I've not looked at the 2010 long form, but if the question is not there, I think it would be interesting for someone do do a FOIA request for all discussions as to why they left it off.
https://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/d-61b.pdf
In 2010 there was no long form.
So, there’s precedence for including the question.
The big issue is that the long form is a research form, whereas its the entire census results that are used for apportioning Congressional Representatives.
I don’t know if the question of whether illegal aliens, or even guests on visas, constitute people that should be represented has ever been asked or answered. 3/5 is too much.
Perhaps Trump should just cite cost concerns and just use the old form.
SCOUTUS ruled 5-4 that the Commerce department has the authority to ask the citizenship question, and that the question is not unconstitutional. Roberts’ objection is that the administration didn’t give a good enough justification for it, a patently ridiculous standard. Trump should just declare victory, print the question anyway, and tell SCOTUS to go pound sand.
I wonder how Kamala the ineligible answered that question?
Back President Trump’s effort to make certain the census form contains the citizenship question in it and no reference to race. But to the country of where the respondent is a citizen of if not an American citizen.
TIME TO END HYPHENATING AMERICANS
One thing the Mexican Constitution has that we should consider doing.Mexico has no hyphenated Mexicans. They prohibit any reference to race when they conduct a census or issue any means of identification, Where a photo id is not available physical description is needed skin color yes but not by race but by nationality..
By doing this Mexico has avoided “balkanizing”, creating fractional disputes in areas where a given group in one of its states is a majority or a minority. Plus it could play a significant part in shutting down the political playing off racial divisions between Americans by the Democrats.
According to the Mexican constitution Americans legally in Mexico get a 2nd class treatment. Besides being unable to vote one must also be a citizen to own land and Mexico is very restrictive about granting citizenship. Because of that a US citizen besides not being able to vote,and cannot have title in their name to any land property in Mexico. It’s time the US should consider making that reciprocal.
But Tulsi's mother was born in Indiana so she probably won't have a problem.
I wrote this to a lib friend of mine:
Honestly, do you really think that the founding fathers were debating and drawing up the Constitution and B. Franklin said “Lets include illegal people for the purpose of apportionment of Representatives” and G. Washingtion, said “I fought the best army in the world and lost lots of American lives to create this new nation and you want to count people from other countries who have no loyalty to this country and they take and don’t contribute and they are a burden to society, and you want to count them for apportionment of Representatives.....Yea, I kinda like that Benji, lets run with that.” You gotta be kidding me if think counting illegals is constitutional, because if you do then you believe this scenario actually happened. hahahaha.
This is not an official census form. It is for informational purposes only.
So one wonders if it was really on the 2000 Census questionnaire or not.
I can't read them myself, perhaps you have to print them off, or perhaps someone with better eyes can read them.
Take that, Roberts.