[ Publications | Department | Projects | CIIJ
Way New News | Internet | SF State | Server ]
You won't have to imagine if either of two initiatives for non-citizen voting -- one proposed by City Supervisor Mabel Teng and another by Carlos Petroni of the Immigrant Rights Movement -- pass.
Though both proposals are aimed at allowing non-citizens to vote, there are key differences in Teng's and Petroni's proposals. Teng's "applies to only legal, permanent residents; applies only to school board and City College elections; and applies only to individuals who have children in school or who are of legal age and attend City College," according to a press release from Teng's office.
Petroni, who plans to run for the Board of Supervisors in November, co-authored the "San Francisco Immigrant Voting Rights Initiative" which includes voting rights for legal and illegal immigrants in all municipal elections.
"It is important that the differences between these two proposals are clearly understood," Teng said in a press release. "My proposal seeks to unify our city's schools and families through active participation in our children's education."
Petroni also notes the differences. He said many immigrants, such as refugees, can never achieve citizenship. "Twenty percent of the population are not citizens," Petroni said. "They have to pay taxes, serve in the military, and work here, but have no representation."
Frank Sproul, a San Francisco immigration attorney, said the two proposals are "contrary to the trend everywhere else. Most states are attempting to limit the rights of illegal and lawful immigrants."
For the "San Francisco Immigrant Rights Movement" to be placed on the November ballot, MDI must collect 10,510 signatures from registered voters by July 24. MDI ran into a mountain of a speedbump on April 29 when Superior Court Judge William Cahill halted the collection of signatures. Cahill said that the court saw "no possibility" of the initiative being constitutional.
Sproul said the Constitution only states that non-citizens cannot vote in federal elections and that allowing non-citizen voting lies within the state and municipal governments.
California Secretary of State Bill Jones also opposes non-citizen voting. "Secretary Jones will challenge the constitutionality of that every step of the way," Alfie Charles, a spokesman for Jones told the San Francisco Examiner. "Proposals like this send us in the opposite direction and run the risk of having all the work of the last couple of years to decrease the amount of fraud rendered worthless."
Non-citizen voting has been in effect since 1992 in Takoma Park, Md. According to Takoma Park Deputy City Clerk Thomas Espinosa, of the estimated 8,000 non-citizens in the city, 250 non-citizens are registered voters, but only 40 voted in the 1993 elections.
Six cities in Maryland, including Takoma Park, allow non-citizens to vote in municipal elections. Espinosa said many people consider these cities "progressive and color blind." But unlike San Francisco, with its 20 percent non-citizen population, Takoma Park's non-citizens make up fewer than 10 percent of the population.
Sproul believes that Teng's proposal would work with San Francisco's demographics and culture. "Why shouldn't they (non-citizens) have a voice?" he said.
Espinosa said non-citizen voters could have swung the election in Takoma Park's 1993 city council race when one candidate won by nine votes.
Teng's proposal is most similar to one in effect since 1968 in New York City, which allows non-citizens to vote solely in school board elections. In an editorial in the San Francisco Examiner, Teng wrote: "Our proposal is patterned after the system in New York City where non-citizen parents of school children are allowed to vote in school board elections. I believe a study of the benefits and experience of the New York system and its potential adaptability to San Francisco is worthwhile."
According to the Examiner, an April poll showed that 45 percent of those polled supported Teng's proposal while 44 percent opposed it. Teng's office did not comment on the results of the poll. "The results are surprising, but it depends on how the question was phrased," Sproul said.
San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown didn't provide a definite stand on the issue, but said, "It was an ill-timed and inappropriate measure to be placed on the ballot. You have to do developmental work, you have to educate the voting public before you assert that kind of an option and that kind of and opportunity. Clearly it's something that should be discussed."