UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center Calls for Examining New Policies to Include 4.6 Million Noncitizens in the Voting Process A new study by UCLA’s Chicano Studies Research Center recommends increasing public debate about whether noncitizens in California should vote and developing a consensus for a constitutional amendment that would permit noncitizens to vote in local elections. According to study author and UCLA law lecturer Joaquin Avila, a de facto political apartheid will exist in California if steps are not taken to include more than 4.6 million non?citizen adults in the voting process. “The new census data shows that many communities in California have significant Latino non-citizen populations who do not have the right to vote,� said Avila, a voting rights expert and former president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “The continued political exclusion of this non-citizen population will have negative repercussions on community grass-roots efforts to promote a more inclusive and cohesive society.� In California, noncitizens make up nearly 19 percent of the adult population, or more than 4.6 million adults, according to the study. Three million of these noncitizens are Latinos. In 12 cities, noncitizens make up the majority of adults. These cities include Santa Ana, Bell Gardens and San Joaquin in Fresno County. In Los Angeles, which is the largest city in the state, non-citizen adults comprise about one-third of the population. The study, entitled “Political Apartheid in California: Consequences of Excluding a Growing Noncitizen Population,� also includes a list of 85 cities in California in which noncitizens comprise more than 25 percent of the city’s adult population. According to Avila, state and local revenues, not to mention community affairs, depend on a growing non-citizen population. However, a significant number of people who contribute to the state’s economy and government revenues are being denied political representation, Avila said. Instead of focusing on excluding noncitizens from taking part in politics, efforts should be directed toward the political integration of the immigrant community, the study concluded. A variety of reasons support the extension of the franchise to noncitizens, Avila said. The reasons range from giving a voice to all individuals in governmental affairs in order to solidify democratic values to the principle that noncitizens have the same obligations as citizens and should therefore enjoy some of the same privileges. The main reason to support non-citizen voting is self-preservation, he said. A society’s interests are not furthered when a substantial number of its inhabitants are excluded from the body politic and have no meaningful way to petition for a redress of grievances through the electoral process. Avila made several recommendations for pursuing a strategy of non-citizen political empowerment. They are:

·Increasing public debate about non-citizen disenfranchisement.

·Researching the eligibility of noncitizens to serve on neighborhood councils and other governmental subdivisions in California.

·Discussing a constitutional amendment permitting counties, cities, school districts and other special election districts to determine whether to permit non-citizen voting for local offices. For example, noncitizens can participate in local community board elections in Chicago and New York City. ·Researching legal strategies seeking to remove the citizenship requirement as a qualification for voting.