Why counting illegal aliens in the Census is wrong explained calmly and clearly in a video

[BackAgain]

Why counting illegal aliens in the Census is wrong explained calmly and clearly in a video, and related matters.



This ^ is a cool, calm and accurate statement about how and why it is wrong to count illegal aliens in the Census for purposes of representation in the House and, thus, for the electoral college.

I agree with it. And I’m curious who can honestly and logically disagree with it. And why?

If illegal aliens get “counted” for other things, such as figuring out ahead of time what resources a State might need, that’s also problematic, too (although more understandable). But to allow (as in the example) California to increase its sway over national legislation by rewarding California’s willing acceptance of illegal aliens and encouragement of illegal immigration is simply wrong.

Thoughts? (I mean thoughts about the video. It would be cool to see any thread stay on the actual topic.)

 

[Moonglow]

The Constitution does not agree.

 

[MisterBeale]

Good explanation.

I know all of this, but if I was filmed trying to explain the same thing, I would put folks to sleep.

I agree with it. And I’m curious who can honestly and logically disagree with it. And why?

The only way someone can disagree with it, is if they use their emotions rather than their intellect, genuinely just hate the Constitution & the way America operates and don't have much integrity.

For example;

Could it be that the best land was stolen?

What makes crossing an imaginary line to feed your family a criminal act?

 

[Hafar1014]

The whole point of the census is apportionment that determines seats in the house and EC votes in each state. Therefore only legal voters should be counted.

Democrats know their states have lost millions in population resulting in at least a loss of 10 seats in the congress that will go to GOP states. They opened the border to fill that gap. Created sanctuary cities to attract them where they hoped they would be counted. Its not going to happen

 

[MisterBeale]

. . oh, and I suppose denial of what the Constitution states.

 

[Moonglow]

The whole point of the census is apportionment that determines seats in the house and EC votes in each state. Therefore only legal voters should be counted.

Democrats know their states have lost millions in population resulting in at least a loss of 10 seats in the congress that will go to GOP states. They opened the birder to fill that gap. Created sanctuary cities to attract them where they hoped they would be counted. Its not going to happen

It doesn't say that in the Constitution.

 

[Moonglow]

. . oh, and I suppose denial of what the Constitution states.

It states to count all...The only exception is the untaxed indians.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Why counting illegal aliens in the Census is wrong explained calmly and clearly in a video, and related matters.



This ^ is a cool, calm and accurate statement about how and why it is wrong to count illegal aliens in the Census for purposes of representation in the House and, thus, for the electoral college.

I agree with it. And I’m curious who can honestly and logically disagree with it. And why?

If illegal aliens get “counted” for other things, such as figuring out ahead of time what resources a State might need, that’s also problematic, too (although more understandable). But to allow (as in the example) California to increase its sway over national legislation by rewarding California’s willing acceptance of illegal aliens and encouragement of illegal immigration is simply wrong.

Thoughts? (I mean thoughts about the video. It would be cool to see any thread stay on the actual topic.)

Counting the population of a State (citizens, legals, and illegals) isn't "wrong". "Right" and "Wrong" are moral judgements. Which isn't what the Census is and the process used to then allocated Represenatives.

There is "what complies with the Constitution" and "what doesn't comply with the Constitution" - that is the measurement.

Article I Section 2 of the Constitution calls for the number of whole persons for apportionment. This language is repeated in Amendment the Fourteenth.

I'm fine with not counting non-citizens for apportionment purposes. Make a case and go through the process to change the Constitution.

Yes it's hard, yes you have to get a lot of people to agree with you. But changing the Constitution shouldn't be easy nor should it be done on a whim.

WW

 

[Moonglow]

Why do you people hate the Constitution and what it says?

 

[candycorn]

The whole point of the census is apportionment that determines seats in the house and EC votes in each state. Therefore only legal voters should be counted.

Wrong.

Democrats know their states have lost millions in population resulting in at least a loss of 10 seats in the congress that will go to GOP states. They opened the birder to fill that gap. Created sanctuary cities to attract them where they hoped they would be counted. Its not going to happen

Also wrong...just more idiotic.

 

[WorldWatcher]

It states to count all...The only exception is the untaxed indians.

In the oldy times, Indian reservations were considered sovereign nations internal to the US. Are there really any Indians not taxed anymore? (Not really.)

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

The only way someone can disagree with it, is if they use their emotions rather than their intellect, genuinely just hate the Constitution & the way America operates and don't have much integrity.

Actually the way a person disagrees with it from a legal standpoint isn't "emotion", it's to quote the language of the Constitution.

WW

 

[MisterBeale]

It states to count all...The only exception is the untaxed indians.

That's true. The guy in the video admits as much.


But it is also true that Congress is given the power to determine who can stay in the United States, not the various individual states and municipalities.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C4-1-1/ALDE_00013160/

Overview of Naturalization Clause

www.law.cornell.edu

You are smart enough to know, the founders never intended for illegals to stay in the U.S. That much is clear from Article I, Section 8, Clause 4.

 

[BackAgain]

The Constitution does not agree.

Really? The Constitution contemplated and allowed the “counting” of a massive influx of illegal aliens for purposes of Congressional and Electoral College purposes?

Please share with us all, if you’d be so kind, which Article, Clause, Section or Amendment supports your claim.

 

[Moonglow]

That's true. The guy in the video admits as much.


But it is also true that Congress is given the power to determine who can stay in the United States, not the various individual states and municipalities.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C4-1-1/ALDE_00013160/

Overview of Naturalization Clause

www.law.cornell.edu

You are smart enough to know, the founders never intended for illegals to stay in the U.S. That much is clear from Article I, Section 8, Clause 4.

True, but the language used in the Constitution, we all play freeze frame and get counted, then go back to playing.

 

[MisterBeale]

Actually the way a person disagrees with it from a legal standpoint isn't "emotion", it's to quote the language of the Constitution.

WW

Agreed.

There is not a damn thing in the Constitution about the Federal Government allowing millions of un-Naturalized illegals to live, work, and influence the politics of the federal government.

Just the opposite.

ArtI.S8.C4.1.1 Overview of Naturalization Clause

 

[Hafar1014]

The Constitution does not agree.

It doesnt define person but expect the SC to define it as a citizen or legal voter. They will not be counted and most will be deported anyway

 

[BackAgain]

Counting the population of a State (citizens, legals, and illegals) isn't "wrong". "Right" and "Wrong" are moral judgements. Which isn't what the Census is and the process used to then allocated Represenatives.

There is "what complies with the Constitution" and "what doesn't comply with the Constitution" - that is the measurement.

Article I Section 2 of the Constitution calls for the number of whole persons for apportionment. This language is repeated in Amendment the Fourteenth.

I'm fine with not counting non-citizens for apportionment purposes. Make a case and go through the process to change the Constitution.

Yes it's hard, yes you have to get a lot of people to agree with you. But changing the Constitution shouldn't be easy nor should it be done on a whim.

WW

The Census has its purposes. But giving more House Representatives to States which encourage illegal immigration to artificially swell their “population” does not appear to have been even considered.

Therefore, why would it be wrong to returning to a period where all people were counted for some purposes but only counting citizens would be the method of apportioning Representation in the House and, thus, also the total EC vote?

 

[BackAgain]

Why do you people hate the Constitution and what it says?

I don’t. Why do you?

 

[my2¢]

I'd prefer that only citizens were counted, but whatever the case it should be addressed through legislation. Perhaps until then a compromise could be reached that illegals be counted as three fifths a person.