Native Vote: American Indians, the Voting Rights Act, and the Right to Vote. By Daniel McCool, Susan M. Olson, and Jennifer L. Robinson. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 246p. $84.00 cloth, $25.99 paper.

2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 664-665
Author(s):  
Kevin Bruyneel
2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 518
Author(s):  
Sharon O'Brien ◽  
Daniel McCool ◽  
Susan M. Olson ◽  
Jennifer L. Robinson

1992 ◽  
Vol 92 (7) ◽  
pp. 1810
Author(s):  
Alexander Athan Yanos

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 87-120
Author(s):  
Glenn Magpantay

Asian Americans face discrimination in some occasions when they exercise their right to vote. AA is the fastest growing minority group and more of them are becoming naturalized citizens. The articles discuss relevant policies in its connection to AA voting. Such policies are The Voting Rights Act and The Language Assistance Provisions of the Voting Rights Act. The American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) employ many methods to collect and document date and details reasons for voting barriers that AA face. The AALDEF uses Election Day monitoring, voter complaint hotline, and multilingual exit poll as its means to gather information needed to understand the barriers and other reasons affecting AA ability to vote. The profile of the voters is discussed as well as the voting place such as how the voting process works in New York City. Many problems and complaints arise in the voting process such as the translation in the bilingual ballots as they are too small to read and were often misleading, and numerous poll sites had inadequate and poor language signage. The article aims to demonstrate several problems present in the voting places, which negatively affects voter turnout. The article tries to reinforce the Voting Rights Act so these problems can be fixed and to improve the administration of the elections. Several recommendations are presented to mitigate these problems to increase voter turnout among the AAPI population. The article highlights the fact that the complexity of the voting process and the gross errors that are not corrected. There should be an alliance between election officials and community groups to facilitate the voting operation process. The struggle for AAPIs right to vote continues as many election procedures do not function in accordance to the law.


2020 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jelena Bäumler

ABSTRACT Democracy means power to the people, but it is not always clear who belongs to "the people". The question has become pertinent in the age of migration where large groups of foreigners permanently reside outside their countries of nationality. The economic, cultural, and political integration of these foreigners is one of the pressing problems faced by democratic States in both the developed and developing worlds. One question is : whether resident non-citizens should be granted the right to vote. The answer to this question depends on who belongs to "the people". In federal and quasi-federal States with multiple levels of government the further question arises : whether "the people" is a homogenous concept that applies uniformly across all levels of government. This article contributes to the debate about the right of foreigners to vote in democratic States with multiple levels of government, such as, South Africa and Kenya. It does so by discussing the German response to the problems mentioned above. The dominant view of the German Federal Constitutional Court since the 1990s has been that "the people" only includes "German citizens" , and that attempts by lower levels of government to extend the right to vote to foreigners from Africa and elsewhere are unconstitutional. In this article I explore and critique this conventional view. I then present a positive case for the extension of voting rights to resident non-citizens under the German Constitution. Many of the arguments would apply with equal force to the debate about the right to vote of foreigners in African multi-level democracies, such as, South Africa and Kenya. Keywords: Denizenship, Citizenship, Voting rights, Nationality law, Multi-level government, The people, Foreigners, Residents, Affected persons principle, Democracy.


2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 126-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
James McIntyre ◽  
Masum Khwaja ◽  
Venkata Yelamanchili ◽  
Sobia Naz ◽  
Maria Clarke

Aims and methodThis study explores knowledge and uptake of the voting rights of adult in-patients in the 2010 UK general election. A clinician-completed survey was used.ResultsEligible to vote psychiatric adult in-patients were half as likely to register as the general population and half as likely to vote if registered. Nine out of ten of those unregistered cited a lack of knowledge of their eligibility to vote or of the registration process. Long-stay patients were particularly disenfranchised.Clinical implicationsMany patients and staff remain unaware of the new rules which have given a greater proportion of in-patients the right to vote and have simplified the registration and voting processes. This information barrier may be addressed in future elections by providing timely written information to both patients and staff. Once registered, patients may need further support to overcome practical and psychological barriers, and cast their vote.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document