I am saddened that President Trump has abandoned asking for the question about
citizenship on the upcoming census. I believe the information would be
valuable on several different levels.
Sportsfan123 - Herriman, UT---The only people disappointed are the
rabid trump haters that soaked up 2.5 years of trump russian collusion dilusion
hoax spewed by the leftist propaganda machine, only to find out by Mueller there
was no conpiracy between russia and the trump campaign to throw the election.I'm truly sorry so many were fooled and so many are still clinging on to
that lie.---My dislike for Trump began long before he ever
became a TV star. Any one who willingly associates with the likes of Roy Cohn is
suspect from the very start, then the bankruptcies, then the Birther Movement,
which should have ended with the answer to "who was Obama's mother, and
what country was she a citizen of?", just as it was quickly answered in the
case of Ted Cruz, documented to have been born outside the US, but to a US
citizen mother. End of story.Trump has shown himself repeatedly to
be unworthy of respect, whether in private business, or now in politics.The Mueller Report documented significant and organized attempts by
Russian or those working on behalf of Russia to influence the US political
environment to be favorable to Trump.That's documented. That is
not a lie.
Daedalus"Trump has proven again and again that he will not or
cannot deliver on those promises his supporters hold so near and dear."Other than the border wall and healthcare which congress refuses to
cooperate, what promises are you talking about? Please tell.."Repeated and consistent disappointment and dashed dreams eventually
results in humiliation and loss of self respect. The only surprising aspect of
america's abherrent Trump moment is how long it has taken for his followers
to reach that point."Is said poster speaking for the masses?
What disappointment? The only people disappointed are the rabid
trump haters that soaked up 2.5 years of trump russian collusion dilusion hoax
spewed by the leftist propaganda machine, only to find out by Mueller there was
no conpiracy between russia and the trump campaign to throw the election.I'm truly sorry so many were fooled and so many are still clinging on to
that lie.But a great economy that oblama had nothing do with is
bolstering my 401K and stock's - thanks trump.Jeclar" I'll pick the new world order over ...Trump"You
tube new world order from american president's - then read the U.N.
agenda's in their entirety.
@sportsfan: "If you love your country as it is there is only one man
willing to stand against this. His name is Donald Trump."Ah,
there's the rub.Even if you believe in and fear the various
convoluted conspiracy theories that you mention, your belief that Trump is
capable of competently addressing a mere fraction of those imagined problems is
misplaced.Trump has proven again and again that he will not or
cannot deliver on those promises his supporters hold so near and dear.Repeated and consistent disappointment and dashed dreams eventually results
in humiliation and loss of self-respect. The only surprising aspect of
America's aberrant Trump moment is how long it has taken for his followers
to reach that point.
Sportsfan123 - Herriman, UT---The previous four administrations
suported globalism it did not matter which party was in the white house, people
need to understand there is an agenda being pushed by the United Nations that
calls for a one world government and all four of the previous presidents
publically talked about a new world order.---Even with the
weakness of the UN, the World has not had a 3rd World War since it's
inception. There have been several 'go it alone' examples of the
US's intervention in the world, such as Vietnam and Iraq. Perhaps if the US
had dropped the A-Bomb on Hanoi, things would have turned out better for the US.
Goldwater hinted at that, and to his political doom.So, the New
World Order, where a global body is in place to work out conflict issues with
less or no warfare is seen as an evil, and where patriotism and imperial dreams,
which have been seen repeated in futile and massively destructive wars, are
praised.I'll pick the New World Order over a hot air windbag
such as Trump and his conspiracy oriented followers.
sman - columbia, MS---The Census results dictate where 400 Billion
dollars go and spent in communities of this nation ,it also affects the number
of of representatives each state has. That alone should be a good reason to know
how many citizens and how many illegals are in our population.---The purpose of the Census is to determine the population of a state, and that
will determine the number of representatives to Congress, and also determine
amount each state would be liable for in a direct tax, as provided in the
Constitution. Property Tax is a direct tax.There were a few
qualifiers on who and how to count persons in the Census. Slaves were given the
famous 3/5ths count, and 'Indians not taxed', is the other. All Free
Persons were always counted.Further the only question that is per
the Constitution to be asked, is 'how many persons live in the
house/home/residence' where the questionnaire is filled out.There are no Constitutional requirements such as birthdate, birthplace,
citizenship, or any other of the many questions that have been asked in the past
or are included on the currently in the process of being printed questionnaire.
Vermonter, the long form was not used in 2010 census, but the citizenship
question was retired from the long form census in 2005, and the American
Community Survey has had the question since 2005, so whether or not Obama
dropped the long form, he did not drop the citizenship question.
What is truly sad is that the SCOTUS got involved and supported the left in this
matter.I dont think people understand clearly what is going in this
country, this is not a bipartisan/partisan issue, it is much bigger than that.
The previous four administrations suported globalism it did not
matter which party was in the white house, people need to understand there is an
agenda being pushed by the United Nations that calls for a one world government
and all four of the previous presidents publically talked about a new world
order.Research agenda 21 and agenda 2030 on the U.N. website read
all of it not just the pretext and title, what all of us should be concerned
about is their plans for population control thru eugenics, hence the push for
abortion. No borders and no sovreignty, hence the politics regarding our border
and why democrats refuse to enforce immigration law.The U.N. charter
has changed since WWII instead of coming together as multi nations to prevent
another halocaust, they now intend to remove constitutions, patriotism and
sovreignty.If you love your country as it is there is only one man
willing to stand against this.His name is Donald Trump.
@RiDal "'Suppressing the response of illegal aliens' would be
exactly what we want to do. They have no right to be included in allocation of
benefits or resources"So if these people add to our traffic
congestion, we should press on blindly allocating funds and resources for roads
and highways without knowing the true numbers involved. The same for water
systems, law enforcement, to say nothing of locating super markets, car dealers
and other fairly necessary commercial establishments. Absolutely brilliant.
Just keep throwing money and resources out there without knowing where they
might be needed most, because after all, abysmal ignorance is always the best
solution to any problem.
@Daedalus, Stephen: "The effect -- and purpose -- would be the same:
selectively depress the response rate of a demographic with a known political
preference, ...."Uhhhh...."suppressing" the response of
gun owners would be suppressing legal American citizens. "Suppressing the response of illegal aliens" would be exactly what we
want to do. They have no right to be included in allocation of benefits or
resources. THey have no right to influence the allocation of Representatives in
Congress. They have no say in our government., They are here illegally, and
should simply be "not here". "Suppressing" them is called
"enforcing the law". Which part of "illegal" is so
difficult to understand. It is an important distinction. PS:
"Suppressing" their influence on our government is not
"persecuting" them or "harassing" them in any way. It is simply
avoiding having "foreign influence in our elections" which was the whole
pretext of the Russian collusion hoax.
@RiDal writes,"So let's say a non-citizen decides to vote:
With no proof of citizenship, and no ID required...how would we even know ? See the problem ?"I understand that you are very
concerned with people telling the truth and following the law.But
not a single Trump supporter has written in and stated the obvious: The
administration tried to get the question added but gave a phony reason for their
action. The Supreme Court ruled against them. The administration should have
followed the law and accepted the decision. But they didn't. They have
continued to attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court decision. So
all this concern about telling the truth and accepting the laws (even when it
wasn't convenient) was a sham? That violation of laws matters only when
it's the "other side" who is doing the violating?See
the problem ?
"Trump's attempt to weaponize the census"That was the
funniest part of the article. It illustrates the degree to which the globalists
see America's border as a "weapon." Leftists, here are
some other weapons: Law and order is a weapon against anarchy. Freedom, peace,
and prosperity are weapons against totalitarianism. Political censorship is a
weapon against democracy.
@reriding "Just imagine a future president decreeing that gun ownership and
number number and kinds of firearms in the house be included in the census of
his time, and you may quickly come to realize the danger of Trump's threat,
now rescinded."Indeed. The effect -- and purpose --
would be the same: selectively depress the response rate of a demographic with
a known political preference, resulting in a tactical undercount and skewed
allocation of federal resources and Congressional districts that favors one
party over the other.That would be wrong in equal measure for the
@Military Mom. NPR is bending the truth with selective reporting. The Census Long Form, sent to some Americans but not all, had a
citizenship question and was used up to and including the 2000 census. The Obama Administration terminated use of the Long Form for the 2010 census.
Just imagine a future president decreeing that gun ownership and number number
and kinds of firearms in the house be included in the census of his time, and
you may quickly come to realize the danger of Trump's threat, now
Vermonter, in Utah we must provide a valid driver license or ID card as part of
the voter registration process. To obtain such identification, citizenship must
be proven, using a birth certificate or other documentation as required by law.
It's true you don't need to prove citizenship at the ballot box, but
it's a part becoming a registered voter.
A comment was made that the question was on previous census, so why is it a
problem now. And this is a valid statement. I do a reasonable amount of
genealogy work, and use Ancestry to read past census for information.But the reality is the question wasn't popular even back in the day. For
example, looking at the 1900 census for Salt Lake City, there was three
questions about citizenship - are you a citizen, for how long, and year of
naturalization. It also asked for the place of birth of you, and your parents.
Majority were born in Utah, so the citizenship question wasn't asked. Of
those who were born out of the country, most answered when they arrived, but few
answered the naturalization question - at least in the census book I just looked
at.1920 census had more questions about native tongue.... questions
about citizenship - mostly when you arrived and such.1930s added a
question if you spoke english enough to work.1940, the question
largely disappeared and it only had a column for citizenship - which seemed to
be largely blank most of the time.So there was precedent to ask the
question.... somehow the administration just really bungled this up on rational.
@smanAccording to an NPR fact checking report published a few
months ago in March, "The last time a citizenship question was among the
census questions for all U.S. households was in 1950. The form asked where each
person was born and in a follow-up question asked, 'If foreign born--Is he
naturalized?' In 1960 there was no such question about citizenship, only
place of birth."
@NoNames - I wish I shared your assessment. Per reporting I read initially
Trump was willing to take the defeat in the Supreme Court, and move on. Hence
the permission to go ahead and start printing. But then he had a huge backlash
from those on the far side claiming Trump was abandoning his campaign promise.
To "save face" with this crowd he had to do something to show he still
was passionate about the subject - all though realizing it was pointless at this
stage.This data he has asked to be collected has been there for the
entire time he has held the white house. There is nothing new here. He since
the beginning has been obsessed believing there are millions that need to be
purged from the voting roles. He when first elected wanted the states to turn
over their voter registrations to the feds. Almost all states refused his
request. Trying to get people off the roles has been a constant. This has been an ill advised tactic for a while. Rather than boot voters, get
them to join your cause. But instead the tactic has been to reinforce your
base, and demonize the opposition. Im not sure that will work going forward.
It might... who knows.
@silo, Utah Blue Devil. Thanks for info. Seems to indicate no massive
voter fraud by non-citizens.
The Census results dictate where 400 Billion dollars go and spent in communities
of this nation ,it also affects the number of of representatives each state has.
That alone should be a good reason to know how many citizens and how many
illegals are in our population. Everyone is throwing a fit and acting as if
Trump is crazy for trying to get the citizenship question on the census
don’t realize that it was on the census all the way up to President Obama,
who took it off. Congress did not change the Census ,Obama did. Yet Trump
critics claim he is going against presidence trying to add it back.
Nice to see checks-and-balances working. Nice to see a wannabe dictator
Blinded by tribalism, too many are missing an important point of this report. If
Trump's motivation for asking about citizenship was to somehow suppress the
response rate of either legal or illegal residents, then there is really no
reason to seek citizenship info via other means. That he is asking federal
agencies to gather the data via other means is some evidence his intent was
other than--or at least went beyond merely--seeking to suppress response
rates.This is both important and good news. It is well past time to
dial back tribalisms and bigotries far enough to actually think rationally about
events rather than blindly attributing to malice everything the "other
team" does and mindlessly cheerleading everything "my guys" do.
As I understand it Utah requires proof of citizenship to get a drivers license.
If you are a legal resident, you get a drivers privilege card instead. And a
drivers license or valid Utah ID card is required to register to vote.... at
least that is how I understand it.If that is true, Utah requirement
of proof of citizenship to vote is satisfied by proof of citizenship to get
your license. And to vote, you have to show an ID. So its kind of circular.
If you have a privilege card, you will not be able to vote.
@vermonter"Does anyone know of a state that requires documented proof
of citizenship to vote?"California.Per the
California Secretary of State website, you cannot vote if you are not registered
to vote, and you cannot register to vote if you can't prove US citizenship
and California residency.Many other states have the exact same
"I don’t know of anyone ever being asked to prove citizenship to vote.
If they don’t need to prove it, then there would be very little evidence
of illegals voting. Does anyone know of a state that requires documented proof
of citizenship to vote?"You have to prove citizenship to
register. You have to register to vote. You have to be on the list of
registered voters to cast a vote. Without registering....no voting. Without
citizenship.... not registering.It's really that simple.
Now everyone can vote, and the purpose of the census -- tabulating population
numbers and location demographics -- can be fulfilled without the would-be
dictator in the White House trying to use the information for non-census
purposes. The guy in he White House has to learn that he doesn't have the
powers of a God, and is subject to the laws of the country (much as he wants to
forget/avoid that fact).
@Emmanuel. Re: No evidence of illegals voting. I don’t
know of anyone ever being asked to prove citizenship to vote. If they
don’t need to prove it, then there would be very little evidence of
illegals voting. Does anyone know of a state that requires documented proof of
citizenship to vote?@wgirl.I like your idea. Don’t allow
any questions not needed to count the population. This includes gender,
ethnicity and age. Or, allow those kinds of questions, including citizenship
question. Should be one way or the other. Maybe a judge or constitutional
scholar can tell us which it should be.
@RiDal - "But the census is the tool specifically set up to measure
demographic information. "NO! That was never the purpose of the
census. It was NEVER intended to measure demographic information.It
was only intended to determine how many people reside in the US (regardless of
race, gender, age, citizenship, etc. etc.). All that should ever be on it is
how many people. There is no other reason for any other demographic information
at all on the census as that is NOT the purpose of the census.While
it is true that for many years demographic information has been collected; that
is actually in violation of the Constitution.And what is worse is
now they not only do the census every 10 years; they do mini censuses every
couple of years; asking extremely personal questions that have no baring
whatsoever on the government representation; and claim under penalty of
imprisonment that one must answer their Spanish Inquisition type questions.Our government has long abandoned the very purpose of this nation's
founding! Life, Liberty and Justice FOR ALL!
Backing down Donald has a pattern that cannot be ignored. Losing everything
since Mexico did not pay for the wall.
@Ridal: "If we use a different counting method, why do you think illegals
would cooperate with that method any better than they would cooperate with the
census? In fact, the would not. "Looks like somebody told
Trump that we have other methods too. You don't like his idea? We will wait and see what Trump's plan is specifically, but there is
plenty of information about U.S. residents on Social Security, IRS, State
Department, and immigration records. Just be careful - he could
issue an executive order and demand all kinds of information. This time it is
citizenship status, but what will it be next? What information might a different
President demand - citing Trump's action as precedent? How might that
information be used? It used to be that Republicans didn't like
the idea of "big brother" looking over their shoulder.
As usual Trump is "All Hat and No Cattle." Nobody makes idle threats
better than this guy.
Trump says "I am not backing down", as he backs down.
RiDal - Sandy, UTJuly 11, 2019 3:17 p.m." . . .
let's say a non-citizen decides to vote: With no proof of citizenship, and
no ID required...and in a Sanctuary City, where the police actively refuse to
even check citizenship status, how would we even know if a voter was a
non-citizen? "Straw man argument. Let's say you try to
illegally emigrate to Russia . . . Trump's backing down on this
threat was expected all along. Two weeks of news cycle noise.Now his
schedule roundup of undocumented immigrants will probably follow the same
course: noise, debate, more noise, threats of lawsuits, more noise, and then
surrender.Talk about a legal headache for the Trump administration.
Maybe Donald Trump likes the mishigas, but his staff probably are saying,
@RiDal:Are non-citizens clamoring to vote? No. There is no
evidence of significant non-citizen voting in any of our elections. So
why all the doomsaying? What's the real agenda?
I wonder at what point liberals in reliably red states, and conservatives in
reliably blue states will decide to opt out of the census?There is a
legal penalty for not completing a census form. But, no one has been prosecuted
since 1970. And prosecution could be difficult since the completion rate was
only between 70% and 80% in 2000 and 2010. Also, will someone in
Congress propose that we use the Population Estimates Program instead of an
actual count to apportion representatives?This could get
@wgirl "rest assured there are many different ways that we count the number
of citizens, non-citizen permanent residents, and even people living here
illegally. The Census is not our only tool. "But the census is
the tool specifically set up to measure demographic information. If you
agree that we have a legitimate right to know this information, then why not use
the best tool we already have: the census. If we use a different counting
method, why do you think illegals would cooperate with that method any better
than they would cooperate with the census? In fact, the would not. It is simply absurd to have a national census of a population and not ask
which people are citizens of that nation.
@one old man : "How many times do we -- those of us who actually understand
basic American laws and the Constitution -- have to tell those who don't
that ONLY citizens of the United States may vote in an election.Non-citizens MAY NOT vote!"That triggers an irony alert. It
is like saying "Illegal aliens may not enter our country." An
obviously false statement. So let's say a non-citizen decides
to vote: With no proof of citizenship, and no ID required...and in a Sanctuary
City, where the police actively refuse to even check citizenship status, how
would we even know if a voter was a non-citizen ? How could we even investigate
it ? See the problem ?
Believe me, by the way, the media doesn’t have a clue, they've been
getting away with murder. We hit a home run with the non-census avenue. I was
never going to use the census. Never, fake news. I always was
going with the non-census for citizenship. It will hit them harder. I have
many, many friends, I must tell you, who say "I won" with the
non-census avenue.I’m a believer in doing very well with the
non-census avenue for citizenship question. In all fairness, it was always the
plan. In the whole world, it will be the best non-census avenue for citizenship
questions. They are laughing at us, the likes of which has never been seen
before, ever . . . about us not using the non-census avenue to ask the
citizenship question. The census avenue? Not gonna happen
right? That I can tell you, to be perfectly honest, I was very
much involved in the non-census avenue to ask the citizenship question.It's going to be major, major. A game changer, people are saying all the
Nottrue wrote : "The libs want as many here as possible for the reason of
votes."How many times do we -- those of us who actually
understand basic American laws and the Constitution -- have to tell those who
don't that ONLY citizens of the United States may vote in an election.Non-citizens MAY NOT vote!So once again, Nottrue, what you
have written is indeed Nottrue.( But it makes a great scare tactic
for people who failed their high school government class. )
For the Trump followers who really really wanted the citizenship question on the
2020 census, please direct your disappointment to the incompetent Trump
administration.It may well have been possible to add the desired
citizenship question, but it required adhering to the Administrative Procedures
Act. Trump and his team proved incapable of simply doing what other
administrations -- Republican and Democratic -- routinely did, on a wide range
of controversial and non-controversial issues.Trump failed.Trump failed his followers.He failed you.Again.And again.And again.Yet, you folks are still
planning to renominate him as the GOP candidate for the 2020 presidential
election.Why not choose someone who is even nominally capable of
managing tasks and people?
Remember in 2010 conservatives like Glenn Beck and Michele Bachmann had a
conniption about the census asking a question about race, and how they'd
say that people should either skip the census entirely or skip that question?
Chalk up more "winning" for T rump. The only thing left for him to do
at this point, 2 years into his Presidency, is make Iran great again.
Harrison Bergeron - Salt Lake City, UTJuly 11, 2019 12:58 p.m."Citizenship sounds like a perfect census question. In fact, this ought to
be the first question the census asks."When the Founder's
wrote the Constitution, they automatically excluded Native Americas as citizens
and agreed to count slaves as 2/3 of a person. The only citizens were white men
who owed property. Women, children, and non-landowning white men were excluded.
Yet there was no inclusion of "citizenship" in the census. The
Constitution left that out because otherwise they could not get the actual count
of the total residents.They, however, included Native Americans,
slaves, women, children, and non-landowning white males in the count of total
population. Other factors were included (i.e. how many children, how many slaves
were owned), but citizenship was not considered important as that wasn't
necessary in determining representation. The only reason that Donald Trump wants
the question included in the census as a means of keeping some people from
participating in the population count. That is what the designer of the question
intended and made clear in his presentation to Republicans.[more]1 of 2
2 of 2 [continued]America slaves did not gain legal status as
citizens until the 14th Amendment. Native Americans were not granted citizenship
until 1924. Chinese immigrants who had been permanent residents prior to WW2
were finally allowed to become citizens after President Franklin Roosevelt
signed the Magnuson Act (December,1943) rescinding the Chinese Exclusion Act of
1882 which made further immigration and citizenship for Chinese already living
in the U.S. illegal by federal law. Also, all other Asian groups were included
in this law (Indians, South Asians, Filipinos) except for Japanese. The
Immigration Act of 1952 finally allowed immigrants of Japanese descent to become
citizens and allowed my grandparents to finally achieve their greatest wish
after living and working in the U.S. for over 40 years.U.S.
immigration policy has always been fraught with problems, often racially based,
but never tied to the census. The writers of the Constitution saw no need to
exclude anyone from the population count. Although people lived here who had
been denied citizenship over the years yet still contributed to this
nation's growth, they had always been counted in the census.
Allegedly, Glorious Leader will not ask the citizenship question on the census,
but will use some other tool developed by the Commerce Department. The supporters of Glorious Leader will tie themselves in knots trying to spin
this surrender by the Master Negotiator.
Is Donald Trump just making noise and stirring the pot or is he actually
prepared to issue an executive order countermanding a Supreme Court decision?
Obviously a sitting president can't be indicted. We learned that from the
Mueller Report where Trump has approximately 10 charges of obstruction of
justice pending. So we can't expect him to get arrested for violating a
Supreme Court decision as one who is "above the law". But it could be
that anyone carrying out the executive decision could be prosecuted.The United States held Japanese prisoners accountable for carrying out illegal
orders. The idea of "just following orders" was held as unacceptable in
incidents violating international law. Japanese soldiers who executed American
airmen after capture were held accountable for carrying out orders given to them
by superior officers.Similarly, any person following through on an
illegal executive order can and should be held accountable. By implementing the
executive order in violation of a Supreme Court decision is involvement in a
conspiracy to violate the law. Trump may be able to avoid prosecution
temporarily, but others participating in his illegal act would be complicit.
"there would be a large movement where many citizens would mark themselves
as "illegal" on the census to protect those who really are and are
afraid to mark anything."Please oh please.
jsf - Centerville, UTJuly 11, 2019 10:59 a.m."And thus
your vote means less because of illegals being included in the number those two
things are allocated on. Also allows for undue influence by fewer people in
those illegal sanctuary states."So you are fine will excluding
legal immigrants, green card holders, refugees, and asylum seekers? Why do you
lump all immigrants as "illegal" in your defense of Trump's
Citizenship sounds like a perfect census question. In fact, this ought to be the
first question the census asks. Censuses ask all kinds of personal questions
about age, race, religion, income, etc. But none of those are as fundamental as
citizenship. It seems like the whole point of a census would be to see how many
citizens are here and how many foreigners are here. Traditionally this has
always been part of the census. Not sure why we are complicating the matter.
Nottrue - Salt Lake City, UTJuly 11, 2019 12:11 p.m."The
issue at hand is why are the illegal aliens here in the first place! The libs
want as many here as possible for the reason of votes. Everyone knows
that!"Too much Fox News in your viewing diet. If you're
going to misrepresent the facts, how does "everyone know it"?
We've got enough Right-Wing shills in these threads.
The latest update is T rump has backed down, yet again. Much ado about nothing,
"Remember when Republicans were all upset about "Obamacare" being
"forced" on the American people by a President that issued too many
executive orders"so what do conservatives think about the fact
that Trump has written more executive orders then Obama did at this same point
in his administration?
It appears that Trump and some of his fellow republicans do not believe in the
Constitution and that the Executive Branch = the Legislative Branch = the
Judicial Branch in power in our federal government.
Why would there be a risk of "undercounting" ? No legal citizen should
have any reason to not answer,____________________It's not an
issue of legal citizens vs. illegal immigrants. The concern is that immigrants
who are not yet citizens but are here legally feel they have reason to fear
because of what they see as Trump's open hostility towards Hispanics in
general. I quite agree with them.
@ridal - rest assured there are many different ways that we count the number of
citizens, non-citizen permanent residents, and even people living here
illegally. The Census is not our only tool. My ancestors - not
citizens - were given 160 acres of free land when they immigrated here. My
family reaps the benefits of that generous government hand-out to this day. I guess I should just be grateful that “America is here for
American residents” didn’t apply to them. They came here with no
passport, visa, money or skills, and the US government did all they could to
make their lives better. Make America Great Again?
I suspect if there was - by some miracle - a citizen question added at the last
minute, there would be a large movement where many citizens would mark
themselves as "illegal" on the census to protect those who really are
and are afraid to mark anything.
The issue at hand is why are the illegal aliens here in the first place! The
libs want as many here as possible for the reason of votes. Everyone knows that!
If they weren't here this wouldn't be an issue, I have no problem with
questions concerning citizenship. Make the guilty ones look over their should
for breaking OUR laws!
Even if the number of illegals is "overestimated"...why shouldn't
we find out what it actually is ? Why would there be a risk of
"undercounting" ? No legal citizen should have any reason to not
answer, and not counting illegals who may not respond is exactly what we want to
do. If we undercount illegals, then their presence does not dilute the vote
representation in the House of Representatives. America is for American
residents who are here legally. We are under no obligation to make things
better for illegals. That idea is pure insanity.
The silence of supposedly pro-Constitution Republicans is deafening. The
citizenship question will suppress an accurate count as required by the
Constitution. And, Trump is effectively thumbing his nose at the 3rd branch of
government, just as he has shown disregard for the 1st branch of government. If
you are pro-Constitution, you have no choice but to be anti-Trump. But then,
hypocrisy is a GOP trait in today's world, it seems. A personality cult is
more important than the work of the Founding Fathers. Go figure, but note it
and remember come election day.
jsf,". . . . thus your vote means less because of illegals being
included in the number those two things are allocated on. thus your vote means
less because of illegals being included in the number those two things are
allocated on."____________________This is nothing new and
it's overstated by an Administration that exaggerates illegal immigrant
estimates for political advantage by exploiting fear. The real risk is
under-counting the population which is preferred by Republicans who are
increasingly alarmed at shifting demographics that have not been moving in their
@JSF - People from states like Utah need to be super careful when they start
making complaints like "thus your vote means less."Because
of the Electoral College our vote "means" much much more than the votes
of citizens in California, New York etc. From the Washington Post:"each individual Wyoming vote weighs 3.6 times more than an individual
Californian’s vote. That’s the most extreme example, but if you
average the 10 most populous states and compare the power of their
residents’ votes to those of the 10 least populous states, you get a ratio
of 1 to 2.5."Do you think we should let every Californian cast 2
votes? Those of us living in small, more rural states, have no right to
complain about our votes not counting - those rich southern slaveholders set up
a pretty sweet deal for themselves...and us. Should we ask Hillary Clinton if
we should go with a system where every vote gets the same "weight?" The
winner of the election is who gets to most popular votes?Trump has
no case. He couldn't get the job done. He couldn't get a question
added to the Census, or Mexico to pay for his wall, or Hillary locked up.
Oh, puhleeeze, President Trump, puhleeeze.We all know you gin up
your supporters with your "tough guy" talk about illegal immigration and
demonization of persons with Hispanic roots.We all know that even
your generally compliant Supreme Court couldn't stomach the balderdash
peddled to the Court to sanction your questions.And we all now know
that you need to keep the issue alive to protect your precious "tough
guy" routine alive with your base of supporters. As with promises to deal
with the expense of certain drug prices, you will eventually cave on this as
well. Then find a way to assuage your tender ego and the keep your fan club
happy by blaming your failures on Obama, Hillary!, Pelosi, Schumer, or almost
anyone else.This is all so predictable, and frankly quite boring.
"The Constitution also explicitly granted Congress the final say when it
came to reapportioning each state’s delegation to the House and Electoral
College based on the census count." And thus your vote means less because
of illegals being included in the number those two things are allocated on.
Also allows for undue influence by fewer people in those illegal sanctuary
Article One of the Constitution explicitly put the census in the hands of
Congress, not the president. It provides that the first census “shall be
made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United
States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as [the
House and Senate] shall by law direct.” The Constitution also explicitly
granted Congress the final say when it came to reapportioning each state’s
delegation to the House and Electoral College based on the census count.
Remember when Republicans were all upset about "Obamacare" being
"forced" on the American people by a President that issued too many
executive orders and played too much golf? Good times, good times.
This move combines two of Trump's favorite things: flaunting the law and
promoting a bigoted policy. He's also doing it without Congress. Have we
become too numbed to see what this is? It's the opposite of democracy
based on the principles of equality. It's tyranny. Hopefully
Sen. Romney will speak up, but it's likely the rest of the Utah delegation
will fall in line, goose-stepping their way behind the Great Leader.
The Supreme Court ruled on the question and Trump refuses to take no for an
answer. I thought Watergate hit rock bottom in the Presidency acting above the
law. But Trump seems determined to define himself as the quintessential outlaw
Won't work, as the administration well knows. (Why do you think all the
lawyers on the case quit?) The administration has no real options after Roberts
flatly said their reasoning was "contrived". (A polite way to say they
were lying.) So now they are suddenly going to conjure up a reason
that passes muster? And get this past all the court challenges in time? Even
with Barr (Trump's new best friend) on the case, it ain't gonna
happen. And we all know why they want the question.