What, exactly, is the end game for the Democrat push for “comprehensive immigration reform”? What about Obama’s executive action giving illegals legal status? Is it about compassion? About doing “the right thing”? Many, including myself, have noted that the ultimate end game is to grant these folks voting rights, creating yet another boxed Democrat voting group, pandered to and given stuff via other taxpayers. Democrats are already pitching giving those affected by Obama’s non-amnesty amnesty measures, and here comes the LA Times Editorial Board
Editorial: Should non-citizens in the U.S. vote?
As of Jan. 1, 2012, an estimated 13.3 million lawful permanent residents lived in the United States, and 8.8 million of them were eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship but had not done so. In California, 2.48 million out of 3.4 million green-card holders were eligible to apply but chose not to. And, of course, not all non-citizens residing in this country are “lawful.†An estimated 11 million people live here without permission, though President Obama recently took action to defer the deportation of as many as half of them.
America obviously would benefit if more non-citizens living here — including, eventually, undocumented immigrants — took on the responsibilities and privileges of citizenship. But what if they don’t? Non-citizens are still members of their communities. They pay taxes and in many cases send their children to public schools. Should they be given some greater say in the decisions of the local governments, school boards and judicial systems that make decisions for themselves and their children?
Many Americans consider it unthinkable that non-citizens — even lawful permanent residents — would be allowed to vote in elections. Gov. Jerry Brown agrees with them. Last year, in vetoing a bill that would have allowed non-citizen permanent residents to serve on juries, Brown said, “Jury service, like voting, is quintessentially a prerogative and responsibility of citizenship.â€
They go on to note that prior to the 20th Century, non-citizens voted. Of course, that was a vastly different time of people coming to the United States to be a part of the Great Melting Pot, looking for a new life and new opportunities, most of whom came legally and wanted to be citizens.
We agree with Brown that voting is and should be inextricably tied to U.S. citizenship. But we also believe that more needs to be done to encourage people who have decided to live in this country to participate fully in its political life at every level of government. It is not healthy if large numbers of permanent residents, workers and taxpayers are excluded from voting. But the answer is not to sever voting — or jury service, for that matter — from citizenship. It is rather to expand the circle of citizenship.
See what they did there? Rather than allowing non-citizens to vote, they want to just make them all citizens, which would immediately confer voting rights on these folks. But, we can easily assume that they are really looking at the population of illegal aliens (say, what about all those that make up the California prison population, in some cases, being 2/3rds of certain prisons?) to turn into new voting citizens. People who came illegally, often do not bother to learn English in order to communicate with American citizens, help cause wage deflation and stagnation, commit serious crimes, and demand social system benefits, like schooling and welfare, clog up our health system, even causing emergency rooms to close. They want signs, forms, phone prompts, and other things in their language. They aren’t humbled, and do not seem to want to be a part of America. Many are demanding that parts of the Southwest US be returned to Mexico, a nation that didn’t want them in the first place.
This is the goal: create a new dependent citizenry beholden to Democrats.
Read: LA Times Wonders If Resident Non-citizens Should Be Able To Vote »
