Who gets to vote?

Trump will find out how complex & controversial voter roll changes can be. India can teach him a few things

Trump’s executive order to ‘protect’ American elections is centred on defining ‘citizenship’. The order requires prospective voters to list documents – a US passport or IDs such as military ID or govt photo ID – as proof of citizenship. The list doesn’t include birth certificates, presumably because Trump cancelled birthright citizenship. This is a double whammy for many US-born migrants. Millions, per US press reports, are set to be disenfranchised if courts don’t intervene.

At present, federal forms – it’s unclear if state forms are included – need a driving licence, state ID or social security number and self-attestation. This means those applicants swear they’re eligible to vote. False registration is rare – in the latest instance of high-decibel accusations in Georgia of “voter fraud”, the state’s election official found 20 of 8.2mn voters were not US citizens. Trump’s order also gives access to DOGE, among other central agencies, to voter rolls to check “eligibility”. States can see such federal govt overhang on voter rolls is counter to federalism – lawsuits are expected. Voter rolls are state infra – reforms are carried out via legislation, not presidential fiat.

Trump mentioned India’s “tying” voter rolls with biometrics. India’s only biometric database is Aadhaar, not considered proof of citizenship. To circle back, the issue isn’t about biometrics really. It is about how Trump’s US would define a citizen – a narrow demographic or wider canvas of peoples. The challenge of “purges” or “sanitising” voter rolls, whether in US or India, carries within it a high risk that ill-maintained databases can disenfranchise legitimate voters. Voters rolls are a complex issue – as Trump will soon find out. India, which manages its elections better, is currently in the middle of a political row over ‘expanded voter rolls’, with opposition arguing EC isn’t giving a satisfying explanation. While we wait for EC to give its side of the argument, let’s note that every stakeholder must be satisfied about every aspect of the electoral process – that’s the bottom line for electoral democracy. It’s also something Trump should keep in mind.