Double Voting

Goodin, Robert E.; Tanasoca, Ana

doi:10.1080/00048402.2014.913300

Cited by 20 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6 As early as 2004, SVP representative Jasmin Hutter introduced a motion entitled 'exclusion from dual citizenship right', which was rejected (see Achermann et al, 2010: 28-29 principle of equality of citizens, expressed by 'one person, one vote' (Goodin and Tanasoca, 2014). 8 When dual citizenship is debated as a matter of consequences, the discussion focuses especially on its potential effects on the integration of immigrants.…”

Section: A Brief Overview Of the Debate On Dual Citizenshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Divided loyalty? Identification and political participation of dual citizens in Switzerland

Schlenker

2015

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In spite of the recent increase in dual citizenship, there are widespread fears that this double status undermines loyalty towards the state, understood as identification with and political participation in the country of residence. We analyze whether there are systematic differences between dual citizens, mono citizens, and foreign residents in this respect, based on data from a 2013 survey of dual citizens in Switzerland with very different migration backgrounds. The results reveal that controlling for migration-related and socio-demographic factors, dual citizens are more loyal in many respects than foreign residents, but there are no significant differences between dual citizens and mono citizens in their level of identification with Switzerland and political participation there. They are even more likely than mono citizens to participate in serving its interests. In addition, there is no trade-off between these forms of loyalty to the country of residence and identification and political participation in the country of descent. On the contrary, they are positively related. Transnational loyalties seem to co-exist or even to be mutually reinforcing. Thus, dual citizenship does not seem to diminish loyalty to the country of residence and countries therefore do not stand to lose anything by allowing it.

show abstract

Section: A Brief Overview Of the Debate On Dual Citizenshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Divided loyalty? Identification and political participation of dual citizens in Switzerland

Schlenker

2015

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It may also be possible, as some scholars propose, that the opportunity to participate (in particular to vote) in the political life of two states is a violation of democratic equality. For a discussion of the latter, see Goodin and Tanasoca (2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Democratic Citizenship and Denationalization

Lenard

2017

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are democratic states permitted to denationalize citizens, in particular those whom they believe pose dangers to the physical safety of others? In this article, I argue that they are not. The power to denationalize citizens—that is, to revoke citizenship—is one that many states have historically claimed for themselves, but which has largely been in disuse in the last several decades. Recent terrorist events have, however, prompted scholars and political actors to reconsider the role that denationalization can and perhaps should play in democratic states, in particular with respect to its role in protecting national security and in supporting the global fight against terror more generally. In this article, my objective is to show that denationalization laws have no place in democratic states. To understand why, I propose examining the foundations of the right of citizenship, which lie, I shall argue, in the very strong interests that individuals have in security of residence. I use this formulation of the right to respond to two broad clusters of arguments: (1) those that claim that it is justifiable to denationalize citizens who threaten to undermine the safety of citizens in a democratic state or the ability of a democratic state to function as a democratic state, and (2) those that claim that it is justifiable to denationalize dual citizens because they possess citizenship status in a second country that is also able to protect their rights.

show abstract

“…By that principle, someone owning property in both Australia and the US should have a right to vote in both places, whereas someone with property in Australia alone should have a right to vote there alone. (2014: 748)As we have seen above, if the weights we give to the votes of these people correspond to the degree to which the decisions affect their interests, the scenario mentioned in the above quote would be perfectly in line with the recommendations of the Independent Proportionality Criterion. According to Goodin and Tanasoca, however, the latter is not discriminating enough.…”

Section: The All Affected Principle and The Equal Quantum Criterionmentioning

confidence: 88%

The All Affected Principle, and the weighting of votes

Angell

Huseby

2020

Politics, Philosophy & Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we defend the view that, on the All Affected Principle of voting rights, the weight of a person’s vote on a decision should be determined by and only by the degree to which that decision affects her interests, independently of her voting weights on other decisions. Further, we consider two recent alternative proposals for how the All Affected Principle should weight votes, and give reasons for rejecting both.

show abstract

Double Voting

Cited by 20 publications

References 21 publications

Divided loyalty? Identification and political participation of dual citizens in Switzerland

Divided loyalty? Identification and political participation of dual citizens in Switzerland

Democratic Citizenship and Denationalization

The All Affected Principle, and the weighting of votes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About