music for the podcast was produced by Diet75.

For more from Tangle, subscribe to our newsletter or check out our content archives at www.readtangle.com. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, Thanks for watching. his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and

older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca.