How did we come to this? Can’t even ask a citizenship question?

Jump to Last Post 1-3 of 3 discussions (28 posts)
  1. jackclee lm profile image83
    jackclee lmposted 2 years ago

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … izens.html

    The Census is conducted anonymously every 10 years as dictated by our Constitution. Yet, in 2019, we are debating whether we can ask if someone is a citizen or not?
    If we can’t ask this simple basic question? What is the point of taking a census?

    1. profile image0
      PrettyPantherposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      The point of taking a census is to accurately determine how many people are living in the United States.

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Is it?  Or is it to count the number of Americans in the country.

        Considering it is used extensively for such things as voting districts, school funding, federal funding for most welfare monies given to states, etc. it seems far more useful to count Americans, not foreign citizens without rights to any of that.

      2. jackclee lm profile image83
        jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        True, so what is wrong with asking in addition how many are citizens, how many are undocumented? How many are legal immigrants?
        It seems to me, the answer to those questions will settle the current immigration debate...no? Is it a crisis or not? We are told there are 12 million undocumented...what if that number is actually 50 million?

        1. profile image0
          PrettyPantherposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I already stated I personally have no strong feelings for or against asking the question. Since a judge recently ruled against allowing it, there must be legal merits against it.

          1. jackclee lm profile image83
            jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Not necessarily, we have activist judges sitting on the bench who ruled on anything except the Constitution.

            1. profile image0
              PrettyPantherposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              If the legal merits used in the ruling are faulty, then I'm sure the decision will be overturned by our conservative-majority Supreme Court.

              1. jackclee lm profile image83
                jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Good, I am glad we have a Conservative Supreme court who will over rule the 9th circuit 90% of the time...

    2. GA Anderson profile image92
      GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      jackclee, at the most basic and strictly interpreted level the answer to your question is because our Constitution states its purpose is to count persons, not citizens.

      If your inferred question is "Why shouldn't we ask the citizenship question?" then more levels come into play.

      To avoid confusion, I do support asking the question. And we have asked it until the 2010 Census. But it was only asked of a sampling of households, (damn, seems odd not saying Americans there),  instead of all households.

      A Census affiliate, the American Communities Survey, (ACS), has been asking that question annually since 2005. Albeit also as a sampling of households instead of all households.

      To reframe your question, I think it could be asked that; "If we have been asking that question for Census counts until 2010, (making 2020 only the second census without it), and we annually ask that question now in the affiliate ACS form, why is it a problem to expand the question to all census households instead of just a sampling of households?

      I think the answer, for both sides of the argument, is politics. And I also think the argument to include the question is the right one - when you consider more than just the basic level of the Constitution's wording of "person." Considering all the governmental efforts now informed by Census numbers, I think it is a valid question to include.

      GA

      1. jackclee lm profile image83
        jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Agree 100%

  2. Live to Learn profile image79
    Live to Learnposted 2 years ago

    That's actually very funny. We want to get a clear picture of the number of citizens in the United States but we can't ask if you are a citizen of the United States. Smells like a Democrat's dream census.

    1. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I can see that you are pretty "impartial" about the issue.

      I am a Democrat and I think that it is silly to assume that none of us are interested in an accurate census.

      1. Live to Learn profile image79
        Live to Learnposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Maybe I'm not impartial, but I'm not willfully blind either.

  3. profile image0
    PrettyPantherposted 2 years ago

    I don't have strong feelings one way or another about asking that question. Apparently, there are legal merits against it, though, since a judge just ruled against it. Not being a legal expert myself, I trust he/she knew what he/she was doing.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Deleted

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I don't think so.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Darn.  I deleted it ("was it a ninth circuit court?) because I wanted to add to it before any replies.  Sorry about that - I'll keep going with some information.

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      It was a court in San Francisco (where else).  The complaint appears to be that not counting foreign citizens will reduce California's representation in Congress and will reduce federal fund given to California.

      Given California politics re: illegal aliens, both complaints could be true.  But so what?  It strikes me that having a lot of illegal aliens in a state should NOT have anything to do with the number of House members, and should NOT have anything to do with entitlement funding to the state.

      So yeah, it looks like another liberal judge making calls based on politics rather than law.  (it has already passed one judge, just as you say.)

      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trial-begi … -question/

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, ofcourse, if it's a decision you don't agree with, it's a liberal judge "making calls based on politics rather than law." That never happens in reverse, I'm sure. roll

        All that aside, I am not interested in arguing about it because I don't have strong feelings one way or the other.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Can't agree or disagree because I don't know the law.

          But if illegals or other foreign citizens are being used to determine the makeup of congress then, legal or not, to me that is a problem.

          1. profile image0
            Hxprofposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Yep, and census results that take into consideration people that are here who AREN'T supposed to be represented are thus inaccurate.  I don't CARE that a judge had a problem with this, the logic is so clear cut that it's hard to see how there can possibly be a divide on this, or how it can even be a question.

            It's astounding to me that anyone perceives a problem with asking a question about citizenship on the census.

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              LOL  It isn't hard at all to see how there can be a divide - it's about political power and money, and whatever brings more of either or both is a winner.  To the one that gets it anyway; others will disagree, thus the divide.

              1. profile image0
                Hxprofposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Sure, a divide based only upon the pursuit of power/wealth, a divide that pushes aside concerns of law and order, and of constitutional government.

                1. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  You got it.

    3. GA Anderson profile image92
      GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Hey there PrettyPanther. I think those legal merits might not be what you thought.

      In my Google journey to find out more about this topic, I came across that Federal judge's ruling. He did not rule on the legality of the question, or of including it. He ruled on Commerce Secretary Ross' actions and explanations for adding the question.

      Judge strikes down Trump administration's plan to add a citizenship question

      But the "legal merits" of the question and its addition to the Census will be addressed soon enough. The Supreme Court has accepted the case.

      GA

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Good clarification.

      2. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        It will indeed be interesting.  The judges decision, from your link, seems to be that Ross had "something to hide" in his motives for the change, and that's about it.

        All of the other complaints - ACLU, Dale Ho, Marc Morial, etc.) appear to center on using the number of "immigrants" (read "foreign citizens") to determine the makeup of congress and federal funding to states with large numbers of foreign citizens.  Neither of which makes sense at all to me, for neither argument should be of any concern whatsoever.

        1. GA Anderson profile image92
          GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I think the Court will rule for the administration. Given that even now we still ask the citizenship question every year, (on the ACS), and that as a Constitutional point the purpose was to determine state representation, I don't see the anti-question side as having a valid argument.

          Would they say it is okay to improperly include the question in sampling surveys, but not complete surveys?

          GA

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I think so, too, but that's because I see the SCOTUS far more concerned with the law, and the intent of the law, than with political concerns.  Those concerns intrude way more than I'd like, but nothing like it does in courtrooms in very liberal states.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)