No Citizenship Question on the Census

[cordex]

I agree that there is nothing unconstitutional with asking if people are citizens (or if they have a firearm in the home, for that matter).  As Dogmush mentions, using citizenship as a filter for the counts, on the other hand, would appear to be unconstitutional.

We know you are so much better than those loser idiots with principles, but it is interesting how you really, really don't want to answer a direct question.

[TommyGunn]

 ...... 1. Because that is not what the Constitution says.
2. Not explicitly, no.  It was billed as an informational question like ones about the gender of the occupants.  I believe Republicans who support this are hoping for a reduction in illegal immigrant participation in the census and that Democrats are afraid of it, but no, that isn't the purpose.

I think that most Rs are ok with counting illegals per se,  but just not using those numbers to determine  representation (ILlegal immigrant, not ALL immigrant).  

[WLJ]

Reading Trump is expected to announce an EO on the matter today

[cordex]

I think that most Rs are ok with counting illegals per se,  but just not using those numbers to determine  representation (ILlegal immigrant, not ALL immigrant).  

I don't like the idea of inflating the representation of strongly Democratic regions based on the huge number of illegal immigrants living there, but if we're going to point to the Constitution to defend rights, we can't just wipe our backsides with it when we disagree with it.

I'd fully support an amendment that redefines representation based on the number of legal citizens.  I don't support what Ron keeps implying with winks and nods (but doesn't have the stones to come out and admit) where we redefine or ignore the Constitution when we want it to say something different than it does because he thinks crapping on the Constitution is the best way to stop the Left from crapping on the Constitution.

[DittoHead]

crapping on the Constitution is the best way to stop the Left from crapping on the Constitution.

This viewpoint has unfortunately been growing in popularity recently.

Reading Trump is expected to announce an EO on the matter today

He's got a pen and he's got a phone. 

[dogmush]

I think that most Rs are ok with counting illegals per se,  but just not using those numbers to determine  representation (ILlegal immigrant, not ALL immigrant).  

On the surface I think that sounds ok, but it pretty rapidly gets sticky.

We tax illegals.  (Some duck taxes, true, but we have a process in place to tax them, and many do, in fact, pay taxes).  If the government taxes them, they should get some representation in that government. Even if I disagree with them. Voting for that representation is another issue, spelled out in a different part of COTUS. But apportionment of representation is pretty clearly based on people,  not citizens.

Which is why it's important to actually enforce our immigration laws. This wasn't an issue when the total number of illegals was a tiny fraction of the population. It was just statistical noise. We need to figure out what we want our immigration policy to be, pass laws to that effect, and enforce those laws. Purposefully making and keeping an underclass that only sorta has rights is disgraceful, and it's what our legislature has been doing for 40 odd years.

Unfortunately,  the legislature has also been steadily abrogating their powers for 40 years so they can excuse never taking a stand on anything. So I wouldn't expect them to suddenly find a spine on this issue.

[WLJ]

If we're taxing them then that means we know who they are and where they are. So why are they still here illegally?

[Ron]

They are only free because we refuse to arrest and deport them for breaking our laws.

Don't talk to me about respect for the law when the law is being disregarded and purposefully being broken.


Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using Tapatalk

[Ben]

Which is why it's important to actually enforce our immigration laws. This wasn't an issue when the total number of illegals was a tiny fraction of the population. It was just statistical noise.

This is the crux of the issue to me. I don't have much of a problem counting residents who are legal immigrants, many, if not most of them, on the path to citizenship. Were illegals still "statistical noise", I couldn't care less about the citizenship question. I just don't believe it's fair, nor do  I think the founding fathers even considered, that there would be a very statistically significant portion of the population that would not only be here illegally, but whose numbers would be used regarding congressional representation.

The correct question on the census would be, "Are you here illegally?" so that illegals could be separated from the representation count (in Ben's perfect world, constitution aside). Obviously it's a question that can neither be asked, nor would be answered, but it's really the crux of the problem. Not "citizen vs non-citizen", but "legally here or illegally here".

[Jamisjockey]

This is the crux of the issue to me. I don't have much of a problem counting residents who are legal immigrants, many, if not most of them, on the path to citizenship. Were illegals still "statistical noise", I couldn't care less about the citizenship question. I just don't believe it's fair, nor do  I think the founding fathers even considered, that there would be a very statistically significant portion of the population that would not only be here illegally, but whose numbers would be used regarding congressional representation.

The correct question on the census would be, "Are you here illegally?" so that illegals could be separated from the representation count (in Ben's perfect world, constitution aside). Obviously it's a question that can neither be asked, nor would be answered, but it's really the crux of the problem. Not "citizen vs non-citizen", but "legally here or illegally here".

The real crux of the problem is that the R's never made a concerted effort to get rid of them all because of cheap labor.  The D's want the question left off so they can find ways to let them vote illegally, offer them free *expletive deleted*it, and redraw districts so that they never lose power again.

[TommyGunn]

On the surface I think that sounds ok, but it pretty rapidly gets sticky.

We tax illegals.  (Some duck taxes, true, but we have a process in place to tax them, and many do, in fact, pay taxes).  If the government taxes them, they should get some representation in that government. Even if I disagree with them. Voting for that representation is another issue, spelled out in a different part of COTUS. But apportionment of representation is pretty clearly based on people,  not citizens.

Which is why it's important to actually enforce our immigration laws. This wasn't an issue when the total number of illegals was a tiny fraction of the population. It was just statistical noise. We need to figure out what we want our immigration policy to be, pass laws to that effect, and enforce those laws. Purposefully making and keeping an underclass that only sorta has rights is disgraceful, and it's what our legislature has been doing for 40 odd years.

Unfortunately,  the legislature has also been steadily abrogating their powers for 40 years so they can excuse never taking a stand on anything. So I wouldn't expect them to suddenly find a spine on this issue.

I think most sentient Americans (I already limit the concerned population here) should be very upset at the idea of regulating  representation by counting illegals.   I suppose there is a lot of room for hypocrisy here .... if it's perceived most areas with illegals that would gain reps are liberal, the Dems might like it but the Republicans .... not so much.  And vica-versa.
As to exactly what the Constitution says,  I don't want to ignore it.  But I have to admit right now I'm not eminently certain I recall what it says,  and I have a copy so I will check.  I also have a copy of THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION,  an excellent well researched and annotated examination of the Constition and Bill of Rights,  and I will also check that,  as it is likely to make plain the meaning and history behind sections of the document that might escape the attention of the layperson.

[cordex]

They are only free because we refuse to arrest and deport them for breaking our laws.

Arresting and deporting is a much better solution that doesn't require violating the Constitution, although it's about as likely as a Constitutional amendment changing the way representatives are apportioned.

Don't talk to me about respect for the law when the law is being disregarded and purposefully being broken.

The law absolutely is being disregarded and purposefully broken.  What's your solution?  In clear, honest language, if you will.

[Ron]

I was hoping Barr would pull a rabbit out of his hat but on the way home I heard the Administration is dropping the issue.

Our devotion to Lex Rex has been weaponized against us.

I wish I had an answer Cordex.

What we have been doing, expecting leftists to play by the rules, is not working.

Hoping the left and the Democrat leadership starts respecting the rule of law, founding principles and originalist interpretations of the law is delusional.

The fundamental change the left is pursuing is replacing all of the above principles, as well as demographic replacement of conservative and heritage Americans with a more compliant people.

[WLJ]

Hold the phone

President Trump has apparently abandoned plans to pursue a citizenship question on the 2020 census. But, he still has a plan to collect the data. Speaking at the Rose Garden Thursday afternoon, Trump announced a new executive order that would order federal agencies to report citizenship information to the Commerce Department.

Trump Announces New Executive Order to Collect Citizenship Data
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2019/07/11/trump-census-speech-n2549941

[TommyGunn]

Well,  I guess the census question is a moot point now ....

[Andiron]

I only care about the EO if it's immediately followed by efforts to repatriate all non citizens.

[Perd Hapley]

https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/12/no-illegal-immigrants-not-included-census/

In fact, the department has decided resident illegals are included. The Residence Rule makes many other determinations, including decisions as to who should be counted in which state. For instance, tourists are counted at their homes. Foreign visitors are not counted, but foreign U.S. residents are, without distinction as to legal or illegal status.

Government - making reasonable, common-sense decisions since never!

[cordex]

I wish I had an answer Cordex.

What we have been doing, expecting leftists to play by the rules, is not working.

I've never expected them to.  That's never been at issue and you know that. 

You have implied repeatedly that it is time for us to start breaking rules and violating the Constitution wherever it is inconvenient in order to improve our chances of winning.  Whenever I've asked you to clarify you've dodged the issue.  You're quick to criticize people on the right who hold to principles even when inconvenient as being weak and stupid losers and have insinuated that it would be so much better to follow a less righteous path.  Apparently you are smart enough to realize that outright admitting you want to trash the Constitution to this group would be unpopular, so you just keep alluding to it.

Hoping the left and the Democrat leadership starts respecting the rule of law, founding principles and originalist interpretations of the law is delusional.

The fundamental change the left is pursuing is replacing all of the above principles, as well as demographic replacement of conservative and heritage Americans with a more compliant people.

roo_n,
I don't think that the left or Democrat leadership is ever going to start respecting rule of law, founding principles, or originalist interpretations of the Constitution.  I do expect the people on my side to do that.  If they don't, I'm not they're on my side anymore. 

As far as the last bit, you keep trying to play the same racial game as the left.  No thanks.

[Ron]

I've never expected them to.  That's never been at issue and you know that.  

You have implied repeatedly that it is time for us to start breaking rules and violating the Constitution wherever it is inconvenient in order to improve our chances of winning.  Whenever I've asked you to clarify you've dodged the issue.  You're quick to criticize people on the right who hold to principles even when inconvenient as being weak and stupid losers and have insinuated that it would be so much better to follow a less righteous path.  Apparently you are smart enough to realize that outright admitting you want to trash the Constitution to this group would be unpopular, so you just keep alluding to it.
roo_n,
I don't think that the left or Democrat leadership is ever going to start respecting rule of law, founding principles, or originalist interpretations of the Constitution.  I do expect the people on my side to do that.  If they don't, I'm not they're on my side anymore.  

As far as the last bit, you keep trying to play the same racial game as the left.  No thanks.

It’s not racial games it’s a calculated demographic attack on the majority population.

If you think this is “just happening” without intention I’m afraid you're being naive.

Since 1965 the nations majority population has been losing influence due to the unprecedented inflows of immigrants from all over the planet. The act that was passed was a “racial” act in that it specifically made it easier for non Europeans over Europeans  to immigrate here. That was the stated intent of the law.

The illegal migrant population is immense and the government has refused to actually count them probably because of the inevitable  backlash from American citizens of all races/ethnicities.

This isn’t just about what race or where these folks are from. It’s the overall numbers and the fact that every single immigrant group regardless of race or ethnicity votes in overwhelming majorities for the leftists who “play the racial game”.

All people are not the same. These aren’t red white and blue proto Americans just waiting for the chance to let our magic dirt turn them into rugged individualists who believe in natural rights and limited government.

It takes generations to assimilate to a culture generally but now there are so many immigrants and illegal migrants that the core culture is weakened, there is no American culture to assimilate to, other than being a consumer.

Across the board the majority of immigrant populations believe in the opposite of American ideals and Republican principles. As soon as they can vote, they vote that way, legally or illegally.

They are playing the race game while you and others virtue signal your country away.

[Ron]

It’s not even the race game. It’s simply the demographic game.

Flooding empires with foreigners is a time tested tactic for toppling them from within.

You don’t see unfettered massive immigration into China now do you?

Regarding the immigration act of 1965. Ignore all the flowery language, just look at the results of its implementation and the resistance to changing anything it has wrought.

Don’t believe the narratives, believe the actions and results. They are verifiable.