Enfranchising migrants in Chile: a century of politics, elites, and regime changes

Abstract

Enfranchising migrants into the demos is a growing global trend, not exclusive to democracy.Analyzing a country that has expanded migrant suffrage in both democracy and dictatorship, I address how and why Chile became one of the most inclusive countries worldwide for migrant voting rights.Chile was a pioneer for enacting select immigrant suffrage rights in relative democracy in 1925, expanded the rights in 1980 during dictatorship, then was a latecomer for granting emigrant voting rights in liberal democracy in 2014. Stepping away from analyzing enfranchisement in consolidated democracies in the 'Global North', I unpack almost a century of elite-led top-down politics in Chile through historical analysis and taking 1980 enfranchisement as an extreme case. The evidence comes from constitutional laws, transcribed debates from constitutional commission sessions, scholarly literature, national censuses, and electoral data. The findings reveal the durability of migrant voting rights and a normative path dependence of who belongs as voters. Inclusivity requires not only continued implementation in elections but also rights survival through shifting ideology and political regime types.

Reject, Reject, Reject...Passed! Explaining a Latecomer of Emigrant Enfranchisement

“…Motions from the parliament and presidents initiated similar bills a dozen times from 1971 before approving it in 2014. Chile was a pioneer adopter of immigrant suffrage and still ranks among one of the most inclusive countries worldwide for immigrant voting (Altman et al, 2023;Finn, 2023). We explain why Chile was a latecomer to emigrant suffrage.…”

“…Perceiving links to the territory-rather than to national ideals or identity, for instance-has a long history in Chilean constitutions, specifically in their citizenship laws since 1822 (Courtis, 2017). Prioritizing territorial connection seems to intuitively explain the within-case variation of Chile as a pioneer versus latecomer to migrant enfranchisement since they politically incorporated (non-naturalized) immigrants about 90 years before enfranchising certain emigrants (Finn, 2023).…”

Voto inmigrante en la provincia de Buenos Aires: la política subnacional de empadronamiento bajo la lupa

“…En términos sencillos, se trata de habilitar un canal alternativo para el reconocimiento de derechos en general y de los derechos políticos en particular, que no se base exclusivamente en la posesión de la nacionalidad, sino en el criterio de residencia. 1 En otras palabras, sumar al criterio exclusivo y excluyente de pertenencia asociado a la nacionalidad (ligada al nacimiento en un territorio, ius solis, o en una familia, ius sanguinis, o a la naturalización), el criterio móvil, dinámico y condicional de la residencia (ius domicili) (De Lucas 2006;Escobar 2015;Acosta 2018;Pedroza 2019;Finn 2020Finn , 2023; Umpierrez de Reguero, Finn y Peltoniemi 2023).…”

Conditional Enfranchisement: How Partisanship Determines Support for Noncitizen Voting Rights

“…3 Rosenberg and Wejryd (2022) experimentally assess U.S. attitudes toward voting requirements, including citizenship and economic contributions. Others consider noncitizen suffrage in non-experimental settings globally (e.g., Finn 2023;Vernby 2013).…”