Boston Officials to “Explore” Giving Foreign Citizens Voting Rights



The Revolutionary patriots might be rolling over in their graves today as the Boston City Council meets to “explore” the proposition of extending to non-U.S. citizens the privilege and right to vote.

“All members of a community should have the right to participate and be included in the governance of that community,” said Council President Andrea Campbell in the order she filed with the council before Tuesday’s hearing.

Campbell’s order would give voting privileges to green card holders, legal permanent residents and to other visa holders and those benefitting from Temporary Protected and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) status. While illegal aliens are not presently on the table, giving lawbreakers the right to vote was part of Campbell’s plan earlier this year.

“I want to have conversations about how noncitizens can fully participate and come out of the shadows to do so. These residents generate millions in taxes coming from folks who are identified as undocumented, DACA, legal permanent residents as well as having green cards. We should be open-minded and keep it open as to how they could participate,” she said.

Even for liberal Boston, that was too far for some of her colleagues.

“Voting is a U.S. citizen’s privilege, it’s the ultimate privilege. And I for one will continue to fight that it remains that way. … Voting for noncitizens is a step too far,” said Hyde Park City Councilor Tim McCarthy at the time, according to the Boston Herald.

Any change in law would have to be approved by the full council and then by the mayor, the Legislature and the governor.

In addition, the order states it is the “responsibility” of “local governments” to “explore inclusive practices including providing documents in multiple languages and interpretation services at meetings and events” sponsored by the City. There is no price tag yet on costs associated with providing transcription and translation for the hundreds and thousands of annual events in Boston.

Speaking of language, none has been released yet, so it remains unclear exactly who will be included under Campbell’s “welcoming” umbrella.

 

About Author

avatar

Jennifer joined FAIR as Web Content Writer in 2017 and brings to the role extensive communications and media background. She began her career as a policy research analyst on multiple national and state political campaigns before entering journalism. In addition to spending over a decade writing for several broadcast and print news outlets, Jennifer directed communications strategy for a member of Congress and a military nonprofit.

6 Comments

  1. avatar

    The law states that only US citizens can vote in federal elections. There is no such legal requirement for municipal elections. Given the law, why in God’s good name should we care about a local municipality giving its local residents a perfectly legal local vote? Focus on things that matter instead of pearl clutching for no good reason.

    • avatar
      Reverend john David on

      Because they don’t belong here in the first place. Second, that why the liberals want to give them the right to vote because they lost the White House and are acting like a bunch of kidnigarders (misspelled). They just can’t stand it, just ask Maxine waters. Boy are you people dumb.😋

  2. avatar

    Liberals are objecting to the DNA tests being given to the children of illegals. That kind of proves that they are more interested in putting on a show, with the cooperation of the media, than actual concern for the children. It’s already been repeatedly proven that in many cases those are not their own kids, but are being used to secure entry in this country because it is harder to remove the adults when they have children with them. Fits the definition of anchor babies, even if not their own. A lot of them are paid to bring in the children of other adults who are already here and established in the country. That begs the question of what interest do these smugglers really have in the children, other than as a source of money. Are they “disposable” when they are no longer of use?

    It’s beyond dispute, per annual reports by Amnesty International, that female children as young as 12 are sexually assaulted on the way through Mexico, to the point many are given birth control for the journey. It is also beyond dispute that many of the children “placed” with families here simply are unable to be found or accounted for, the so-called “missing” children. Would not an American taking care of a foster child be charged with a crime if that child were no longer with the person they were placed with? But apparently immigration “advocates” and the media don’t seem to be interested in those little details.

    • avatar
      Patricia Watkins on

      This is the thing with rabid liberal Democrats, you give them an inch (or they just take an inch) and then they will take a mile. Instead of supporting our nation’s immigration laws and respecting our sovereign borders, they want to make it a free for all. They don’t look at illegals as aliens or as breaking federal immigration laws. They don’t want U.S. citizenship to be the highest privilege for America. They just want to give it all away. They want to make illegals and non-citizens equal to legal American citizens. If they had their way, being a citizen would mean nothing.

      • avatar
        Bridget Palecek on

        If non citizens have the right to vote there is no need for them to become citizens. If there is no difference between a green card holder and a citizen of the United States it would be everybody and any body’s country and people would be voting in multiple country’s. How would you ever untangle a mess like that?

Leave A Reply