Who lets foreigners vote?

I know that some States allow local jurisdications to give foreigners the vote, though only, of course, in elections in those jurisdictions. Somehwere in Maryland allows all resident aliens to vote in City and school board elections.

Legal residents in Chile were allowd to vote in the plebiscite that ousted Pinochet

Takoma Park, maryland allows noncitizens to vote in local elections.

Noncitizens with children in the public schools can vote in local school board elections in Chicago. The same was true in NYC until local school boards were eliminated here a couple of years ago.
Thee’s fairly active movement to allow noncitizens to vote in other elections — there are no Consitutional impediments as far as local elections are concerned. (And maybe not for federal elections either — not sure about this.)

More interestingly, most states allowed noncitizens to vote in at least some elections during the 19th century.

If the brits seriously want to move republican voters in ohio, they should write to Polish voters to have them write to Republican voters in Ohio. Poland is in Rumsfeld approved New Europe. The message should be something along the lines of Bush having a secret plan to make peace with Chirac.

I had an interesting conversation with a college from the Czech Republic. His main point was that the choices made by the US President effect the rest of the world. Because of this, everyone should have a say in who becomes the US President. Neither the Bush supporters nor the Kerry supporters thought this was a good idea.

“His main point was that the choices made by the US President effect the rest of the world. Because of this, everyone should have a say in who becomes the US President”

But if you put the point to him that the decisions of the rest of the world affected the US therefore America should have a say in the affairs of the rest of the World – including Czeh, somehow I’m sure he’d disagree.

like james’s colleague, I have thought about the “right” of people elsewhere in the world having some vote in the US elections. like electoral votes, determined by a winner take all vote in each of the countries. giles objection makes sense as well, but one needs to take into account the disproportionality of influence. that is, i believe what the US does affects Czech Republic more than the other way around. How milght this be measured and the votes scaled accordingly. after all in the US, we have somewhat the same problem in that votes in Mississippi can affect my future in Massachusetts and vice versa.

there is also the fact, that views and thoughts in one country have influenced happennings in another, viz., world public opinion, political thought, etc. a fact that oppressive regimes and others recognize through censorship, radio jamming, etc. hence the ignorance or perhaps autism the bush administration would want us to have toward the rest of the world is rather sad. truly a closing of the American mind.

The letter writing campaign is one of the stupidest ideas I’ve heard in some time. Rich is right, most Americans are fiercely independent and would resent being told who to vote for. I’ve lived in the US for seven years and I’m still very careful when I tell my American friends my opinions politically, particularly when I think they’re drastically wrong (i.e. they’re going to vote for Bush). If Guardian readers want to have the most effect on the election they should write to their own MPs and get them to withdraw British troops from Iraq.

perianwyr: that’s a very good change on the old saw “if you don’t like it here, leave,” viz., “if you don’t like it here, move here.” but if, as the pundits of globalization tell us, our ties across political borders will intensify, why should not governments to the point that the borders dissovle or change?

Well, it’s a better song than the damned British national anthem.

And speaking as a regular Guardian reader, I thought the letter writing campaign was a rather dubious idea for precisely the reasons that have been given. How would I feel if I got a letter from (stereotype warning, OK?) some bible-bashing right-wing American, or indeed some earnest liberal American, telling me how I should vote in the general election next year? Still, I understand the impulse behind it; I share that frustration at not having any say in US elections that have so much impact beyond the US.

One of my former students David Earnest wrote a dissertation on the topic. Many democracies have some possibility for resident aliens to vote but countries differ greatly in the extent to which this is discriminatory (e.g. only nationals of former colonies/EU), whether local jurisdictions have discretion (as in the U.S.) and whether the possibility only exists for local/national elections.

“Isn’t it enough that foreigners bear the cost of greenhouse gasses which Americans pump into the atmosphere? Have they got to pay US taxes too?”

Unless the rest of the world has discovered and put into use an entirely new and completely non-polluting industrial powersource, I don’t see that this oh-so-ideologically-correct riposte makes much sense, Michael. The last I looked, Europe and Japan produced quite a fair bit of greenhouse gasses. My own country, Canada, is also a massive producer of pollution as well, Kyoto Treaty support window-dressing to the contrary. Never mind the massive and increasing amounts of pollution produced my developing industrial states like Mexico, Brazil, India, China, etc. etc….

Your response also ignores the fact that a fair bit of the world economy is supported by the US industrial growth. They don’t produce pollution just to spite you, you know.

Nice ideological models may be comforting and bring a false clarity, but they’re woefully inadequate for addressing problems in the messy real world.

The reaction of anger and insult to the Guardian’s suggestion is interesting when you think of the wider world stage right now. Americans don’t want foreigners to even think of telling them how to vote, while at thes same time these Americans think nothing of invading other countries for no good reason, stealing their resources, and — although knowing nothing of their history, culture and language — feeling very self righteous as they order about, with imperturbable sang-froid and stupidity, the natives. Shockingly enough, instead of acknowledging their racial and cultural inferiority and being forever grateful to the great white American bwanas, the Iraqis actually take pot shots at em. The gall of some people!

the decisions of the rest of the world affected the US therefore America should have a say in the affairs of the rest of the World

Ah, but America does have a say in the affairs of the rest of the world, thanks to the CIA and the U.S. military. You know, between Pinochet, the Shah, Saddam (in), Saddam (out), Duvulier (in), Duvulier (out), Noriega (in), Noriega (out), etc., etc., I’ve just about become convinced that no government rules without the implied consent of the U.S. Department of State.

From a US citizen’s perspective. The “sin” the US committed in Iraq is not one of getting involved in another countries affairs. The US is asked to do that all the time. Its not even one of sending troops to another country. The US is asked to do that frequently. The “sin” is the failing to act with out the consent of the more vocal members of the European community.