Posted on 07/02/2019 8:59:42 AM PDT by PBRCat
For most Americans, the census is something none of us really think about, for good reason.
It doesn’t come around but once every ten years, and then it’s gone again. Besides a few stories on the changing demographics of the country, and possible changes in the number of representatives any given state is allotted, the census is usually in the back of many people’s minds.
That, however, changed with the arrival of the Trump administration. Seemingly out of nowhere it was announced the 2020 Census would be modified in a simultaneously subtle and monumental fashion. Wilbur Ross, the Secretary of Commerce, announced in 2018 the next census would include a question asking for respondents’ citizenship status. Almost immediately the potential question was met with a bevy of criticism, support and lawsuits. Opinion
Those lawsuits culminated last week in the Supreme Court handing down a decision in the citizenship census case.
States with heavy immigrant populations, which also coincidentally happen to be strongholds for the Democratic Party, would likely lose seats in Congress, funding, and a host of other things as a result of their “official” population lowering.
The fear, by many immigrants, is certainly well founded, considering the president of the United States opened his campaign with violently racist remarks against immigrants, and his administration has made it a point to manufacture a humanitarian crisis on the southern border.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicago.suntimes.com ...
They were legal residents. Reisdent aliens were also counted. Indians were not.
The counting served as the basis for BOTH representation AND taxation, which was appropriated among the states (up until the income tax) according to the census results.
Only relatively recently (I’d guess 60 years ago, but I’m sure there are three dozen people on the forum who can quote the cases, and hundreds more who could look it up, some of whom have more time than I,) did the Supreme Court really get into details on how states doled out their Federal seats, as well as the state legislature seats. Many state legislatures started off with an upper chamber that was not primarily tied to population—not unlike the federal senate.
By focusing on the irrelevant, they skate around the fact that they have very very few rational arguments.
Not saying it's Mickey Mouse or anything...
No, the reason the US chamber, neocons and places like iowa and Nebraska want open borders is for cheap labor.
The census also determines the number of electors for the presidential election.
Because...uh...Trump...uh...Orange man....uh...Why are you racist?
As a Lib to explain the 3/5ths Clause regarding Slaves in the Constitution that they always vilify to push their narrative.
They use that number all the time in belittling the Founders of our Nation yet they have no concept that the final draft of our Constitution required negotiating between different factions to Unite the States to form our Union.
It’s all to help the Democrats.
>> States with heavy immigrant populations, which also coincidentally happen to be strongholds for the Democratic Party, would likely lose seats in Congress,
Heavy illegal immigrant populations....
The Democrat Thug Party’s critical support base —not the American citizen.
You may recall the they were only four fifths a person for the very reason they would change the representation power of Southern States.
It also, depending on how you view it, increased (or decreased) taxation.
Because criminal degenerates are people, too!
Slaves were counted because the Constitution required it for purposes of apportioning representation in Congress. There is no constitutional argument for counting illegal aliens.
oops three fifths.
When our country started it wasn't a country, it was a confederation.
The goal with counting illegal aliens in the census is the same as that for counting the slaves - artificially increasing the representation of those who benefit from the subjected status of those illegals/slaves.
Trump wasn’t discounting aliens, he was simply asking if them if they were in the country legally.
If someone with a PhD can’t discern the difference, they should lose their cushy position at the University.
The fact that the Obama Administration removed the citizenship question in 2010 is not mentioned, because it destroys his argument. It was removed because it provided a political advantage to the Democrats and supported their open borders strategy. They wanted to hide illegal aliens and eventually, enable the Democrats to register them to vote.
This was obvious to the Republicans and they resolved to return it to the Census when they returned to power. The Constitutional issue was settled by the Supreme Court. The question is Constitutional and the Secretary of Commerce has the power to decide the matter. We have been stymied by a process foul revolving around something called the Administrative Process Act (APA). It’s a speed bump and will be overcome. The Democrats are hoping that they can delay until it’s too late for 2020, but I think that Trump still has some arrows in his quivver.
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.