progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,638
- 37,633
- 2,615
why you so jealous??Naw, just Elon, because the guy is a weirdo.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
why you so jealous??Naw, just Elon, because the guy is a weirdo.
Well, it's unconstitutional, to start with. The Census requires you to count everyone!
Secondly, if you have ever been a census enumerator, you'll realize that it's impractical. Non-citizens will just not send their forms in, and the Census bureau will find out who lives there by other means. For instance, when I had someone who wasn't cooperative, I would just talk to their neighbors to get their names. Only about 70% of people answer their census forms. The rest the have to be tracked down.
GOP effort to stop illegal immigrants being counted for House districts, Electoral College shot down in Senate
you can count them,,As it should have been, the Constitution is very clear that everyone gets counted.
As it should have been, the Constitution is very clear that everyone gets counted.
As you often say when I complain about gun-fetishist carnage, good luck with that. Most states aren't going to give up representation they have with large foreign populations.Since when have you cared about the Constitution?
You are correct though, as the term citizen isn't used. Back then the franchise wasn't universal, and thus women in all cases, and non property owners in some cases had to be counted even if they couldn't vote.
I would support an amendment limiting the count to citizens and legal residents only.
And we can remove the whole "Indians not taxed" thing at this point.
you can count them,,
you just cant use them for allotting electoral seats beings they are still under the jurisdictions of their country of origin,,
Except the Constitution makes no such distinction.you can count them,,
you just cant use them for allotting electoral seats beings they are still under the jurisdictions of their country of origin,,
As you often say when I complain about gun-fetishist carnage, good luck with that. Most states aren't going to give up representation they have with large foreign populations.
try reading the 14th amendment and get back to me,,Constitution doesn't say that. To change it you would need an amendment.
read the 14th and get back to me,,Except the Constitution makes no such distinction.
try reading the 14th amendment and get back to me,,
count them but dont include them for electoral seats
but it does say jurisdiction,,it says nothing about the EC, or the Census, of apportioning of house seats to the various States.
Sorry, I hate when the left goes nanners with Equal Protection reaches, I am not doing it myself.
Best way to handle this is the amendment process.
All congressional and electoral college apportionments shall be on the basis of a Census, counting citizens and legal permanent residents only.
Do you think that the electoral college of whacky Second Amendment would survive a constitutional convention?There are more States without that benefit than have it. And even the ones with some of them, they would gain anyway due to the massive shift out of places like NY and Cali.
Another thing to add to the list for a State called Constitutional Convention.
but it does say jurisdiction,,
using your logic an invading army that can maintain a stronghold shold get their own electoral votes,,
I highly doubt that was the intention of the founders,,
I think it would be difficult to get an accurate count of invaded territory.but it does say jurisdiction,,
using your logic an invading army that can maintain a stronghold shold get their own electoral votes,,
I highly doubt that was the intention of the founders,,
do you think the country could survive trying to take guns away form the people??Do you think that the electoral college of whacky Second Amendment would survive a constitutional convention?
Do you think that the electoral college of whacky Second Amendment would survive a constitutional convention?
if I steal something from you and have it for 100 yrs its still yours dumbass,,If they hold American territory, it's no longer under the Jurisdiction of the USA.
I understand the desire to do this, but the Constitution simply doesn't allow laws to change it.