1. *I want to express my special thanks to Brian Barry for many comments and discussions. I am also very grateful to Olivia Arvizu, Monica Aspe, Jorge I. Dominguez, Robert E. Goodin, Jon Elster, Julia Maskivker, Thania Sanchez, David Stevens, Rebecca Weitz-Shapiro and two anonymous reviewers.
2. 1Although I briefly touch on the issue in Section III, I shall not discuss here how much time needs to pass by in order to distinguish between permanent and temporary statuses. Inevitably, any solution to this problem will involve a degree of arbitrariness. It is sufficient for my purpose, however, to indicate that the distinction is unavoidable and to use examples that are unlikely to be controversial.
3. 3I shall focus on the arguments made in Mexico and the Philippines. The following statistics may suggest why the issue of voting by non-resident citizens has acquired an unusual political importance in these countries. According to the Commission of Filipinos Overseas, there are 7.41 million Filipinos residing abroad: 41% are transients, 36% are permanent non-residents, and the rest have an indeterminate status. Long-term expatriates would constitute approximately 8% of registered voters. The Federal Electoral Institute of Mexico estimated in 1998 that 9.9 million Mexicans of voting age live permanently in a foreign country, most of them in North America. They would represent about 14% of eligible voters.
4. Deciding who has the right to vote: a comparative analysis of election laws