Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Illegals may give state more clout - ... more seats in Congress
MediaNews ^ | 10/07/2007 | Mike Swift

Posted on 10/07/2007 1:53:58 PM PDT by calcowgirl

Illegals may give state more clout
Undocumented population may give California more seats in Congress

Illegal immigration is channeling political clout to California and other border states from the Northeast and Midwest, according to a new report that predicts that California's undocumented population will equate to two seats in Congress following the 2010 Census.

The Connecticut report predicts that California, Arizona, Texas, Florida and New Jersey will gain seats in Congress after the next Census because of their illegal immigrant populations. Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, and Ohio will each lose a seat because they have relatively few undocumented immigrants. New York, which would lose two seats under the current system, would lose only one seat if illegal immigrants were excluded.

California would appear to have the most to lose if the apportionment of seats in the House were changed to be based only on citizens. According to Rodriguez' projections, California, which has one quarter of the nation's estimated 11.6 million undocumented immigrants, would be the only state to lose two seats after the 2010 Census if that population were not counted.

The nation's population of unauthorized immigrants has grown by 37 percent since the last Census, according to the U.S. Office of Immigration Statistics. California has about 2.8 million unauthorized immigrants, about 1.2 million more than Texas, the state with the second-highest total.

(Excerpt) Read more at insidebayarea.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: aliens; apportionment; census; congress; illegals; immigrantlist; immigration
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-78 next last

1 posted on 10/07/2007 1:54:03 PM PDT by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Lets all give the democrats a big round of applause. And while we’re at it lets all send out a special thank you to the open border republicans.


2 posted on 10/07/2007 1:56:36 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Not news, but fact....that’s how representation is made. Like slavery in modern times ie it’s used both on representation and cheap labor.


3 posted on 10/07/2007 1:57:37 PM PDT by Rick_Michael (The Anti-Federalists failed....so will the Anti-Frederalists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Why on earth would we count non-citizens for electing representatives? I didn’t even know we were doing this. This is madness. We just can’t wait to give our country away.


4 posted on 10/07/2007 2:00:11 PM PDT by MizSterious (Deport all the illegals to sanctuary cities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael

Then let’s use the three-fifths rule.


5 posted on 10/07/2007 2:00:18 PM PDT by Publius (A = A)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
If they are undocumented, how does anybody prove that they are actually there? And, just who is in charge of providing the official count of people who aren’t there?
6 posted on 10/07/2007 2:02:16 PM PDT by Bernard (The only fair tax is the tax that taxes you and not me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Like DUH! Just look along the borders at the Red/Blue maps of the last election.


7 posted on 10/07/2007 2:03:08 PM PDT by mtbopfuyn (I think the border is kind of an artificial barrier - San Antonio councilwoman Patti Radle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard
They use the same "drive-by" methodology to count the homeless. In the case of illegals, I agree with a previous poster where if they are "un-documented", they are not technically HERE, and foreign citizens who ARE here are not part of this country's population, in ANY case.

This crap has no end, and we need to establish a bounty system for U.S. Citizens who turn in an illegal. WE could SAVE Billions this way, and it sure would clean up this mess.

8 posted on 10/07/2007 2:05:48 PM PDT by traditional1 ( Fred Thompson-The ONLY electable Republican Candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bernard
If they are undocumented, how does anybody prove that they are actually there?

They're probably only undocumented in Mexico because they have documentation out the wazoo in the US - welfare, registered democrats, school enrollment, government housing, paychecks, bank accounts, home ownership, drivers licenses, jail time, unpaid hospital bills, etc.

9 posted on 10/07/2007 2:06:55 PM PDT by mtbopfuyn (I think the border is kind of an artificial barrier - San Antonio councilwoman Patti Radle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mtbopfuyn
That's an interesting point.

Put a map of "crime areas" next to a map of "Democrat-voting areas", and I am sure it would show where the voters for the Sociailists are.

10 posted on 10/07/2007 2:07:49 PM PDT by traditional1 ( Fred Thompson-The ONLY electable Republican Candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
Why on earth would we count non-citizens for electing representatives? I didn’t even know we were doing this. This is madness. We just can’t wait to give our country away.

That is why the last couple census's they RATS insist upon counting the homeless under bridges. More representative for the RAT concentrated areas.

11 posted on 10/07/2007 2:11:36 PM PDT by w1andsodidwe (Jimmy Carter allowed radical Islam to get a foothold in Iran.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
I would go even further. I would propose that representation be calculated ONLY FROM U.S. CITIZENS THAT ARE REGISTERED VOTERS.

If you aren’t a registered voter, you shouldn’t get representation.

12 posted on 10/07/2007 2:13:00 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY; abner; Abundy; AGreatPer; Albion Wilde; alisasny; ALlRightAllTheTime; AlwaysFree; ...

PING!


13 posted on 10/07/2007 2:14:27 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Repeal the Terrible Two - the 16th and 17th Amendments. Sink LOST! Stop SPP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Marvelous.


14 posted on 10/07/2007 2:14:42 PM PDT by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Elections have consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

15 posted on 10/07/2007 2:17:02 PM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: w1andsodidwe
That is why the last couple census's they RATS insist upon counting the homeless under bridges.

And if the homeless guy under the bridge has multiple personalities, they will register each personality as a separate voter. As Democrat voters, of course!

16 posted on 10/07/2007 2:17:48 PM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Actually, on second thought, I would go even further than my previous post. I would calculate representation by the number of actual voters that showed up to vote in the previous election.


17 posted on 10/07/2007 2:17:55 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
California would appear to have the most to lose if the apportionment of seats in the House were changed to be based only on citizens.

Someone please explain why congressional seats would be based on anything BUT citizens????

18 posted on 10/07/2007 2:24:27 PM PDT by TheBattman (I've got TWO QUESTIONS for you....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius
Then let’s use the three-fifths rule.

I'll give it a try but after the first fifth, things get blurry and it makes it hard for me to drive.

19 posted on 10/07/2007 2:25:53 PM PDT by BipolarBob (Yes I backed over the vampire, but I swear I didn't see it in my rear view mirror.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

A repeat but for dif’t reasons?

The failure to reapportion in 1920 was also a reflection of regional power dynamics. The results of the 1920 Census revealed a major and continuing shift in population from rural to urban areas, which meant that many representatives elected from rural districts resisted reapportionment. Also, the growing number of immigrants entering this country had some impact on population shifts. Delay followed delay as rural interests tried to come up with mechanisms that would reduce the impact of the population shift. Congressmen from rural areas that would lose seats to more urbanized areas simply blocked passage of reapportionment legislation for 9 years.

http://www-atlas.usgs.gov/articles/boundaries/a_conApport.html


20 posted on 10/07/2007 2:29:47 PM PDT by crazyshrink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-78 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson