Question - Citizenship Question for Census

[Billy_Kinetta]

Please post where I suggested that.

Post number 9

And here it is ladies and gennilmin!

"Census forms could be sent out as late as December 31 2020 to be legally counted as fulfilling the ten-year mandate."

I just know you're dying to explain how this constitutes favoring ignoring a law.

The law states they have to be sent out by 1 April. Do wait till Dec 31 would be ignoring the law.

that was not too complicated.

I merely mentioned the last date to fulfill the ten-year mandate. As we have discussed, changing the law is an option, and certainly assumed by those of sound mind.

What do you suppose the chance are that both sides of Congress would approve of changing the law?

Depends upon the level of blackmail available to a pro side.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

So you want non citizens to determine the direction of states and our country. Of course you do.

For the millionth time, non citizens do not vote. If people who do not vote are determining the direction of states and our country, there is something wrong with that state or our country. Look to yourself.

They are giving unequal representation by being included in a census that determines representation.

Everyone in this country pays taxes -- property taxes through their rent if they don't own. Sales taxes. Road use taxes every time they drive through a toll or buy gas. The list goes on and one.
The easy answer is, crack down on illegal immigrants and there are a lot of things we need to do in order to be successful. It's not going to be pretty for awhile, but in ten years, for the 2030 census, this would not be such a big deal.

There are not going to be a lot of changes in the apportionment of reps, at least not according to the prognostications I saw. A lot of this is just more trash talking and making a huge deal out of illegals so Trump can get his Wall.

Paying taxes grants illegals no special rights. They are still illegals.

Being counted in the census grants no special rights either.

Indeed. But the rights and benefits of citizens should be considered before illegal invaders.

 

[depotoo]

Remember, we are not just trying to count citizens, but everyone.

Congressional representation is based upon total numbers, not just citizens.

What is the benefit of the citizenship question?

So you want non citizens to determine the direction of states and our country. Of course you do.

For the millionth time, non citizens do not vote. If people who do not vote are determining the direction of states and our country, there is something wrong with that state or our country. Look to yourself.

They are giving unequal representation by being included in a census that determines representation.

Everyone in this country pays taxes -- property taxes through their rent if they don't own. Sales taxes. Road use taxes every time they drive through a toll or buy gas. The list goes on and one.
The easy answer is, crack down on illegal immigrants and there are a lot of things we need to do in order to be successful. It's not going to be pretty for awhile, but in ten years, for the 2030 census, this would not be such a big deal.

There are not going to be a lot of changes in the apportionment of reps, at least not according to the prognostications I saw. A lot of this is just more trash talking and making a huge deal out of illegals so Trump can get his Wall.

you can go to almost any other country out there and pay the same taxes. do they give you rights to help determine the direction of their country for that? asking because i don't know. if i'm on a work visa to china, mexico, japan, UK, iceland - do i get my say in how the country is ran while i'm there?

curious how others do this also.

also - i don't care about a wall and i don't see how asking if someone is a citizen will force pelosi and co to go along with it. if the left is using these #'s to gain an EC advantage, then yes it needs to be dealt with. i'd feel the same if the right were doing things to give them an advantage of this nature.

At the federal level, most do not-
Right of foreigners to vote - Wikipedia

 

[iceberg]

not that i know of. but that wasn't my question. i am asking how others do this and if these "rights" are universal in nature or just our own. if no other country does this, then sure i will ask why we do it.

if we do it for the common good of us all, let's identify that and leave it alone. if we only care for poltiical advantages, then we're stuck in business as usual and may the best case presented win.

I do not know why the 14th was written the way it was, perhaps it was for political advantage back in the day, but it did get approved through a specific process.

Perhaps it needs to be changed, I do not know. But I do know that it is there in our Constitution and should be followed until such time as it is removed.

agreed. for the most part i've gotten a lot out of the different sides of this convo and gained a better understanding of how we've gotten this far. i love conversations like this and appreciate all the different views/sides that are focused on the overall issues we face. who anyone loves or hates *today* i really don't give a damn about in topics like this.

That is one of the overlooked problems with the census question being added last minute. As I stated earlier, these things are planned down to the most precise detail to get maximum response rates and the most accurate responses to the wording of the questions. They have been planning and laying out the next census since the last one ended. Throwing in an extra question is far more complicated than it might be worth. Even Ross admits that it would decrease response rates and response rates play a huge part in accuracy of the data.

and that's why i started the thread - to better understand the rejection and why. making changes as this have ramifications, intentional and otherwise. i just wanted a better understanding of the decision and for the most part, this has been a great conversation i've learned a lot from.

 

[depotoo]

Alexander Hamilton Quote
“The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice, and on the love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education, and family. The opinion advanced in Notes on Virginia [by Thomas Jefferson] is undoubtedly correct, that foreigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have left behind; to the country of their nativity, and to its particular customs and manners. They will also entertain opinions on government congenial with those under which they have lived; or, if they should be led hither from a preference to ours, how extremely unlikely is it that they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential to real republicanism?”

 

[mudwhistle]

Justices, Blocking Citizenship Question on Census, Call Trump's Push 'Contrived' | National Law Journal

how was the question actually raised on the proposal? could it be rephrased or better detailed to get this on there?

i hear it will misrepresent minorities and i don't understand how. if you're a citizen, who cares of what background? you did what you needed to do to be here, you get the same benefits we all do at that point. we keep throwing bodies into a crossfire of confusion and i just don't get it.

most stories are beating up trump or calling the "news" news but not really going into detail. i'll dig more as my day allows but would love to hear honest discussion on the question and why it's a "problem" to count citizens.

What the court decided
In the opinion, which was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that the Commerce Department does have the authority to add a question to the census asking respondents if they are citizens of the U.S. The conservative members of the court agreed with Roberts on that point.

Legal scholars and court watchers Thursday agreed that the Trump administration got in its own way by offering a justification that would not pass legal muster.
But Roberts took issue with Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’ explanation that adding the question would help enforce the Voting Rights Act. “The evidence tells a story that does not match the explanation the Secretary gave,” Roberts wrote.

This claim is ultimately what the Supreme Court took issue with, describing the reasons behind the administration’s reasoning as “contrived.” The final opinion of the court also suggested that Ross, who runs the department charged with administering the census, had plans to include the citizenship question long before that explanation. “The record shows that the Secretary began taking steps to reinstate a citizenship question about a week into his tenure,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

The Supreme Court blocked a citizenship question from the census. Now what?

I'm not sure why the Court will give Wilbur Ross a second chance to come up with a reason for the question--that seems contrived. Or how that would happen--on appeal, I suppose. But it sounds as if no matter what the "reason," the Court has already seen evidence that Ross had an agenda to disenfranchise Hispanics from the start.

If you're confused about the case, you're not the only one, according to the article. The "experts" are arguing about it, too.

Illegals shouldn't be counted in the census. Non-citizens can be. However since only citizens participate in the election process, they should be the only folks represented in the US congress. Non-citizens get state level representation because they are residents of that state. Citizenship isn't a question. Illegals deserve no representation

and this is my point. to simply blindly count and base our entire system on a final # w/o thought into how that number was built - well you may as well get on a boat and shoot torpedos at yourself. you're going down.

and i still have not been told how counting them in such a manner stop people from voting. if you're legal, no one is stopping you. if not, you shouldn't be voting anyway.

we're making up strawman situations to sell emotionally and that benefits no one.

Democrats think asking illegals such questions is offensive.
Criminal illegals deserve to be treated with dignity.