[House Report 118-150]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress }                                          { Report 
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session   }                                          { 118-150

======================================================================
 
       TO PROHIBIT INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOT CITIZENS OF THE UNITED 
      STATES FROM VOTING IN ELECTIONS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

                                _______
                                

 July 18, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Comer, from the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 192]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Oversight and Accountability, to whom was 
referred the bill (H.R. 192) to prohibit individuals who are 
not citizens of the United States from voting in elections in 
the District of Columbia, having considered the same, reports 
favorably thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill 
as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Summary and Purpose of Legislation...............................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................     3
Legislative History..............................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     3
Roll Call Votes..................................................     3
List of Related Committee Hearings...............................     5
Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the 
  Committee......................................................     5
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............     5
Application of Law to the Legislative Branch.....................     5
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     6
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings..............................     6
Federal Advisory Committee Act Statement.........................     6
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Statement...........................     6
Earmark Identification...........................................     6
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................     6
New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost 
  Estimate.......................................................     6
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     7
Minority Views...................................................    10

    The amendments are as follows:
    Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. PROHIBITING VOTING BY NONCITIZENS IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
                    ELECTIONS.

  An individual who is not a citizen of the United States may not vote 
in an election for public office in the District of Columbia or in any 
ballot initiative or referendum in the District of Columbia.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF LOCAL RESIDENT VOTING RIGHTS AMENDMENT ACT OF 2022.

  The Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022 (D.C. Law 24-
242) is repealed, and any provision of law amended or repealed by such 
Act shall be restored or revived as if such Act had not been enacted 
into law.

    Amend the title so as to read:
    A bill to prohibit individuals who are not citizens of the 
United States from voting in elections in the District of 
Columbia and to repeal the Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment Act of 2022.

                   Summary and Purpose of Legislation

    H.R. 192 prohibits noncitizens from voting in D.C. local 
elections and repeals the Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment Act (D.C. Law 24-0242).

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    On November 21, 2022, the District government enacted the 
Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act (D.C. Law 24-0242), 
which allows noncitizens, including illegal immigrants, to vote 
in D.C. local elections. The Act makes no exception for foreign 
diplomats or agents voting in the District. These individuals 
often have interests separate from, or opposed to, the 
interests of Americans. This D.C. Act dilutes the votes of 
American citizens and could have a ripple effect across other 
large U.S. cities.
    Backlash to the D.C. Act was swift, including among 
Democratic policymakers. Mayor Bowser expressed opposition by 
withholding her signature on the Act--something she has done 
only a handful of times over the course of her tenure. Even The 
Washington Post editorial board opposed the bill, writing that 
``voting is a foundational right of citizenship.''\1\ On 
February 9, 2023, 260 Members in the House voted in favor of 
Chairman James Comer's resolution of disapproval (H.J. Res. 24) 
to block enactment of the D.C. Act. The resolution received 
bipartisan support, with 42 Democratic Members voting with 
Republicans. However, this bipartisan resolution has not been 
voted on in the Senate, and D.C.'s noncitizen voting law has 
gone into effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\D.C. is considering legislation to let noncitizens vote. That's 
a bad idea, The Wash. Post (Oct 17, 2022), https://
www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/17/dc-voting-noncitizens-
legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The House Committee on Oversight and Accountability has a 
constitutional duty to oversee the District of Columbia and has 
held three full Committee hearings so far this year where the 
D.C. Mayor, City Council members, and law enforcement officials 
have testified on behalf of their policies. On June 7th, the 
Committee held a joint hearing with the Committee on House 
Administration entitled ``American Confidence in Elections: The 
Path to Election Integrity in the District of Columbia'' where 
members heard from the Executive Director of the D.C. Board of 
Elections. Three witnesses--Mr. Weiser, Mr. Spies, and Mr. 
Cuccinelli--echoed Congressional Republicans' concerns that 
foreign actors may attempt to meddle in local elections under 
the newly enacted D.C. law.
    H.R. 192 represents the exact role Congress should take in 
regard to matters of the District's governance. Under the U.S. 
Constitution Congress is granted ``exclusive Legislation in all 
Cases whatsoever'' over the District and, under the Home Rule 
Act, Congress maintains a critical role to scrutinize and 
approve of District legislation.\2\ Free and fair elections are 
a prerequisite for a healthy republic, and the American people 
deserve confidence in the safety and security of their election 
system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\U.S. Const. amend. I, Sec. 8; District of Columbia Home Rule 
Act, Sec. 1-204.01--1-204.115, (1973).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Section-by-Section Analysis


Section 1. Prohibiting voting by noncitizens in District of Columbia 
        elections

    Prohibits noncitizens from voting in D.C. local elections 
for public office, including any ballot initiative or D.C. 
referendum.

Sec. 2. Prohibition on Federal employee censorship

    Repeals the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act 
(D.C. Law 24-0242).

                          Legislative History

    H.R. 192, To prohibit individuals who are not citizens of 
the United States from voting in elections in the District of 
Columbia, was introduced on January 9, 2023, by Representative 
August Pfluger, along with Representatives Jake Ellzey, Paul 
Gosar, Brian Babin, and Marjorie Taylor Greene. The bill was 
referred solely to the Committee on Oversight and 
Accountability. The Committee held a legislative hearing on 
June 7, 2023. The Committee considered H.R. 192 at a business 
meeting on July 12, 2023, and ordered the bill as amended 
favorably reported by a recorded vote.

                        Committee Consideration

    On July 12, 2023, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered the bill, H.R. 192, favorably reported with an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, by a roll call vote of 
23 to 19, a quorum being present.

                            Roll Call Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the following roll call vote 
occurred during the Committee's consideration of H.R. 192.
    The roll call vote was on final passage of H.R. 192. The 
bill was agreed to in a recorded vote of 23-19.


                       Explanation of Amendments

    During Committee consideration of the bill, Representative 
James Comer (R-KY), Chairman of the Committee, offered an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute that adds a new section 
that would repeal D.C. Law 24-0242, the Local Resident Voting 
Rights Amendment Act. The amendment in the nature of a 
substitute passed by voice vote.

                   List of Related Committee Hearings

    In accordance with House rule XIII, clause 3(c)(6), (1) The 
following hearing was used to develop or consider H.R. 192:
    On June 7, 2023, the Committee held a hearing titled 
``American Confidence in Elections: The Path to Election 
Integrity in the District of Columbia'' with The Honorable Ken 
Cuccinelli, Chairman, Election Transparency Initiative; Mr. 
Charles Spies, Member, Dickinson Wright, PLLC; Ms. Monica 
Evans, Executive Director, DC Board of Elections; and Ms. Wendy 
R. Weiser, Vice President, Democracy, Brennan Center for 
Justice.
    (2) The following related hearings were held:
    On March 29, 2023, the Committee held a hearing titled 
``Overdue Oversight of the Capital City: Part I'' with Mr. Phil 
Mendelson, Chairman, D.C. Council; Mr. Charles Allen, 
Councilmember, D.C. Council; Mr. Glen Lee, Chief Financial 
Officer, Washington, D.C.; and Mr. Greggory Pemberton, 
Chairman, D.C. Police Union.
    On March 16, 2023, the Committee held a hearing titled 
``Overdue Oversight of the Capital City: Part II'' with the 
Honorable Muriel Bowser, Mayor, District of Columbia; Matthew 
M. Graves, U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office for the 
District of Columbia; Mr. Robert Contee, Policy Chief, D.C. 
Metropolitan Police; and Mr. Kevin Donahue, City Administrator, 
District of Columbia.

  Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause 
(2)(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee's oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the Background and Need for 
Legislation section above.

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

    In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee's performance 
goals or objectives of this bill are to prohibit individuals 
who are not citizens of the United States from voting in 
elections in the District of Columbia.

              Application of Law to the Legislative Branch

    Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a 
description of the application of this bill to the legislative 
branch where the bill relates to the terms and conditions of 
employment or access to public services and accommodations. 
This bill does not relate to employment or access to public 
services and accommodations in the legislative branch.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    In accordance with clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII no provision 
of this bill establishes or reauthorizes a program of the 
Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal 
program, a program that was included in any report from the 
Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to 
section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program related to a 
program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance.

                  Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings

    This bill does not direct the completion of any specific 
rule makings within the meaning of section 551 of title 5, 
U.S.C.

                Federal Advisory Committee Act Statement

    The Committee finds that this legislation does not direct 
the establishment of advisory committees within the definition 
of Section 5(b) of the appendix to title 5, U.S.C.

                 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Statement

    Pursuant to section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 the Committee has included a letter received from the 
Congressional Budget Office below.

                         Earmark Identification

    This bill does not include any congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 
clause 9 of rule XXI of the House of Representatives.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee includes below a cost 
estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

   New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House of 
Representatives, the cost estimate prepared by the 
Congressional Budget Office and submitted pursuant to section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is as follows:




    H.R. 192 would disapprove the District of Columbia 
Council's enactment of the Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment Act of 2022 (D.C. Law 24-242), which allows 
noncitizen residents the right to vote in local, but not 
federal, elections. Because enacting the bill would not affect 
the federal budget, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 192 
would have no cost to the federal government.
    H.R. 192 would impose an intergovernmental mandate as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) by 
disapproving D.C. Law 24-242. The bill also would impose a 
private-sector mandate by prohibiting noncitizen permanent 
residents from voting in D.C. elections and ballot initiatives. 
CBO estimates that the cost of the mandates would not exceed 
the intergovernmental or private-sector threshold established 
in UMRA ($99 million and $198 million, respectively, adjusted 
annually for inflation).
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Matthew 
Pickford (for federal costs) and Andrew Laughlin (for 
mandates). The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, 
Deputy Director of Budget Analysis.

                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                             Director, Congressional Budget Office.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, As Reported

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(e) of rule XIII 
of the Rules of the House of Representatives, changes in 
existing law made by the bill, as reported, are shown as 
follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in 
black brackets, new matter is printed in italics, and existing 
law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets and 
existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

           LOCAL RESIDENT VOTING RIGHTS AMENDMENT ACT OF 2022


Be it enacted by the Council of the District of Columbia, [That 
this act may be cited as the ``Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment Act of 2022''.
  [Sec. 2.  The District of Columbia Election Code of 1955, 
approved August 12, 1955 (69 stat. 699; D.C. Official Code 
Sec.  1-1001.01 et seq.), is amended as follows:
  [(a) Section 2 (D.C. Official Code Sec.  1-1001.02) is 
amended as follows:
          [(1) Paragraph (2) is amended as follows:
                  [(A) Subparagraph (B) is amended to read as 
                follows:
                  [``(B) Is a citizen of the United States; 
                except, that this subparagraph shall not apply 
                in a local election;''.
                  [(B) Subparagraph (C) is amended by striking 
                the phrase ``any state or territory'' and 
                inserting the phrase ``any state, territory, or 
                country'' in its place.
          [(2) A new paragraph (34) is added to read as 
        follows:
          [``(34) The term `local election' means:
                  [``(A) An election for:
                          [``(i) Mayor;
                          [``(ii) Chairman or member of the 
                        Council;
                          [``(iii) Attorney General;
                          [``(iv) Member of the State Board of 
                        Education; or
                          [``(v) Advisory Neighborhood 
                        Commissioner; or
                  [``(B) An initiative, referendum, recall, or 
                charter amendment measure on a District 
                ballot.''.
  [(b) Section 7 (D.C. Official Code Sec.  1-1001.07) is 
amended as follows:
          [(1) The lead-in language of subsection (c)(1)(D) is 
        amended by striking the phrase ``this paragraph and 
        stated that the applicant is a citizen of the United 
        States,'' and inserting the phrase ``this paragraph,'' 
        in its place.
          [(2) Subsection (d)(14)(C) is amended by striking the 
        phrase ``that citizens'' and inserting the phrase 
        ``that residents'' in its place.

[SEC. 3. APPLICABILITY.

  [(a) This act shall apply upon the date of inclusion of its 
fiscal effect in an approved budget and financial plan.
  [(b) The Chief Financial Officer shall certify the date of 
the inclusion of the fiscal effect in an approved budget and 
financial plan, and provide notice to the Budget Director of 
the Council of the certification.
  [(c)(1) The Budget Director shall cause the notice of the 
certification to be published in the District of Columbia 
Register.
          [(2) The date of publication of the notice of the 
        certification shall not affect the applicability of 
        this act.

[SEC. 4. FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT.

  [The Council adopts the fiscal impact statement in the 
committee report as the fiscal impact statement required by 
section 4a of the General Legislative Procedures Act of 1975, 
approved October 16, 2006 (120 Stat. 2038; D.C. Official Code 
Sec.  1-301.47a).

[SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.

  [This act shall take effect following approval by the Mayor 
(or in the event of veto by the Mayor, action by the Council to 
override the veto), a 30-day period of congressional review as 
provided in section 602(c)(1) of the District of Columbia Home 
Rule Act, approved December 24, 1973 (87 Stat. 813; D.C. 
Official Code Sec.  1-206.02(c)(1)), and publication in the 
District of Columbia Register.]

                             MINORITY VIEWS

    Committee Democrats strongly oppose H.R. 192, which would 
repeal the District of Columbia's Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment Act of 2022 and prohibit individuals who are not 
citizens of the United States from voting in local D.C. 
elections. This legislation undermines home rule for D.C. and 
the basic American principle of political self-determination, 
which we cannot condone.

                      DEMOCRACY AND D.C. AUTONOMY

    The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines democracy as 
``government by the people'' and ``a government in which the 
supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them 
directly or indirectly through a system of representation 
usually involving periodically held free elections.''\1\ By 
definition, the United States is a democracy, but its capital 
is not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Merriam-Webster, Definition of ``Democracy'' (online at https://
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy) (accessed July 12, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The principles of no taxation without representation and 
consent of the governed helped launch the American Revolution 
and are enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. Yet, D.C. 
residents, who pay federal taxes, have no voting representation 
in Congress, and Congress has plenary authority over D.C.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Committee Republicans claim Congress has a constitutional 
duty to legislate on local D.C. matters. That is false. 
Republicans choose to legislate on local D.C. matters only when 
they think it can score political points.
    Despite giving Congress plenary authority over D.C., the 
Framers expected Congress to establish a local government for 
D.C.\3\ Indeed, Congress has established various forms of local 
government for D.C. since 1802.\4\ The U.S. Supreme Court has 
held that ``there is no constitutional barrier to the 
delegation by Congress to the District of Columbia of full 
legislative power.''\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ ``[A] municipal legislature for local purposes, derived from 
their own suffrages, will of course be allowed them.'' The Federalist 
No. 43, at 240-241 (James Madison) (Clinton Rossiter ed., 1961).
    \4\House Committee on the District of Columbia, Governance of the 
Nation's Capital: A Summary History of the Forms and Powers of Local 
Government for the District of Columbia, 1790 to 1973, 101st Cong. 
(1990).
    \5\District of Columbia v. John R. Thompson Co., Inc., 346 U.S. 
100, 109 (1953).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1973, Congress passed the D.C. Home Rule Act, which 
established an elected chief executive (the D.C. Mayor) and an 
elected legislature (the D.C. Council) for D.C.\6\ The intent 
of the D.C. Home Rule Act is to, among other things, ``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.''\7\ H.R. 
192 contravenes the intent of the D.C. Home Rule Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\Pub. L. No. 93-198 (1973).
    \7\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The D.C. Council passed the Local Resident Voting Rights 
Amendment Act of 2022 twice, as required by the D.C. Home Rule 
Act, by votes of 12 to 1 and 12 to 0.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\D.C. Law 24-242 (online at https://lims.dccouncil.gov/downloads/
LIMS/47374/Signed_Act/B24-0300-Signed_Act.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The D.C. Council has 13 members, who are elected by, and 
accountable to, D.C. residents. Congress has 535 voting 
members, none of whom are elected by, or accountable to, D.C. 
residents. Congress should not act as a super-legislature for 
D.C.
    Instead of undemocratically interfering in local D.C. 
matters, Congress should pass the D.C. statehood bill, H.R. 51, 
the Washington, D.C. Admission Act. The bill would admit the 
State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth into the Union and 
reduce the size of D.C., or the federal district.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\The State would consist of 66 of the 68 square miles of the 
current federal district, and the federal district would consist of two 
square miles, including the White House, the Capitol complex, the 
Supreme Court, the principal federal monuments, and the federal 
buildings adjacent to the National Mall.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Admissions Clause of the Constitution gives Congress 
the authority to admit new states.\10\ Congress has admitted 
all 37 new states by simple legislation.\11\ The District 
Clause of the Constitution gives Congress plenary authority 
over the federal district and establishes a maximum size of the 
federal district (100 square miles).\12\ Congress has the 
authority to reduce the size of the federal district, as it has 
previously done.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\U.S. Const. art. IV, Sec. 3, cl. 1.
    \11\Congressional Research Service, DC Statehood: Constitutional 
Considerations for Proposed Legislation (May 12, 2022) (online at 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47101).
    \12\U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 17.
    \13\Congressional Research Service, DC Statehood: Constitutional 
Considerations for Proposed Legislation (May 12, 2022) (online at 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47101).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Constitution does not establish any prerequisites for 
new states, but Congress has generally considered three 
criteria in evaluating new states: (1) commitment to democracy; 
(2) support for statehood; and (3) sufficient population and 
resources.\14\ D.C. meets all three criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\Government Accountability Office, Experiences of Past 
Territories Can Assist Puerto Rico Status Deliberations (Mar. 7, 1980) 
(online at https://gao.gov/assets/130/128964.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    D.C. residents have been petitioning for voting 
representation in Congress and local self-government for more 
than 200 years.\15\ On November 8, 2016, D.C. residents 
approved a referendum advising the D.C. Council to petition 
Congress for statehood by a vote of 244,134 to 40,779.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\House Committee on the District of Columbia, New Columbia 
Admission Act, 102nd Cong. (1992) (H. Rept. 102-909).
    \16\District of Columbia Board of Elections, General Election 
2016--Certified Results (Nov. 8, 2016) (online at https://
electionresults.dcboe.org/election_results/2016-General-Election).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    D.C. has a larger population than two states.\17\ D.C. pays 
more federal taxes than 19 states and pays more per capita 
federal taxes than any state.\18\ D.C. has a higher per capita 
personal income than any state.\19\ D.C. has a larger gross 
domestic product than 16 states and a higher per capita gross 
domestic product than any state.\20\ D.C.'s general obligation 
bonds have the highest rating (Aaa) from Moody's Investors 
Service.\21\ Federal funds are a smaller percentage of D.C.'s 
revenue than federal funds are of total state revenue.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\Census Bureau, 2020 Population and Housing State Data (online 
at https://census.gov/library/visualizations/interactive/2020-
population-and-housing-state-data.html) (accessed July 12, 2023).
    \18\Internal Revenue Service, Internal Revenue Service Data Book, 
2022 (online at https://irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p55b.pdf) (accessed July 
12, 2023).
    \19\Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Release Tables: Per Capita 
Personal Income by State, Annual (online at https://
fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?eid=257197&rid=110) (accessed July 
12, 2023).
    \20\Bureau of Economic Analysis, Gross Domestic Product by State 
and Personal Income by State, 3rd Quarter 2022 (Dec. 23, 2022) (online 
at https://bea.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/stgdppi3q22.pdf).
    \21\District of Columbia, Resilience: Annual Comprehensive 
Financial Report 2022 (Jan. 24, 2023) (online at https://cfo.dc.gov/
sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocfo/publication/attachments/
FY%202022%20DC%20ACFR.pdf).
    \22\The Pew Charitable Trusts, Pandemic Drives Federal Share of 
State Revenue to Record High (Nov. 4, 2022) (online at 
www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2022/10/18/
pandemic-drives-federal-share-of-state-revenue-to-record-high); 
District of Columbia, FY 2020 Approved Budget and Financial Plan (July 
25, 2019) (online at https://cfo.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/
ocfo/publication/attachments/DC_OCFO_2020_Budget_Vol_1_0.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There can be no question that D.C. meets the historical 
qualifications for statehood. Congress should honor the will of 
D.C. residents and admit D.C. as the 51st state in the Union.

     HISTORY OF PERMITTING NONCITIZENS TO VOTE IN THE UNITED STATES

    The United States has a long history of permitting 
noncitizens to vote in local, state, territorial, and federal 
elections, dating back to at least 1704, prior to the country's 
founding.\23\ Congress did not prohibit noncitizens from voting 
in federal elections until 1996.\24\ At various points, 
Congress and 40 states have permitted noncitizens to vote, 
including every state represented by the Majority, except for 
one.\25\ Today, more than a dozen municipalities permit 
noncitizens to vote in local elections.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\Alan Kennedy-Shaffer, Voters in a Foreign Land: Alien Suffrage 
and Citizenship in the United States, 1704-1926 (2009) (online at 
https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=5978&context=etd#page=10).
    \24\18 U.S.C. Sec. 611.
    \25\Alan Kennedy-Shaffer, Voters in a Foreign Land: Alien Suffrage 
and Citizenship in the United States 1704-1926 (2009) (online at 
https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=5978&context=etd#page=10); Ron Hayduk, 
Democracy for All: Restoring Immigrant Voting Rights in the United 
States (2006).
    \26\Ballotpedia, Laws Permitting Noncitizens to Vote in the United 
States (online at https://ballotpedia.org/
Laws_permitting_noncitizens_to_vote_in_the_United_States) (accessed 
July 12, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               CONCLUSION

    We strongly oppose H.R. 192 and any other effort to 
undermine the will of D.C. residents and their locally elected 
representatives. D.C. residents want statehood for D.C., and 
Congress should heed their calls instead of violating the basic 
American principle of political self-determination.

                                              Jamie Raskin,
                                                    Ranking Member.

                                  [all]