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?
The point of taking a census is to accurately determine how many people are living in the United States.
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.
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?
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.
Not necessarily, we have activist judges sitting on the bench who ruled on anything except the Constitution.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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/
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.
All that aside, I am not interested in arguing about it because I don't have strong feelings one way or the other.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
by ga anderson 6 years ago
MyEsoteric posed the question that prompted this thread, and Wilderness gave the response that sired it.In a thread about state governors that declined Obamacare's Expanded Medicaid program, MyEsoteric asked the question; "What do you think are a state's responsibilities to it citizens?I tried...
by ga anderson 5 years ago
The controversy over birthright citizenship, (aka `Anchor babies`), seems to one of interpretation.Specifically, the 2nd hurdle to citizenship the 14th Amendment included; that the mother must be; "...subject to the jurisdiction of the United States." It appears that there are two...
by Jack Lee 22 months ago
If we are not allowed to ask this question according to the distinguished Supreme Court, how else can we get an e stimate?The answer is very simple. We have a tremendous database both in our public agencies and in private or public traded companies. In fact, I am willing to bet, Google and...
by Ralph Schwartz 2 years ago
President Trump is taking action on immigration due to decades of failure by Congress. He plans on issuing an Executive Order to remove citizenship for babies born within the US border by non-citizens or illegal aliens known as "anchor babies." This action is guaranteed to be...
by Leslie McCowen 7 years ago
A Bill, “H.R. 4133: United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012,” legally binds America to a “Jewish” state.The Resolution was passed under a procedure called “suspension of the rules” typically reserved for non-controversial topics requiring little debate and allowing for a...
by Ralph Schwartz 3 years ago
President Trump is pressing for a question to be asked on the 2020 census to state: Are you a US Citizen? Seems like a fair question since the census has a lot to do with how governmental resources are allocated and of course the number of representatives each area has in Congress. Yet,...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This 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.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We 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 Pixels||We 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.|