Full Version: Illegal aliens voting in school board elections?
San Jose Mercury: S.F. may give non-citizens school board voting rights...
In a push to get more immigrants involved in their children's education, San Francisco officials are considering asking voters in November to give parents who are not U.S. citizens the right to vote in school board elections.
Under the proposed ballot initiative, even illegal immigrants would be able to vote, so long as they are parents with kids in public schools.
Man... they must get the "good stuff" up there...
I was watching Dennis Miller Live this evening when I heard about this proposed measure which would allow illegal aliens who have children attending area schools to vote in the school board elections.
(Also from the link)
I just had to point that out.
So is this a good idea or not?
Do the precendents that are cited (Non-citizen voting in Chicago and New York) make this a sound idea?
And not to open another can of worms as far as the illegal immigration debate goes but...
Is this right, period?
Well, I personally think that whether or not it's worked in New York and Chicago, this is a bad idea. This sabotages the concept of gaining legal citizenship. Not to mention that this is an outdated measure from a time when immigrants actually went to get their US citizenship once they got here. Nowadays it's become a validation to break the law.
As far as "Is this right, period" goes. Of course not. THEY"RE ILLEGAL.
To go back to that quote:
Mr. Perez seems to think that he's entitled to the right to vote because the decisions that are made in the school board affect his child. I wonder if he knows that his choice, as well as others in California who have entered the United States illegally, costs this state dearly.
To those in this fourm who have children and reside in the great state of California, pay close attention to this stat.
California spends $2.2 billion dollars educating illegal immigrant children
$2.2 BILLION!
In Los Angeles County, here in SoCal, illegal immigrants who use ERs as free clinics cost county and state taxpayers $340 million dollars... every year.
$340MILLION ANNUALLY
So excuse me if I think this is completely insane.
To quote Dennis Miller tonight...
"If you look under the part of the Statue of Liberty that says '..give me your tired, huddled masses...' it reads ...but please sign the guestbook for God's sake!"
QUOTE
In a push to get more immigrants involved in their children's education, San Francisco officials are considering asking voters in November to give parents who are not U.S. citizens the right to vote in school board elections.
Under the proposed ballot initiative, even illegal immigrants would be able to vote, so long as they are parents with kids in public schools.
Man... they must get the "good stuff" up there...
I was watching Dennis Miller Live this evening when I heard about this proposed measure which would allow illegal aliens who have children attending area schools to vote in the school board elections.
(Also from the link)
QUOTE
For immigrant parents like Miguel Perez, a permanent resident whose daughter attends a San Francisco elementary school, the right to vote in the school board elections boils down to a basic democratic principle: no taxation without representation.
``We want to have the right to choose because this affects our daily lives,'' said Perez, a member of an immigrant rights group that supports the proposal.
``We want to have the right to choose because this affects our daily lives,'' said Perez, a member of an immigrant rights group that supports the proposal.
I just had to point that out.
So is this a good idea or not?
Do the precendents that are cited (Non-citizen voting in Chicago and New York) make this a sound idea?
And not to open another can of worms as far as the illegal immigration debate goes but...
Is this right, period?
Well, I personally think that whether or not it's worked in New York and Chicago, this is a bad idea. This sabotages the concept of gaining legal citizenship. Not to mention that this is an outdated measure from a time when immigrants actually went to get their US citizenship once they got here. Nowadays it's become a validation to break the law.
As far as "Is this right, period" goes. Of course not. THEY"RE ILLEGAL.
To go back to that quote:
QUOTE
For immigrant parents like Miguel Perez, a permanent resident whose daughter attends a San Francisco elementary school, the right to vote in the school board elections boils down to a basic democratic principle: no taxation without representation.
"We want to have the right to choose because this affects our daily lives,'' said Perez, a member of an immigrant rights group that supports the proposal.
"We want to have the right to choose because this affects our daily lives,'' said Perez, a member of an immigrant rights group that supports the proposal.
Mr. Perez seems to think that he's entitled to the right to vote because the decisions that are made in the school board affect his child. I wonder if he knows that his choice, as well as others in California who have entered the United States illegally, costs this state dearly.
To those in this fourm who have children and reside in the great state of California, pay close attention to this stat.
California spends $2.2 billion dollars educating illegal immigrant children
$2.2 BILLION!
In Los Angeles County, here in SoCal, illegal immigrants who use ERs as free clinics cost county and state taxpayers $340 million dollars... every year.
$340MILLION ANNUALLY
So excuse me if I think this is completely insane.
To quote Dennis Miller tonight...
"If you look under the part of the Statue of Liberty that says '..give me your tired, huddled masses...' it reads ...but please sign the guestbook for God's sake!"
No I don't think this is a good idea. Mr. Gonzalez makes his wishes apparent here:
His intention, as it appears to me has nothing to do with the children or the parents being involved but it has to do with opening all municipal elections to ILLEGAL immigrants.
And Miguel Perez thinks he has a right?? Because he moved here illegally and is benefitting from a free school system? Sorry, get your citizenship, come to this country legally and then YOU HAVE a RIGHT.
Ok, blatantly this person supports less immigration. While I don't mind legal immigration to this country, she has point. The PTA is a very nice avenue to participate in your child's education. Also staying in touch with the child's teacher's, looking at their homework, discussing the day with your child, all are other avenues where a Parent can be involved with their child's education.
QUOTE
``The idea here is not so radical,'' said Matt Gonzalez, president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and author of the proposal. ``Ultimately, we'd like non-citizen voting in all municipal elections. This is a starting place.''
His intention, as it appears to me has nothing to do with the children or the parents being involved but it has to do with opening all municipal elections to ILLEGAL immigrants.
QUOTE
``We want to have the right to choose because this affects our daily lives,'' said Perez, a member of an immigrant rights group that supports the proposal.
And Miguel Perez thinks he has a right?? Because he moved here illegally and is benefitting from a free school system? Sorry, get your citizenship, come to this country legally and then YOU HAVE a RIGHT.
QUOTE
What's more, non-citizen parents have plenty of other avenues to participate in their children's education, such as the Parent Teacher Association, said Brenda Walker, spokeswoman for the Bay Area Coalition for Immigration Reform, a Berkeley-based group that supports reduction in U.S. immigration.
Ok, blatantly this person supports less immigration. While I don't mind legal immigration to this country, she has point. The PTA is a very nice avenue to participate in your child's education. Also staying in touch with the child's teacher's, looking at their homework, discussing the day with your child, all are other avenues where a Parent can be involved with their child's education.
So is this a good idea or not?
No, it isn't a good idea and I won't be voting for it in November.
The intent here is to get parents who are illegal immigrants more involved in their children's schools. The people who are sponsoring this proposition think the best way to do this is to give them the ability to vote on the school board. I respectfully disagree, these parents can get involved in any number of other ways such as joining organizations like the PTA.
This is a flawed argument, because most illiegal immigrants do not pay state or federal taxes. In the case of San Francisco very few of them own property (in order to pay property taxes to support schools). The median price for a home in the bay area is in excess of 500K, I do not know very many immigrants that can afford that. Therefore Mr. Perez is asking for Representation without Taxation, no sir it doesn't work that way.
If it effects his constituents daily life so much then they would march over to the INS over on Washington and Sansomme and apply for citizenship and this would be a non-issue.
Do the precendents that are cited (Non-citizen voting in Chicago and New York) make this a sound idea?
This is not a good idea for California which has one of the largest problems with illegal immigrants in the United States. There have been several attempts in this state recently to give illegal immigrants rights without them being citizens. I firmly disagree with these attempts because to me citizenship actually means something and I don't take kindly to others expecting the benefits of citizenship without paying the price for it. Almost all of these attempts have been cheap political ploys to garner the latino vote in the state (*cough* Gray Davis *cough*).
If this were to pass in San Francisco it would inevitably spread to other cities in the Bay Area because we generally lead the way as far as policy goes. After that I would imagine that similar measures might make it onto So Cal ballots in the future.
Is this right, period?
No it isn't, these people are illegal immigrants meaning they are here illegally. I do not agree with conferring the benefits of citizenship upon people without expecting them to pay for those benefits as the rest of us pay for them (i.e taxes, selective service, social security, etc).
I'm sure that the people that created this ballot initiative for San Francisco had good intentions, but they are going about this in the wrong way. But the thing people must understand about San Francisco is the uniqueness of the city as far as politics go. We are probably the only city in the US where the two party system consists of Democrats and Greens. Ridiculous things like this end up on the ballot all the time, they are usually soundly defeated -- it happened last year, it'll happen this year too.
No, it isn't a good idea and I won't be voting for it in November.
The intent here is to get parents who are illegal immigrants more involved in their children's schools. The people who are sponsoring this proposition think the best way to do this is to give them the ability to vote on the school board. I respectfully disagree, these parents can get involved in any number of other ways such as joining organizations like the PTA.
QUOTE
For immigrant parents like Miguel Perez, a permanent resident whose daughter attends a San Francisco elementary school, the right to vote in the school board elections boils down to a basic democratic principle: no taxation without representation.
This is a flawed argument, because most illiegal immigrants do not pay state or federal taxes. In the case of San Francisco very few of them own property (in order to pay property taxes to support schools). The median price for a home in the bay area is in excess of 500K, I do not know very many immigrants that can afford that. Therefore Mr. Perez is asking for Representation without Taxation, no sir it doesn't work that way.
QUOTE
``We want to have the right to choose because this affects our daily lives,'' said Perez, a member of an immigrant rights group that supports the proposal.
If it effects his constituents daily life so much then they would march over to the INS over on Washington and Sansomme and apply for citizenship and this would be a non-issue.
Do the precendents that are cited (Non-citizen voting in Chicago and New York) make this a sound idea?
This is not a good idea for California which has one of the largest problems with illegal immigrants in the United States. There have been several attempts in this state recently to give illegal immigrants rights without them being citizens. I firmly disagree with these attempts because to me citizenship actually means something and I don't take kindly to others expecting the benefits of citizenship without paying the price for it. Almost all of these attempts have been cheap political ploys to garner the latino vote in the state (*cough* Gray Davis *cough*).
If this were to pass in San Francisco it would inevitably spread to other cities in the Bay Area because we generally lead the way as far as policy goes. After that I would imagine that similar measures might make it onto So Cal ballots in the future.
Is this right, period?
No it isn't, these people are illegal immigrants meaning they are here illegally. I do not agree with conferring the benefits of citizenship upon people without expecting them to pay for those benefits as the rest of us pay for them (i.e taxes, selective service, social security, etc).
I'm sure that the people that created this ballot initiative for San Francisco had good intentions, but they are going about this in the wrong way. But the thing people must understand about San Francisco is the uniqueness of the city as far as politics go. We are probably the only city in the US where the two party system consists of Democrats and Greens. Ridiculous things like this end up on the ballot all the time, they are usually soundly defeated -- it happened last year, it'll happen this year too.
Horrible idea and I’m shocked.
I don’t know what infuriates me more: that this is even being considered (and has obviously been allowed in the past), or for whatever reason illegal aliens feel they have the right to vote.
If Mr Perez is illegal, then he has no social security number, pays no taxes, and has no right to vote. End of discussion.
Further, I’m appalled that here is an illegal alien who is so vocal that he has the audacity to take his voice to the streets (I’ll give him credit there) without fear of being deported, which to me is a flagrant lack of respect of our laws.
What’s next, his right to draw against social security for retirement when he’s contributed nothing to the fund?
I don’t know what infuriates me more: that this is even being considered (and has obviously been allowed in the past), or for whatever reason illegal aliens feel they have the right to vote.
If Mr Perez is illegal, then he has no social security number, pays no taxes, and has no right to vote. End of discussion.
Further, I’m appalled that here is an illegal alien who is so vocal that he has the audacity to take his voice to the streets (I’ll give him credit there) without fear of being deported, which to me is a flagrant lack of respect of our laws.
What’s next, his right to draw against social security for retirement when he’s contributed nothing to the fund?
i can't believe this is being considered. Allowing illegals, who suck off the government for billions and not contribute, to be allowed voting power when the constitution doesn't apply to them because they are not legal US citizens.
If this dip wants this right, then he should get his US citizenship, get a job and contribute to society rather then sucking off the federal government.
If this dip wants this right, then he should get his US citizenship, get a job and contribute to society rather then sucking off the federal government.
For what it's worth, there appears to be an embarrassing mistake made by a few posters here. There is certainly merit to discussing whether an illegal alien should be allowed to vote on representation (IMHO they should NOT). However this Miguel Perez quote from the Dennis Miller Show keeps referring to a "permanent resident".
Permanent residents are not illegals. If anyone is unclear about what the status means, they can read the USCIS web site itself.
http://uscis.gov/graphics/howdoi/legpermres.htm
Permanent residents are not illegals. If anyone is unclear about what the status means, they can read the USCIS web site itself.
http://uscis.gov/graphics/howdoi/legpermres.htm
However this Miguel Perez quote from the Dennis Miller Show keeps referring to a "permanent resident".
Permanent residents are not illegals. If anyone is unclear about what the status means, they can read the USCIS web site itself.
You forgot to include the following in your statement.
ILLEGAL immigrants are not and do not have the privilege of living and working permanently in the United States. Instead what they have done is broke the law. They remain ILLEGAL, and the ILLEGAL do not have voting privileges in the United States.
Permanent residents are not illegals. If anyone is unclear about what the status means, they can read the USCIS web site itself.
You forgot to include the following in your statement.
QUOTE
An immigrant is a foreign national who has been granted the privilege of living and working permanently in the United States.
ILLEGAL immigrants are not and do not have the privilege of living and working permanently in the United States. Instead what they have done is broke the law. They remain ILLEGAL, and the ILLEGAL do not have voting privileges in the United States.
QUOTE(yehoshua @ Sep 1 2004, 02:04 PM)
ILLEGAL immigrants are not and do not have the privilege of living and working permanently in the United States. Instead what they have done is broke the law. They remain ILLEGAL, and the ILLEGAL do not have voting privileges in the United States.
Exactly!
They don't belong here if they don't have legal status. So why is someone proposing giving them rights that only legal americans have?
They don't belong here if they don't have legal status. So why is someone proposing giving them rights that only legal americans have?
One anchronomy: M.E.Ch.A.
One anchronomy: M.E.Ch.A.
GoAmerica & yehoshua, please be constructive and provide substance by which others can debate you.
TOPICS:So is this a good idea or not?
Do the precendents that are cited (Non-citizen voting in Chicago and New York) make this a sound idea?
TOPICS:So is this a good idea or not?
Do the precendents that are cited (Non-citizen voting in Chicago and New York) make this a sound idea?
QUOTE(Titus @ Jul 13 2004, 08:46 PM)
To those in this fourm who have children and reside in the great state of California, pay close attention to this stat.
California spends $2.2 billion dollars educating illegal immigrant children
$2.2 BILLION!
In Los Angeles County, here in SoCal, illegal immigrants who use ERs as free clinics cost county and state taxpayers $340 million dollars... every year.
$340MILLION ANNUALLY
California spends $2.2 billion dollars educating illegal immigrant children
$2.2 BILLION!
In Los Angeles County, here in SoCal, illegal immigrants who use ERs as free clinics cost county and state taxpayers $340 million dollars... every year.
$340MILLION ANNUALLY
Thank you for pointing that out, Titus, to those who may be unaware of
the painful reality of what illegal immigration is doing to California. As
a So. Cal. resident I am affected greatly by such statistics.
It angers me that we, as a state, are allowing this unprecendented
influx of immigration. The tax-paying citizens are shouldering the
educational and medical costs for uneducated, criminals who have
somehow adopted the idea that they deserve everything handed to
them on a silver platter, just because they exist and because they
managed to sneak across the border.
QUOTE
Mr. Perez seems to think that he's entitled to the right to vote because
the decisions that are made in the school board affect his child. I wonder if he
knows that his choice, as well as others in California who have entered the United
States illegally, costs this state dearly.
the decisions that are made in the school board affect his child. I wonder if he
knows that his choice, as well as others in California who have entered the United
States illegally, costs this state dearly.
I have been inside public elementary schools, and was appalled at
what I saw. Overcrowded, cattle-like conditions for students. That
is why I opted to pay $980 a month to put my son through Kindergarten,
and I'll be making the same financial investment for first grade. Those
who are more adversely affected by decisions that are made by the school
board are those citizens who pay taxes, and are forced to deal with the
extremely unfavorable conditions that have become the "norm" in public
schools. Many Californians (legal ones) do not have the luxury of opting
out of public school education for their children, and they are the ones
who are left without a voice, in terms of decisions made by school boards.
This is one of the major reasons that my family and I will be relocating
to a different part of the country. Southern California is no place to
raise children..
I have been inside public elementary schools, and was appalled at
what I saw. Overcrowded, cattle-like conditions for students. That
is why I opted to pay $980 a month to put my son through Kindergarten,
and I'll be making the same financial investment for first grade. Those
who are more adversely affected by decisions that are made by the school
board are those citizens who pay taxes, and are forced to deal with the
extremely unfavorable conditions that have become the "norm" in public
schools. Many Californians (legal ones) do not have the luxury of opting
out of public school education for their children, and they are the ones
who are left without a voice, in terms of decisions made by school boards.
My wife homeschools my children for the very reason that the area I live in, the public school my children will have to go to have 50% ESL (English Second Language). With the program, the school thinks it is best not to divide the students and cause 'separation' but to throw them into one classroom making the teacher instruct half the class in English and half the class in Spanish. There is no benefit for my childs education.
what I saw. Overcrowded, cattle-like conditions for students. That
is why I opted to pay $980 a month to put my son through Kindergarten,
and I'll be making the same financial investment for first grade. Those
who are more adversely affected by decisions that are made by the school
board are those citizens who pay taxes, and are forced to deal with the
extremely unfavorable conditions that have become the "norm" in public
schools. Many Californians (legal ones) do not have the luxury of opting
out of public school education for their children, and they are the ones
who are left without a voice, in terms of decisions made by school boards.
My wife homeschools my children for the very reason that the area I live in, the public school my children will have to go to have 50% ESL (English Second Language). With the program, the school thinks it is best not to divide the students and cause 'separation' but to throw them into one classroom making the teacher instruct half the class in English and half the class in Spanish. There is no benefit for my childs education.
Can someone supply an article you don't have to register for? Please 
I just wonder why this topic was made to focus only on Illegal immigrants? Non-citizens can in fact be legal as someone already pointed out.
I think the issue should focus more on the legal residents....do you feel it is fair to welcome these people into our country..give them permission to work, demand they pay taxes, demand they send their children to school and then in return give them no voice in the school itself? What if the child is in fact an American citizen..do you feel they should be given political representation through their parents/guardians as all the other children are?
Ack! You are right yehoshua...just think your kids could actually end up learning a second language! How horrible.
I just wonder why this topic was made to focus only on Illegal immigrants? Non-citizens can in fact be legal as someone already pointed out.
I think the issue should focus more on the legal residents....do you feel it is fair to welcome these people into our country..give them permission to work, demand they pay taxes, demand they send their children to school and then in return give them no voice in the school itself? What if the child is in fact an American citizen..do you feel they should be given political representation through their parents/guardians as all the other children are?
Ack! You are right yehoshua...just think your kids could actually end up learning a second language! How horrible.
I just wonder why this topic was made to focus only on Illegal immigrants? Non-citizens can in fact be legal as someone already pointed out.
You have to be a citizen to vote in the U.S.
I think the issue should focus more on the legal residents....do you feel it is fair to welcome these people into our country..give them permission to work, demand they pay taxes, demand they send their children to school and then in return give them no voice in the school itself?
You do not have to pay taxes in the U.S. if you are an Immigrant.
What if the child is in fact an American citizen..do you feel they should be given political representation through their parents/guardians as all the other children are?
Why not become legal?
Your right yehoshua...just think you kids could actually end up learning a second language!
My kids already know a second language. But that wasn't the point. The education of the children are down played because it is hard for a teacher to explain everything once in english and then again in spanish.
You have to be a citizen to vote in the U.S.
QUOTE
The right to vote is sometimes referred to as "suffrage." The right of suffrage in the United States is currently enjoyed by all citizens over the age of eighteen.
(Source)I think the issue should focus more on the legal residents....do you feel it is fair to welcome these people into our country..give them permission to work, demand they pay taxes, demand they send their children to school and then in return give them no voice in the school itself?
You do not have to pay taxes in the U.S. if you are an Immigrant.
QUOTE
You are exempt from U.S. tax by an income tax treaty, consular agreement, or international agreement between the United States and your country...
(Source)What if the child is in fact an American citizen..do you feel they should be given political representation through their parents/guardians as all the other children are?
Why not become legal?
Your right yehoshua...just think you kids could actually end up learning a second language!
My kids already know a second language. But that wasn't the point. The education of the children are down played because it is hard for a teacher to explain everything once in english and then again in spanish.
QUOTE(yehoshua @ Sep 2 2004, 04:20 PM)
I think the issue should focus more on the legal residents....do you feel it is fair to welcome these people into our country..give them permission to work, demand they pay taxes, demand they send their children to school and then in return give them no voice in the school itself?
You do not have to pay taxes in the U.S. if you are an Immigrant.
(Source)
You do not have to pay taxes in the U.S. if you are an Immigrant.
(Source)
Legal resident carries a connotation that immigrant does not. Your source addresses a lot of what-if's and maybe situations when it defines what workers born outside the U.S. are exempt from paying U.S. taxes. Chances are if you're working for an outside body within the U.S. you're not automatically seen as an immigration candidate. Hint: Employees of Foreign Governments or International Organizations.
A majority of immigrants, legal and illegal, work for regular businesses, not foreign governments and international organizations. Even seasonal migrant workers pay taxes unless paid under the table. Why obfuscate the difference with a blanket statement like "You do not have to pay taxes in the U.S. if you are an Immigrant?"
So is this a good idea or not?
Bad idea. Our naturalization process isn't so clogged up that it takes years to swear the oath. It took my mother 6 months from start to finish in South Florida. Encouraging people to naturalize encourages them to participate in politics instead of relying on proxy representation through PACs.
Most illegal immigrants pay taxes because they do not want to be seen as illegal immigrants. And most illegal immigrants use the services supplied by the government (emergency room health care, roads, police, fire, schools, housing). However do they pay in more then they use?
NO.
ILLEGAL cost: $2,700 more then what the put in.
The point being that the argument is bad to say 'they pay taxes so they should vote. No they should vote because they are a citizen over the age of 18.
NO.
ILLEGAL cost: $2,700 more then what the put in.
The point being that the argument is bad to say 'they pay taxes so they should vote. No they should vote because they are a citizen over the age of 18.
QUOTE(yehoshua @ Sep 2 2004, 05:09 PM)
Most illegal immigrants pay taxes because they do not want to be seen as illegal immigrants. And most illegal immigrants use the services supplied by the government (emergency room health care, roads, police, fire, schools, housing). However do they pay in more then they use?
NO.
ILLEGAL cost: $2,700 more then what the put in.
The point being that the argument is bad to say 'they pay taxes so they should vote. No they should vote because they are a citizen over the age of 18.
NO.
ILLEGAL cost: $2,700 more then what the put in.
The point being that the argument is bad to say 'they pay taxes so they should vote. No they should vote because they are a citizen over the age of 18.
Illegal immigrants probably take up more than they put in. Can you point out where bucket vouched for illegal immigrants?
Saying legal residents shouldn't vote for x, y, z reasons is fine. I support that opinion myself. Inferring legal residents and illegal aliens are equals in the eyes of the law... them are fightin' words.
I say it isn't a democracy unless everyone can vote. The problem isn't keeping people from voting, its finding people who are interested enough to know who they want to vote for. If it were up to me, I would even let a committed 16 year old vote if I was sure his parents didn't put him up to it.
Non-citizen residents were able to vote in 22 states and territories until the enactment of the National Origins Act of 1924. In 1996 it became a federal crime. Of course I can be philosophical, because I live in Chicago. When I lived in Chula Vista, CA, I may have held a different opinion.
Non-citizen residents were able to vote in 22 states and territories until the enactment of the National Origins Act of 1924. In 1996 it became a federal crime. Of course I can be philosophical, because I live in Chicago. When I lived in Chula Vista, CA, I may have held a different opinion.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.