Should they have a say?

Some towns consider non-citizen voting

Mark Puleo

In an effort to encourage greater civic engagement among those affected by the tremendous backlog in our nation’s immigration system, lawmakers in Massachusetts and across the country have proposed allowing legal permanent residents, more commonly known as “green card holders,” to be able to vote in municipal elections.

The acrimonious debate over the status of undocumented immigrants has meant less attention paid to the plight of these legal permanent residents – many of whom have lived here for years, contributing their hard-earned tax dollars and serving in the armed forces without having a voice in the political process. Yet these residents, who in most cases qualify to become naturalized citizens, wait for years either to receive notice of their permanent residency status or for the federal government to process their citizenship paperwork.

While the proposal on non-citizen voting remains controversial, a handful of communities in Massachusetts have passed legislation to petition the state government to allow this change for local elections, including Amherst, Cambridge and Newton. Supporters also point to the city of Chicago, where non-citizen immigrants can vote in school board elections, and in Maryland, where five towns have passed similar measures, one of which as long ago as 1992.

Additionally, the European Union, with its heavy reliance on immigration for both skilled and unskilled labor to help replenish a declining birth rate in many of its member-states, allows non-citizen voting for permanent residents in local elections.

At face value, the proposal to extend voting rights to non-citizens sounds fantastical, but consider the arguments of those who support it. With long waiting lines, many immigrants who want to become naturalized citizens must wait up to ten years or longer before they proudly take their citizenship oaths. Of all immigrants, green card holders are often among the most heavily invested individuals in their communities, frequently owning property, small businesses or performing vital professional services. Also, many permanent residents have children who are American citizens and enrolled in local public schools.

Take the case of Alvaro Lima, the Director of Research for the Boston Redevelopment Authority, who arrived in the United States almost twenty years ago on a student visa. Diligently jumping through all the procedural hoops ultimately to become a permanent resident, Mr. Lima’s naturalization process drags on while many of the most high-powered officials in Boston depend on his advice and statistical analysis to shape the city’s future. Yet Mr. Lima cannot decide on how his own property taxes are spent.

“We are asking to engage a large community that has very much decided to invest itself in our cities and towns,” Mr. Lima explained. “We know this [non-citizen voting] could not be easily done at the federal level, since it would require Constitutional changes. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask that all residents of a local community have a say on who directly spends their tax dollars.”

But most Americans remain dubious about extending voting rights to non-citizen immigrants – including in local elections. There is the notion that doing so, even for a legal immigrant, would discourage the final leap to become a loyal, patriotic citizen. Of course, the 35,000 green card-holding immigrant soldiers serving in Iraq who cannot vote may disagree.

“If we can have so many immigrant soldiers proudly serving and dying for our country, we must address the issue of making the immigration process more open, fairer and just to all,” Mr. Lima added.

Last year, the City of Boston narrowly rejected a proposal to extend voting rights to permanent residents in municipal elections. If enacted, the new measure would have added tens of thousands of new voters to the rolls in an electorate that has already been transformed by newcomers from across the country and the world.

Even if it had secured enough votes, the Boston measure – as well as those already passed in three other communities – would need special approval from the Massachusetts Legislature, known as a Home Rule Petition, in order to become law.

It should be no surprise that attempts would be made at the local level if lawmakers cannot clear the logjam in Washington. We owe it to all Americans to resolve it, otherwise what is the value in waiting?