House votes in favor of illegal immigrant voting

TailsMK4

  • Togepi Egg
    • 527
    Posts
    6
    Years
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/8/house-votes-favor-illegal-immigrant-voting/

    It's unbelievable to me now how much the party has changed. Things that the Democrats wouldn't even consider in the Bush/Obama era are now being front and center. I used to think that the Democrat party offered a different view on issues and should be considered to form bi-partisan approaches. However, the Democrat party has changed so much that I can't take this seriously anymore. I can't imagine anyone that has actually read up on the ideals the freshmen are pursuing now would support the new faces of the party. Right now illegal immigrants are barred from voting in federal elections, but you will bet this party would seek to overturn that. Thoughts on the Democratic House now, after reading about this and other top news from the House?
     
    The House Dems couldn't even condemn by name one of theirs for anti Semitic comments.
     
    Last edited:
    It's apparently part of a larger bill about voting rights and such. You can read the bill here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1/text

    Too many words though for me to bother finding the part about allowing illegal immigrants to vote

    It'd be strange though if they're seriously considering giving the right to vote to illegal immigrants before legal ones.
     
    Nah said:
    It's apparently part of a larger bill about voting rights and such. You can read the bill here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1/text

    Too many words though for me to bother finding the part about allowing illegal immigrants to vote

    It'd be strange though if they're seriously considering giving the right to vote to illegal immigrants before legal ones.
    Click to expand...

    It took a painfully long time but the resolution was SEC. 11003. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

    A full transcript can be found here, I would suggest anyone that wants to look through this use the find function on your browser.

    https://www.congress.gov/congressio...rch":["allowing+illegal+immigrants"]}&s=7&r=3
     
    Last edited:
    EnglishALT said:
    It took a painfully long time but the resolution was SEC. 11003. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

    A full transcript can be found here, I would suggest anyone that wants to look through this use the find function on your browser.

    https://www.congress.gov/congressio...rch":["allowing+illegal+immigrants"]}&s=7&r=3
    Click to expand...

    I knew there was a record somewhere, but thank you for finding it.

    Whether or not this was accepted or rejected matters not right now, but the point I was trying to make was that only 6 Democrats in the party approved of this measure, the rest rejected it. Does this mean the Democrat party is wanting to give illegal immigrants the right to vote? The right (which I am part of, but I do my research before drawing conclusions), says this is the case, and to me there is some truth to this. Not every Democrat will support this, but my viewing is an increasing number of Democrats would rather push their agenda and help bolster their re-election efforts rather than try to help solve problems (including climate change as a result of air pollution and fracking), in a bi-partisan fashion (most politicians do, but this seems to be excessive to me). For this thread, I'm saying that maybe it's not a majority of Democrats right now, but the Democrats are looking for any way possible to regain control of the country, just because they couldn't win in 2016, and illegal immigrants being able to vote seems to be part of that agenda.
     
    I'm all for expanding voting rights to ensure legal citizens have the means to vote, especially given that voting is a fundamental right in the US. But allowing illegal immigrants to vote, even at the municipal level, does not make any sense. The purpose of republicanism is that citizens can choose who makes and enforces their laws. Why should non-citizens have a say in who "rules" (not quite the right connotation, but you get the idea) over citizens? It's absolutely ridiculous.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top