Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5085

Bill Overview

Title: A bill to prohibit the government of the District of Columbia from using Federal funds to allow individuals who are not citizens of the United States to vote in any election. and for other purposes.

Description: This bill prohibits the use of federal funds to allow noncitizens to vote in any election in the District of Columbia (DC). Further, DC must certify that it does not allow noncitizens to vote in elections as a condition of receiving any federal funds. Federal law bars noncitizens from voting in federal elections; however, the DC Council passed a bill on October 18, 2022, that allows noncitizens who meet residency and other requirements to vote in local elections.

Sponsors: Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Target Audience

Population: Noncitizens residing in Washington, D.C.

Estimated Size: 13000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

restaurant worker (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I was excited to finally have a say in how the city is run.
  • It feels like a step back to lose that opportunity.
  • I understand the concern about federal funding, but it's disappointing.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 8
Year 5 5 8
Year 10 5 9
Year 20 4 9

software engineer (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I understand why the policy was proposed, but it feels exclusionary.
  • Voting locally was a way for me to connect with my neighborhood.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 7
Year 5 5 7
Year 10 5 8
Year 20 5 8

graduate student (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I'm not deeply affected in the short term, it does make D.C. feel less inclusive.
  • I chose D.C. partly for its open atmosphere, and this policy changes that.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 5 6
Year 10 5 7
Year 20 5 7

real estate agent (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Overall, I think the policy protects the integrity of elections.
  • It might make some residents feel unwelcome, which isn't good for community cohesion.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

teacher (Northern Virginia)

Age: 37 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Had the opportunity been there, I might have moved to D.C.
  • It's important for residents to have a voice, and this feels like a missed opportunity for inclusivity.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

policy analyst (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy limits local democracy and should be reconsidered.
  • Noncitizens contribute to the community and deserve a local vote.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

barista (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 24 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It feels like I'm not welcome to participate in the community fully.
  • I was excited to be engaged and now that's taken away from me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 5 6
Year 10 4 7
Year 20 4 7

retired (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 58 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • From a community perspective, this policy seems very exclusionary.
  • Diversity in local representation leads to more robust and relatable governance.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

project manager (Maryland)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This legislative change makes D.C. seem less appealing for noncitizens considering a move.
  • The inclusivity aspect was a big factor for me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 7
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 7

taxi driver (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Although it doesn't affect me directly, I think it might lead to less diverse governance.
  • Policies should focus on including all voices, especially at the local level.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)

Year 2: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)

Year 3: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)

Year 5: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)

Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)

Year 100: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $4000000)

Key Considerations