Do you think citizenship / suffrage should be more restrictive? (Poll)

[Infohawk]

The history of democracy has been about more and more people getting the vote and the name citizens. In the ancient world, citizenship carried real responsibility: risking your life in battle when called by the city. In the Roman, citizenship was a mark of honor.

Now I'm not suggesting we return to citizenship for only white property owners. But sometimes it seems like we've gone too far. Any old numbnut is born a citizen. Anybody who crosses a river or lands on a plane and sticks around a while can become a citizen.

I am aware that historically citizenship tests have been used to discriminate in the US. However, with Obama I think we are institutionally beyond that.

So, do you support putting more limits on citizenship? If so, what do you suggest the limits be?

I do. I think a good start is some sort of showing of education. This does not have to be through a university or school, but can be through self-learning as well. If you can't read and write, how can you really have anything to offer in a modern society. I'm also okay with a system where only those willing to serve their country in DEFENSIVE wars be citizens.

Of course, the law would apply to everyone including non-citizens equally. The only difference is that citizens would make the law. This right to make law and the right to be in the military would be the only privileges of citizenship.

EDIT: MY SUGGESTIONS ARE NOT LIMITED TO FOREIGNERS. I AM SAYING THAT EVERYONE, EVEN THOSE BORN IN AMERICA OR TO AMERICAN PARENTS, WOULD HAVE TO PROVE THEMSELVES EACH GENERATION. THE FAT WHITE KID OF ENGLISH-GERMAN DESCENT DOWN THE STREET WOULD EVENTUALLY HAVE TO PROVE HIMSELF.

 

[Anarchist420]

I believe the 14th Amendment should be repealed and immigration requirements should be stricter. I also don't think Federal Government service should be offered in languages other than English, including ballots.

 

[Robor]

I believe the 14th Amendment should be repealed and immigration requirements should be stricter. I also don't think Federal Government service should be offered in languages other than English, including ballots.

Oh, joy. Another sock puppet.

Immigration (as in legal) is already a royal pain in the ass but you wouldn't know that if you never dealt with the USCIS (which you obviously haven't).

FWIW, I voted 'No. We should expand the right to vote even more.' but it's not about voting. I just think the USCIS badly needs reform.

 

[Anarchist420]

This is really one of the only things I'm not libertarian about (the other being abortion), but the truth is, illegal aliens are a drain on society, especially with all of the welfare we have here and they take jobs from poor citizens.

 

[Robor]

This is really one of the only things I'm not libertarian about (the other being abortion), but the truth is, illegal aliens are a drain on society, especially with all of the welfare we have here and they take jobs from poor citizens.

Illegal aliens don't vote. You have to be a citizen - either by birth or naturalization - to vote.

 

[shortylickens]

Overall I am fine with the current immigration policy. But I do know lots of legal immigrants who are unhappy about all the shit they had to go through yet this country allows 11 million illegals to wander around without learning English, paying taxes and behaving like a proper citizen.

I am in favor of anything that kicks out all the current illegal aliens. Reagan gave them all amnesty back in the 80's and it only made the problem worse.

As for current legal immigrants and citizens, yes, I think you should have to earn it. Like in Starship Troopers (the book, not the movie).

 

[jhu]

This is really one of the only things I'm not libertarian about (the other being abortion), but the truth is, illegal aliens are a drain on society, especially with all of the welfare we have here and they take jobs from poor citizens.

Uh, what? If anything they bring prices down since they're doing all the fruit picking that the rest of the poor citizens don't want to do! I'm not advocating illegal immigration, but the argument about taking away jobs is complete BS.

 

[Jaskalas]

If the requirement is simply to read/write English that would be enough for me.

Frankly I'm concerned with beginning down the road of tests ending up where only sycophants pass muster. If to do no harm we must ensure everyone is a voter then so be it.

 

[Infohawk]

If the requirement is simply to read/write English that would be enough for me.

Frankly I'm concerned with beginning down the road of tests ending up where only sycophants pass muster. If to do no harm we must ensure everyone is a voter then so be it.

That's a fair and real concern. But I do think it's possible to make more complex tests without making it a loyalty test.

For example, testing for a large enough vocabulary, which essentially translates into being well read, requires no loyalty. Questions would have to be factual and not analytical (although I would support a mathematical portion to test basic reasoning skills). As far as I know all religions and parties still agree that where 1x=2, x is 2.

 

[Infohawk]

As for current legal immigrants and citizens, yes, I think you should have to earn it. Like in Starship Troopers (the book, not the movie).

How do they have to earn it in the book?

 

[Carmen813]

I am 100% against a test of any sort being forced on people in order to vote at the polls. We've been down this road before.

We should be expanding the right to vote and taking steps to eliminate fraud.

 

[Craig234]

The better question is, do you believe people should live under the power of government without any say in the government, without representation?

We have pretty much already answered 'yes' to that for most Americans insofar as we've let money dominate our elections, but there's still a principle when it comes to voting.

The key point I once realized is, voting isn't about picking the 'best person'. It's about the civil right for people to have a say in their government, however good or bad the right is used.

 

[Craig234]

How do they have to earn it in the book?

It's a misguided notion that only those who join the military can vote. Bad right-wing ideology.

 

[Craig234]

I am 100% against a test of any sort being forced on people in order to vote at the polls. We've been down this road before.

Agreed.

We should be expanding the right to vote and taking steps to eliminate fraud.

Fraud is a very minor issue. The dominatin of money in the system is the problem.

 

[Infohawk]

The better question is, do you believe people should live under the power of government without any say in the government, without representation?

We have pretty much already answered 'yes' to that for most Americans insofar as we've let money dominate our elections, but there's still a principle when it comes to voting.

The key point I once realized is, voting isn't about picking the 'best person'. It's about the civil right for people to have a say in their government, however good or bad the right is used.

This is also a valid point. Stated in a different way, allowing everyone to vote decreases the risk of revolt and social tensions. BUT it seems like many people have essentially abdicated their right to vote anyway by failing to care for so long. And again, anybody with a strong enough desire for change would still be able to pass the test if they improved themselves enough.

 

[Infohawk]

It's a misguided notion that only those who join the military can vote. Bad right-wing ideology.

Isn't that the same as the movie?

 

[Craig234]

Isn't that the same as the movie?

I would assume so, since it's based on the book. I've avoided the movie.

 

[Carmen813]

Agreed.



Fraud is a very minor issue. The dominatin of money in the system is the problem.

I agree that money is probably a bigger problem then fraud, but then again, I didn't specify only voter fraud. Fraud of any sort is obviously a corrupting influence.

I'm not sure what the best way to reduce the amount of money in the system would be. I've been kicking around the idea of 100% taxpayer funded campaigns, but that presents it's own problems.

 

[Craig234]

I agree that money is probably a bigger problem then fraud, but then again, I didn't specify only voter fraud. Fraud of any sort is obviously a corrupting influence.

I'm not sure what the best way to reduce the amount of money in the system would be. I've been kicking around the idea of 100% taxpayer funded campaigns, but that presents it's own problems.

Money in the system isn't fraud, though. It's corruption. The answer is pretty easy: don't allow the money to dominate the system, with some combination of spending restrictions and subsidized campaigns.

The hard question is how to get that to happen now that our activist Supreme Court has put into our constitutional law the invention that the rights in the constitution extend to legal fictions, corporations.

One state had a creative approach to one issue - if a rich person spent a lot on their campaign, the state would pay the same to their opponent to equalize things. But IIRC, that was found unconstitutional.

Nancy Pelosi has created a panel to investigate what remedies are available under the new ruling, but there's not much optimism. A constitutional amendment seems itmight be the only thing to do.

 

[MotF Bane]

I see nothing particularly wrong with the legal immigration system right now, but it is not something I've looked into in detail. Illegal immigration is not related to this topic, so that can be left aside.

As for voting, as much as I would love to see some sort of a civics and literacy test, as an effort to increase the percentage of informed voters, I don't see such a measure as Constitutional.

 

[StageLeft]

Maybe not citizenship. it's now how the world works; you kind of need a citizenship if only for travel purposes. For actual direction, i.e. voting I do truly believe there should be a requirement beyond basic citizenship. Too many voters are frankly and demonstrably so ignorant they do not understand anything beyond their emotional response to issues and they should not be voting.

 

[Danube]

The anchor baby thing needs to end. If American parents have a kid on American soil ok they are citizen. If foreigners come to US to have a baby to get citizenship for it (and bennies for them) then that's crazy.

Citizens on welfare should forfeit their vote while they are on it since they just vote themselves into the treasury.

 

[cubby1223]

The hard question is how to get that to happen now that our activist Supreme Court has put into our constitutional law the invention that the rights in the constitution extend to legal fictions, corporations.

...and your argument has now completely fallen apart

nice try, though

 

[Craig234]

...and your argument has now completely fallen apart

nice try, though

t's too bad your parents didn't provide for you to get educated on how to argue a point, but the Supreme Court accepting pressure from corporations to be entitled to rights as 'persons' is judicial activitism.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I would support a two-tiered citizen system.

The basic level requires citizenship status, meaning born to American parents, or completing a strict immigration process (background check, language proficiency, cultural education, etc...maybe even mandatory community service, but maybe not). It would affirm ALL basic rights and protections. Every citizen must be allowed to vote (even if they'll use it stupidly), every citizen must have their Constitutional rights and basic human protections, etc.

The advanced level requires service to your country (military, humanitarian, economic, etc). In addition to the standard protections it earns you access to government programs (unemployment, ss, health care, grants, loans, etc). I am willing to entertain the possibility of more voting powers, tax breaks, etc, but I don't know that it'd work out.

The theory is, if you're willing to use some of your life to take care of your country and those who reside in it, the country (and ALL citizens in it) owe you a debt. If you'd rather live only for yourself and be left alone, that's perfectly fine - but you'll get no support from those you choose not to support.