I didn't recall any of this. Two years ago, voters in San Francisco
approved a referendum removing the citizenship requirement prerequisite
for an appointment to a board or commission.

So the city's board of supervisors duly appointed Kelly Wong, immigrant
rights advocate but not-a-citizen, to the seven member election
commission.

She's still not qualified to register to vote.

https://www.kqed.org/news/11976026/san-francisco-appoints-first-non-citizen-to-serve-on-elections-commission

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <uquq35$1nhpe$2@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

I didn't recall any of this. Two years ago, voters in San Francisco
approved a referendum removing the citizenship requirement prerequisite
for an appointment to a board or commission.

So the city's board of supervisors duly appointed Kelly Wong, immigrant rights advocate but not-a-citizen, to the seven member election
commission.

She's still not qualified to register to vote.

Incrementalism. The Open Borders crowd is on the march again.

First it was just letting illegals vote in school board elections. Now
it's, "Well, they're already voting in school board elections, so why
not allow them to serve on boards and commissions?"

Tomorrow it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions, so why not let them vote for city council?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already voting in school board and city
council elections and serving on boards and commissions, so why not let
them vote for county commissioner?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, and county commissioner
elections, so why not state delegate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, and state delegate elections, so why not state senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state
delegate, and state senate elections, so why not governor?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state
delegate, state senate, and gubernatorial elections, so why not House of Repesentatives?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state
delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House elections, so why not
U.S. Senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state
delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House and Senate elections,
so why not president?"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

I didn't recall any of this. Two years ago, voters in San Francisco >>approved a referendum removing the citizenship requirement prerequisite
for an appointment to a board or commission.

So the city's board of supervisors duly appointed Kelly Wong, immigrant >>rights advocate but not-a-citizen, to the seven member election
commission.

She's still not qualified to register to vote.

Incrementalism. The Open Borders crowd is on the march again.

First it was just letting illegals vote in school board elections. Now
it's, "Well, they're already voting in school board elections, so why
not allow them to serve on boards and commissions?"

Tomorrow it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions, so why not let them vote for city council?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already voting in school board and city
council elections and serving on boards and commissions, so why not let
them vote for county commissioner?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, and county commissioner
elections, so why not state delegate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, and state >delegate elections, so why not state senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state >delegate, and state senate elections, so why not governor?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state >delegate, state senate, and gubernatorial elections, so why not House of >Repesentatives?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state >delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House elections, so why not
U.S. Senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state >delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House and Senate elections,
so why not president?"

They were once illegally present in the United States. Let's let them
vote on the ballot from where they last stayed using the overseas voting process.

To the extent Mexico has free and fair elections, Mexican nationals in
the United States who don't intend to return, like a green-card holder,
are able to vote. I'm not sure if a naturalized American can still vote.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

. . .

Well, Maryland wants to ban U.S. citizens from voting in certain
elections.

The state has proposed the creation of illegal alien-only seats on the
local school boards and city councils, where not only would illegals be >allowed to vote, but American citizens would be prohibited from doing so.

The 14th 1/2 Amendment is superior to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and comparable state laws on equal protection.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 12:40:11 -0800
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

In article <uquq35$1nhpe$2@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

I didn't recall any of this. Two years ago, voters in San Francisco approved a referendum removing the citizenship requirement
prerequisite for an appointment to a board or commission.

So the city's board of supervisors duly appointed Kelly Wong,
immigrant rights advocate but not-a-citizen, to the seven member
election commission.

She's still not qualified to register to vote.

Incrementalism. The Open Borders crowd is on the march again.

First it was just letting illegals vote in school board elections.
Now it's, "Well, they're already voting in school board elections,
so why not allow them to serve on boards and commissions?"

Tomorrow it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions, so why not let them vote for city council?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already voting in school board and city
council elections and serving on boards and commissions, so why not
let them vote for county commissioner?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, and county
commissioner elections, so why not state delegate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, and state delegate elections, so why not state senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, state delegate, and state senate elections, so why not governor?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, state delegate, state senate, and gubernatorial
elections, so why not House of Repesentatives?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, state delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House elections, so why not U.S. Senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, state delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House
and Senate elections, so why not president?"

I doubt it will take anywhere near that long. They're bound to
leeapfrog the whole process much earlier on and insist that if illegals
are allowed to vote in just a couple of places, the whole idea of
having citizenship to vote is already moot. Therefore, it should be
abandoned in favour of the "progressive" principle that anyone who
makes it to the polling station - or who can mail in a ballot from
within the USA - is automatically allowed to vote. Once they accomplish
that, they'll push to allow mail-in ballots from any country, even if
the person has no knowledge of the USA or the English language.

--
Rhino

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 15:25:11 -0800
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

In article <ur0mdg$23ron$3@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

I didn't recall any of this. Two years ago, voters in San
Francisco approved a referendum removing the citizenship
requirement prerequisite for an appointment to a board or
commission.

So the city's board of supervisors duly appointed Kelly Wong,
immigrant rights advocate but not-a-citizen, to the seven member >>election commission.

She's still not qualified to register to vote.

Incrementalism. The Open Borders crowd is on the march again.

First it was just letting illegals vote in school board elections.
Now it's, "Well, they're already voting in school board
elections, so why not allow them to serve on boards and
commissions?"

Tomorrow it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and >commissions, so why not let them vote for city council?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already voting in school board and
city council elections and serving on boards and commissions, so
why not let them vote for county commissioner?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, and county >commissioner elections, so why not state delegate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county >commissioner, and state delegate elections, so why not state
senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county >commissioner, state delegate, and state senate elections, so why
not governor?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county >commissioner, state delegate, state senate, and gubernatorial
elections, so why not House of Repesentatives?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county >commissioner, state delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and
House elections, so why not U.S. Senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county >commissioner, state delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and
House and Senate elections, so why not president?"

They were once illegally present in the United States. Let's let
them vote on the ballot from where they last stayed using the
overseas voting process.

To the extent Mexico has free and fair elections, Mexican nationals
in the United States who don't intend to return, like a green-card
holder, are able to vote. I'm not sure if a naturalized American
can still vote.

Well, Maryland wants to ban U.S. citizens from voting in certain
elections.

The state has proposed the creation of illegal alien-only seats on
the local school boards and city councils, where not only would
illegals be allowed to vote, but American citizens would be
prohibited from doing so.

If ever an idea needed to be resisted, this one does. Given that
Maryland is very blue, it might have to be fought via a court challenge
rather than through the legislature but it needs to be done. Otherwise,
you have, at least symbolically, given up the sovereignty of your
country. If foreigners are making the decisions, you no longer control
what happens in your own country. I can't imagine ANY other country
embracing such a stupid idea (although it might well appeal to Trudeau
if someone mentions it to him).

--
Rhino

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <ur0mdg$23ron$3@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

I didn't recall any of this. Two years ago, voters in San Francisco >>approved a referendum removing the citizenship requirement prerequisite >>for an appointment to a board or commission.

So the city's board of supervisors duly appointed Kelly Wong, immigrant >>rights advocate but not-a-citizen, to the seven member election >>commission.

She's still not qualified to register to vote.

Incrementalism. The Open Borders crowd is on the march again.

First it was just letting illegals vote in school board elections. Now >it's, "Well, they're already voting in school board elections, so why
not allow them to serve on boards and commissions?"

Tomorrow it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions, so why not let them vote for city council?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already voting in school board and city >council elections and serving on boards and commissions, so why not let >them vote for county commissioner?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, and county commissioner >elections, so why not state delegate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, and state >delegate elections, so why not state senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state >delegate, and state senate elections, so why not governor?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state >delegate, state senate, and gubernatorial elections, so why not House of >Repesentatives?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state >delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House elections, so why not
U.S. Senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and commissions
and voting in school board, city council, county commissioner, state >delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House and Senate elections,
so why not president?"

They were once illegally present in the United States. Let's let them
vote on the ballot from where they last stayed using the overseas voting process.

To the extent Mexico has free and fair elections, Mexican nationals in
the United States who don't intend to return, like a green-card holder,
are able to vote. I'm not sure if a naturalized American can still vote.

Well, Maryland wants to ban U.S. citizens from voting in certain
elections.

The state has proposed the creation of illegal alien-only seats on the
local school boards and city councils, where not only would illegals be
allowed to vote, but American citizens would be prohibited from doing so.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

. . .

Also, all these "they can only vote for school board" schemes are
ridiculous because once you're on a state's voter rolls, you're on the
rolls for *every* election. There's no such thing as just being
registered to vote only for school board.

There was a period in which we had federal-only ballots when Motor Voter
was new on the books and the state legislature refused to change the law
to match federal law.

The records tell the judges what kind of ballot to issue.

What's happening in these cases is that these illegals are showing up at
the polls to vote for school board (or city council or dog catcher or >whatever) and being handed a ballot with EVERY election on it and we're
just trusting the illegals to obey the law and only vote for the one
election that they're allowed to-- a group of people, don't forget, who
are breaking the law with their very presence in the country and have
show their willing to disregard our laws when they think it's to their >advantage.

I won't suggest that California isn't doing incredibly stupid things.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <20240219193243.00002c54@example.com>,
Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 12:40:11 -0800
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

In article <uquq35$1nhpe$2@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

I didn't recall any of this. Two years ago, voters in San Francisco approved a referendum removing the citizenship requirement
prerequisite for an appointment to a board or commission.

So the city's board of supervisors duly appointed Kelly Wong,
immigrant rights advocate but not-a-citizen, to the seven member
election commission.

She's still not qualified to register to vote.

Incrementalism. The Open Borders crowd is on the march again.

First it was just letting illegals vote in school board elections.
Now it's, "Well, they're already voting in school board elections,
so why not allow them to serve on boards and commissions?"

Tomorrow it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions, so why not let them vote for city council?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already voting in school board and city council elections and serving on boards and commissions, so why not
let them vote for county commissioner?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, and county commissioner elections, so why not state delegate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, and state delegate elections, so why not state senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, state delegate, and state senate elections, so why not governor?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, state delegate, state senate, and gubernatorial
elections, so why not House of Repesentatives?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, state delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House elections, so why not U.S. Senate?"

Then it'll be "Well, they're already serving on boards and
commissions and voting in school board, city council, county
commissioner, state delegate, state senate, gubernatorial, and House
and Senate elections, so why not president?"

I doubt it will take anywhere near that long. They're bound to
leeapfrog the whole process much earlier on and insist that if illegals
are allowed to vote in just a couple of places, the whole idea of
having citizenship to vote is already moot. Therefore, it should be
abandoned in favour of the "progressive" principle that anyone who
makes it to the polling station - or who can mail in a ballot from
within the USA - is automatically allowed to vote. Once they accomplish
that, they'll push to allow mail-in ballots from any country, even if
the person has no knowledge of the USA or the English language.

Also, all these "they can only vote for school board" schemes are
ridiculous because once you're on a state's voter rolls, you're on the
rolls for *every* election. There's no such thing as just being
registered to vote only for school board.

What's happening in these cases is that these illegals are showing up at
the polls to vote for school board (or city council or dog catcher or
whatever) and being handed a ballot with EVERY election on it and we're
just trusting the illegals to obey the law and only vote for the one
election that they're allowed to-- a group of people, don't forget, who
are breaking the law with their very presence in the country and have
show their willing to disregard our laws when they think it's to their advantage.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <ur0os8$24h6k$1@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

. . .

Well, Maryland wants to ban U.S. citizens from voting in certain
elections.

The state has proposed the creation of illegal alien-only seats on the >local school boards and city councils, where not only would illegals be >allowed to vote, but American citizens would be prohibited from doing so.

The 14th 1/2 Amendment is superior to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and comparable state laws on equal protection.

I think the 14.5 (otherwise known as the MoviePig Amendment) is superior
to the Constitution itself.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/19/2024 9:13 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

In article <ur0os8$24h6k$1@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

. . .

Well, Maryland wants to ban U.S. citizens from voting in certain
elections.

The state has proposed the creation of illegal alien-only seats on the
local school boards and city councils, where not only would illegals be
allowed to vote, but American citizens would be prohibited from doing so. >>

The 14th 1/2 Amendment is superior to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and
comparable state laws on equal protection.

I think the 14.5 (otherwise known as the MoviePig Amendment) is superior
to the Constitution itself.

*Any* amendment is, by definition, "superior to the Constitution
itself". Other than that, I've no idea wtf you're talking about...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 19:37:38 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

If ever an idea needed to be resisted, this one does. Given that
Maryland is very blue, it might have to be fought via a court challenge >rather than through the legislature but it needs to be done. Otherwise,
you have, at least symbolically, given up the sovereignty of your
country. If foreigners are making the decisions, you no longer control
what happens in your own country. I can't imagine ANY other country
embracing such a stupid idea (although it might well appeal to Trudeau
if someone mentions it to him).

I doubt it since 'dual citizenship' is remarkably easy to get in
Canada that there really should be no argument for non-citizen voters.

(On the other hand, one of my daughters holds Canadian, British and
Polish citizenship - long story - and has voted in UK elections)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 19:32:43 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

I doubt it will take anywhere near that long. They're bound to
leeapfrog the whole process much earlier on and insist that if illegals
are allowed to vote in just a couple of places, the whole idea of
having citizenship to vote is already moot. Therefore, it should be
abandoned in favour of the "progressive" principle that anyone who
makes it to the polling station - or who can mail in a ballot from
within the USA - is automatically allowed to vote. Once they accomplish
that, they'll push to allow mail-in ballots from any country, even if
the person has no knowledge of the USA or the English language.

I know several US citizens living in Vancouver who every four years
faithfully traipse down to the US consulate to vote. One of them is
even the local chair of "Democrats Abroad".

On the other hand, I am not aware that my late father (who held dual US-Canadian status from the 1970s till his death) ever voted in a US
election at least since I became old enough to understand what an
election was (which for me would have been 9 years old since my
maternal grandfather ran twice for the Conservatives in the 1965 and
1968 federal elections - at the time this area was considered a 'safe'
Liberal seat). The main thing I remember about his citizenship
ceremony was (a) when he put his hand on the Bible for his oath while
raising the other hand and (b) that he spoke the best English in the
room including the judge!

In my grandfather's federal runs, my Canadian born mother often
appeared either on stage or in photos but my then American father
didn't. (Mostly because he was working but he also didn't want his
citizenship to be an issue for his father-in-law) It was because of
him I got to meet John Diefenbaker (who had been prime minister in the Eisenhower and Kennedy eras and was trying to regain his past job)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 15:25:11 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Well, Maryland wants to ban U.S. citizens from voting in certain
elections.

The state has proposed the creation of illegal alien-only seats on the
local school boards and city councils, where not only would illegals be >allowed to vote, but American citizens would be prohibited from doing so.

I assume there's a legal challenge pending - and my question is on
what legal grounds does a state abrogate voting laws?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 18:11:31 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Also, all these "they can only vote for school board" schemes are
ridiculous because once you're on a state's voter rolls, you're on the
rolls for *every* election. There's no such thing as just being
registered to vote only for school board.

In Canada there are separate federal and provincial voters' lists and
no one could be allowed to vote ONLY for school board because school
board is on the same ballot form as the city council.

I was aghast about 15 years ago when they cut the citizenship
requirement from 5 to 3 years since 5 years ensured the newcomer would
have personally witnessed federal and provincial elections while 3
years did not.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)