Prohibiting Voting By Noncitizens in District of Columbia Elections

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I strongly oppose H.R. 884, which would repeal a law duly enacted by the District of Columbia because D.C. should be free to govern its own local matters.

Republicans claim that Congress has a constitutional duty to legislate on local D.C. matters, but this is historically and legally incorrect. Republicans legislate on local D.C. matters only when they think they can score political points, such as by demonizing immigrants.

Where is this passion and work on affordable housing for D.C. residents? Where is this impassioned work on ending gun violence for D.C. residents? They only bring it up to the floor when they think they can score political points, taking away the democratic rights of people here in D.C. and home rule.

The Framers expected Congress to establish a local government for D.C., and Congress has established various forms of local government for D.C. since 1802.

The Supreme Court has held that Congress may delegate to D.C. legislative authority over local D.C. matters. In 1973, Congress passed the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, which gave D.C. an elected chief executive and an elected legislature, the Mayor and the D.C. City Council. The purpose of the Home Rule Act is to ``grant to the inhabitants of the District of Columbia powers of local self- government'' and ``relieve Congress of the burden of legislating upon essentially local District matters.'' H.R. 884 contravenes the purpose of the Home Rule Act.

D.C.'s Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022 allows D.C. residents who are not yet U.S. citizens to vote only in local elections--namely, for Mayor, members of the city council, the State Board of Education, attorney general, advisory neighborhood commissioner, and ballot measures.

The D.C. law does not allow noncitizens to vote in Federal elections, which is a crime under Federal law.

Regardless of your views on the merits of noncitizen voting for local elections, we have to acknowledge that D.C. is not the first nor are they the only jurisdiction in our country to allow this. At various points throughout American history, Congress and 40 States have allowed noncitizens to vote in local, State, and territorial elections, including the home State of the sponsor of this bill.

Congress did not prohibit noncitizens from voting in Federal elections until 1996, and today, about 20 municipalities allow noncitizens to vote in local elections.

I also want to address very specific concerns that we are hearing from our Republican colleagues. Number one, they are concerned that foreign diplomats might vote in local D.C. elections. We believe, number one, that that is highly unlikely, both because they have to renounce their right to vote in their home country and because D.C. has no authority over Federal matters and has only limited local self- government.

In D.C., the penalty for voter fraud includes imprisonment for up to 5 years. To be eligible to vote in D.C., a person must maintain their residency in D.C. for at least 30 days before the election and cannot claim voting residence or the right to vote in any State, territory, or country.

In a letter to Congress, the D.C. Board of Elections made it clear that to vote in a D.C. local election, a foreign diplomat would have to ``effectively renounce their right to vote in their country of origin.'' The board noted that a foreign diplomat would have to ``swear under penalty of law through the D.C. registration application that that person is not claiming voting residence in another country.''

The board also noted that an embassy address could not be used to register to vote since it is considered a commercial or business address and that a foreign passport cannot be used to register to vote since it does not contain a residential address in D.C.

While Republicans are concerned about foreign diplomats voting in local elections, I wonder if they are aware that currently in this country, United States citizens who are registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act are currently allowed to vote in elections at all levels of government in the United States, including Federal elections. That is right. Registered foreign agents who are currently U.S. citizens can vote anywhere in the United States.

Republicans are also concerned that undocumented immigrants might vote in local D.C. elections. That is highly unlikely because the D.C. voter roll is a public record, and undocumented immigrants likely will not want to identify themselves, including their addresses.

In closing, the House of Representatives is considering the wrong D.C. voting rights bill here today. Republicans claim that voting is a core right or privilege of American citizenship. Not only is that historically incorrect, but as I described earlier, it is also hypocritical.

Republicans have fought tooth and nail to defeat legislation that would give the American citizens who reside in D.C. voting representation in the House and Senate. We, of course, continue to push for D.C. statehood.

Madam Speaker, I urge the House to reject H.R. 884 and, instead, to pass H.R. 51.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FROST. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the gentleman just asked our constituents to ask us what we think about this issue. I think the better thing would be for the gentleman to ask his constituents what they care about. I promise this issue will not be in the top 3 or 10 things that they want us to focus on.

At the same time, they are pushing a bill to take away healthcare from 15 million Americans. Give me a damn break.

D.C. believes in universal adult suffrage, that all adult D.C. residents, regardless of their immigration status, are subject to D.C. laws and taxation and must register with the Selective Service System. D.C. believes they deserve a say in the local laws that govern them and how their local taxes are spent.

Congress should not decide which residents are fit to govern on local D.C. matters. I promise the gentleman that if he spoke with his own constituents, they don't give a damn.

Norton).

Mr. Speaker, I think it is interesting because the gentlewoman who just spoke said this is about preserving ``our elections.''

This is not about our elections. It is not about my election. It is not about her election, being from New York. It is about the elections, the local elections, of residents of D.C. It is not about hers or mine. It is about their local elections.

I think it is interesting because I don't know what happened. My Republican colleagues always like to talk about limited Federal Government. My Republican colleagues always like to talk about how important local governance is. Yet, they want to rip it away from the people in this city.

My question is: How many doors have they knocked on in D.C.? Have they knocked on a single door? Have they spoken with a single resident, a person who lives here, about what they care about? No, they are using this Chamber and these bills to score national political points on local issues.

Mr. Speaker, the other thing the gentlewoman said is that this is about protecting the sanctity of citizen voting. Like every other issue, Republicans want our people to believe that in order to protect us, we have to take something away from somebody else. That is how we protect the sanctity of voting for citizens. We have to take something away from D.C. that they voted for when, right in front of us, if we want to protect the sanctity of citizen voting in D.C., then we know what we have to do. It is D.C. statehood.

We have to ensure that citizens in D.C. are able to have a fully voting Representative in the United States Congress and have full representation in this country.

That is what we do to protect the sanctity of citizen voting in Washington, D.C. We don't encroach on decisions that the people here have made locally.

Mr. Speaker, I don't want to hear about our elections. Local D.C. elections are not my elections. They are not their elections unless they live here. The local D.C. elections are about the residents of this area.

Mr. Speaker,

Mr. Speaker, once again, my Republican colleagues want to deflect on this issue focusing on undocumented immigrants. Undocumented immigrants are unlikely to vote in local D.C. elections.

Again, why?

It is because the D.C. voter roll is public record. Undocumented immigrants are not going to want to identify themselves, including their address, where they live.

Noncitizen voting, again, this is consistent in a lot of jurisdictions across the entire country. We talked about 20 municipalities doing this to allow universal adult suffrage, the ability for people to take part in local elections.

The other thing, really quick, that one of my Republican colleagues brought up that the purpose of this bill is to: ``Stop diluting the voices of American citizens.'' What is really diluting the voice of American citizens are voter suppression laws like we see in the South and like we see in Florida where I am from: poll taxes, voter roll purges, and voter intimidation. That is what is diluting the voice of American citizens.

I haven't heard a single Republican in this debate talk about ensuring that citizens who live in D.C. can have full representation in Congress.

Where is that?

I bring it up again. In every issue Republicans want to talk about protecting us by taking away stuff from other people. They never want to talk about giving citizens what they deserve. The citizens of D.C. deserve to have full representation in the United States Congress.

Mr. Speaker,

Mr. Speaker, if the esteemed chair from Wisconsin would indulge me, he brought up a set of laws in Georgia, which I thought was very interesting, talking about what we need to do. However, I would yield 30 seconds to the chair if he could let me know who voted for those laws that were enacted in Georgia.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FROST. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FROST. Reclaiming my time. I am curious what body wrote the legislation, voted on the legislation, and sent it to the Governor's desk?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FROST. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FROST. Reclaiming my time. The reason I ask the gentleman is he brings up a law in Georgia that was written by the elected representatives of the legislature voted into office by the people of Georgia.

My Republican colleagues would have us believe that today a lot of Democrats are going to vote for a bill to give noncitizens the ability to vote in D.C.

That is not what we are voting on. We are not voting on a bill to do something. We are voting on a bill to allow something to stay in place which was voted into action by the elected representatives of the local government of D.C.

That is what we are doing here today. We are not voting to give noncitizens the ability to vote. We are just saying: Let D.C. make their own local laws just like they did in Georgia, just like the esteemed chair brought up earlier.

The other thing I want to mention that was brought up has to do with the length of residency to vote. D.C.'s length of residency requirement is not a unique thing. To vote in D.C., yes, a person has to be a resident for at least 30 days before an election, but to vote in Kentucky, for example, a person has to be a resident for at least 28 days.

I haven't heard our esteemed chair of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform complain about the laws in Kentucky. In fact, under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, States cannot set a voter registration deadline for Federal elections more than 30 days before an election.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned here today, no matter what my Republican colleagues say, they want to frame this as the Democrats voting to do something here today. We are not voting to let noncitizens vote in D.C. today. What we are voting to do is allow D.C. to make their own decisions. That is something my Republican colleagues used to talk a lot about, home rule, the ability for localities and people to elect their representatives to a body and those representatives to do something.

If my friend has a problem with local D.C. laws, then pick up a damn clipboard, go knock on doors, and try to change it in D.C. To do it from this institution, I think is shameful.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source