Politico: Census to add controversial question on citizenship status
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 10:48:53 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Politico: Census to add controversial question on citizenship status
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Politico: Census to add controversial question on citizenship status  (Read 3301 times)
BudgieForce
superbudgie1582
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,298


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 27, 2018, 10:09:06 AM »

Oh, also, republicans shouldn't want this either. Undercounting immigrants will also effect red states. Immigrants don't respond and Texas won't gain 3 congressional seats.

A big part of this is probably Republicans wanting citizenship data so they can draw maps based on citizens only, as opposed to adult population. There was a lawsuit in 2016 or 2017 regarding this. They sued to try and force redistricting to be based on citizens (or at least let states choose), and I think part of the rationale against it was that the census doesn't have full citizenship data - only from the ACS.

So it could end up being much worse, even with Texas maybe getting a lower count.

Wouldn't that require a vote in the Senate?
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,478
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2018, 10:09:42 AM »

At this point they need to drop all the demographic questions, all we need the census for is to find out population numbers, the demographics of the people should be of no concern to the government.

That would violate the VRA.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: March 27, 2018, 10:11:34 AM »

Wouldn't that require a vote in the Senate?

I'm not sure. A vote on what?
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,478
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: March 27, 2018, 10:16:52 AM »

The Constitution via the 14th Amendment Section 2 literally says "counting the whole number of persons in each State." They use the word citizen Section 1 but not in Section 2, which means they deliberately wanted the census to count people, not citizens when dealing with apportionment of seats.
Logged
BudgieForce
superbudgie1582
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,298


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2018, 11:15:24 AM »

Not sure how accurate this guy is but someone on Twitter did the calculations for seat appointments in 2020 with less Hispanic responses.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MaxwellBPalmer/status/978654113360642048
So pretty much a wash.

Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: March 27, 2018, 11:44:11 AM »

This could easily cost California a House seat.
Logged
junior chįmp
Mondale_was_an_insidejob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,396
Croatia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: March 27, 2018, 11:45:34 AM »

Not sure how accurate this guy is but someone on Twitter did the calculations for seat appointments in 2020 with less Hispanic responses.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MaxwellBPalmer/status/978654113360642048
So pretty much a wash.



Appears to hurt big growing red States more too
Logged
Jeffster
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 476
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: March 27, 2018, 12:02:25 PM »

Why should non-citizens have representation in the Congress? That's just stupid. They aren't citizens and aren't supposed to be able to vote, so why should they get representation? This is like when Southerners wanted slaves counted so they could get more representation in Congress and the Electoral College, while not allowing those slaves to vote, but then had to settle for the 3/5 compromise. You guys are using parts of the 14th Amendment designed to prevent former slaves from not being counted or treated as citizens in order to extend those rights to illegal immigrants, and padding your Congressional and Electoral College numbers in the process.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: March 27, 2018, 12:31:11 PM »

My issue with only using voting age citizens in redistricting was not only the undocumented immigrant factor, but also (maybe even mostly) the exclusion of children - even citizen children, who would eventually be voting age at some point during the decade where those maps were set. It seems extraordinarily unfair to exclude children/teenagers, even those who are only 12+, who would become eligible to vote in anywhere from less than a year - year(s) after the maps are enacted. You are essentially cutting out future voters for no good reason. Our system should incorporate future voters into its design, not exclude them.

As for the immigrants, the census should count all people and attempt to do it accurately. I'd like to see this question thoroughly tested and for the govt to find ways to maintain acceptable response rates if they insist on asking that in the initial census. This is not that. They are putting in a problematic question just a couple years before the census goes live. That is not right.

Maybe, consider it a difference of how I view representation. These people are here whether you like it or not, and they are vital cogs in the economy, whether you like it or not. Representatives should represent the people in their district, undocumented or not.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: March 27, 2018, 12:31:45 PM »

Off-topic obviously, but I do find it interesting how immigration always attracts a particular kind of user - those like Mortimer or Jeffster, usually are very argumentative and passionate about what must be their top issue.

EnglishPete and ahugecat were also the same, except their issue was the Russia investigation, and they would immediately invade any thread on it and drown it in pages of arguments that looked like they were ripped from the comments section of Breitbart.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,803


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: March 27, 2018, 12:32:56 PM »

The 2020 Census is going to be massively politicized. At this point, it is totally discredited before it even begins. I wonder if it would be legal to conduct a mid-decade Census say in 2022 or 2023 to fix the problems that this will have.
Logged
Strudelcutie4427
Singletxguyforfun
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,375
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: March 27, 2018, 06:29:22 PM »

Wonderful news! Now we will be able to draw districts with Citizen Voting Age Population.
Wait, districts are currently not drawn that way? In that case, including this question is obviously good.

Only in Texas that I know of
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: March 27, 2018, 06:44:00 PM »

In most countries o/c electoral apportionment is based on the enrolled electorate.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: March 27, 2018, 06:55:18 PM »

Maybe, consider it a difference of how I view representation. These people are here whether you like it or not, and they are vital cogs in the economy, whether you like it or not. Representatives should represent the people in their district, undocumented or not.

I am not trying to start a fight on this, but I'm legit curious: Is there evidence to suggest that having non-citizens as neighbors makes you more likely to vote in a way that represents the interests of non-citizens?  Has this been studied?  Because even if you are apportioning seats based on total population, it's only the actual citizens of voting age in those districts who are doing the voting.

What if, hypothetically, the evidence actually went the other way?: That living near non-citizens made people more racist, and therefore more likely to vote in representatives who advocated policies that non-citizens didn't like?  Would that change the calculus?
Logged
Sestak
jk2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,268
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: March 27, 2018, 07:10:42 PM »

Guys the constitution is quite clear. States are apportioned House seats by total population.

Having this question essentially deters some people from answering the census, which deprives states of their right to constitutional representation.

Also if we drew districts by voting age population, everyone 18-28 would be disenfranchised by the end of the decade.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: March 27, 2018, 07:27:48 PM »

I am not trying to start a fight on this, but I'm legit curious: Is there evidence to suggest that having non-citizens as neighbors makes you more likely to vote in a way that represents the interests of non-citizens?  Has this been studied?  Because even if you are apportioning seats based on total population, it's only the actual citizens of voting age in those districts who are doing the voting.

What if, hypothetically, the evidence actually went the other way?: That living near non-citizens made people more racist, and therefore more likely to vote in representatives who advocated policies that non-citizens didn't like?  Would that change the calculus?

Hmmm, I'm not sure. I thought I recalled some analyses of the 2016 election showing heightened racially polarized voting in areas with significant minority populations... but that is not exactly for undocumented immigrants - at least not entirely.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: March 27, 2018, 07:42:03 PM »

Maybe, consider it a difference of how I view representation. These people are here whether you like it or not, and they are vital cogs in the economy, whether you like it or not. Representatives should represent the people in their district, undocumented or not.

I am not trying to start a fight on this, but I'm legit curious: Is there evidence to suggest that having non-citizens as neighbors makes you more likely to vote in a way that represents the interests of non-citizens?  Has this been studied?  Because even if you are apportioning seats based on total population, it's only the actual citizens of voting age in those districts who are doing the voting.

What if, hypothetically, the evidence actually went the other way?: That living near non-citizens made people more racist, and therefore more likely to vote in representatives who advocated policies that non-citizens didn't like?  Would that change the calculus?


I'm not sure about voting patterns but there's definitely been a lot of work on the relationship between living in or near immigrant communities and having a positive attitude toward immigrants. The same generally holds true for undocumented immigrants. In contrast, places with few immigrants tend to have less positive views about them.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: March 27, 2018, 08:17:03 PM »
« Edited: March 27, 2018, 08:59:16 PM by True Federalist »

California has already sued. 95% chance in the next couple of weeks there will be an injunction that will stop this. Honestly, even a conservative judge would rule against this question.

Actually, no. I doubt the suit will succeed. The reason given is plaus even tho I have doubts as to its motivation.
Logged
SteveRogers
duncan298
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,155


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -5.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: March 27, 2018, 10:04:23 PM »

Wonderful news! Now we will be able to draw districts with Citizen Voting Age Population.
Wait, districts are currently not drawn that way? In that case, including this question is obviously good.

The Constitution says persons, not citizens.

To clear up some of the confusion on these points in this thread (since I studied this issue in my election law class in law school):

No legal analyst seriously questions the fact that the Constitution requires the use of total population, not citizen population or voter eligible population, for the apportionment of house seats between states. This won't change no matter what questions are added to the census.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


There's a slightly different question of what measure of population, if any, the Constitution requires for the intrastate drawing of districts, both U.S. congressional districts and state legislative districts. SCOTUS back in 1964 announced the "One person, one vote" test in Reynolds v. Sims, holding that the 14th Amendment requires states to draw legislative districts with essentially equal populations. Since then, pretty much everyone always assumed that this meant equal population based on total population as per the census, and every state currently draws its legislative districts according to total population.

In 2016 SCOTUS heard a case in which a conservative group sued the Texas legislature arguing that the 14th Amendment requires states to use voter-eligible population rather than total population. Their argument was that drawing districts based on total population dilute certain voter's votes relative to districts with large numbers of non-citizens, minors, and ineligible felons. The Texas legislature for its part was not attempting to draw a map based on voter-eligible population but argued for reserving its right to do so in the future. SCOTUS ruled in Evenwel v. Abbot that the Constitution certainly didn't require the use of voter-eligible population. The Court did not actually reach the question of whether, as most scholars have assumed, "one person, one vote" mandates the use of total population. So technically SCOTUS has not yet shut the door on states using voter-eligible or citizen population in their districting should a state attempt to do so in the future.

So yes, there's technically an unsettled question of whether or not state legislatures can draw districts by disregarding non-citizens when equalizing population. But Krazen is flat wrong that adding this question to the U.S. census somehow facilitates that. If and when that question is before the Court, the Court will decide that question through Constitutional interpretation.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: March 27, 2018, 10:07:01 PM »

It will be more difficult to get illegal aliens to answer the Census. If enumerators do not ask about citizenship they will not get to say something like i No soy Migra!.

Illegal aliens use roads, schools, and police services. Other demographic data is of use to politicians and public administrators making decisions on public works and education.  What they use that gets underfunded should illegal aliens not be counted will not help people whose status of citizenship is not in doubt.

I can imagine making a presentation at an apartment complex in which I, if a Census crew leader, were to make our presence known and tell people how not to get abused by fakes. The Census does not ask questions about bank balances, religious affiliation, sexual orientation,  or partisan politics. Ir did not ask about citizenship, and it did not distinguish between matrimony and cohabitation. I made very clear to an apartment manager at a place with large numbers of vulnerable people that if someone asked certain questions or tried to collect a fine from people for failing to answer the Census to not even bother the Census Bureau -- just call the police. Genuine enumerators will know what to do. Fakes will be caught without official badges and other such documents.
Logged
BudgieForce
superbudgie1582
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,298


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: March 27, 2018, 10:28:55 PM »
« Edited: March 27, 2018, 10:32:28 PM by superbudgie1582 »

California has already sued. 95% chance in the next couple of weeks there will be an injunction that will stop this. Honestly, even a conservative judge would rule against this question.

Actually, no. I doubt the suit will succeed. The reason given is plaus even tho I have doubts as to its motivation.

I'm just an armchair lawyer who read multiple Twitter accounts saying there is merit to this suit. What does "plaus" mean by the way?

Edit: I doubt anybody truly believes the Trump administration is doing this because of the Voting rights act.
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,237
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: March 27, 2018, 10:48:11 PM »

Virginia, Cabinet confirmations should not be about whether a hypothetical "second choice nominee" would be better or worse. They should instead be based on the merits of the actually nominated person. I don't care that Republicans had the votes to confirm this guy on their own, or that a second choice nominee wouldn't have been any better - It was clear from the start that Ross was a terrible choice for the job, and because of that, Democrats should have put up all 48 of their votes against him.

This is worse than the Ajit Pai thing. Only a few choice characters broke off for that. With this guy, almost half the Dem Caucus voted for him! I know you're obligated to spin this in the best way possible for your party, but Dems are complicit. It's just the way it is.

Just because half of Dems voted to confirm a guy that all 52 GOPers voted to confirm doesn't make the new question good policy. Dems are complicit but why aren't you blaming the 52 Republicans here for doing the same?

The 51 Republicans who voted to confirm him (Isakson was absent that day) are complicit. But at least they support this sort of thing, and can therefore justify their vote. Democrats, on the other hand, voted to confirm this guy in significant numbers, and now suddenly act shocked and outraged that he's being the terrible commerce secretary he was always going to be. It's an amazing excercise in hypocracy.

Justice that post is an amazing exercise in stupidity

I would be kinder if post warranted it, but it really doesn't.
Logged
BoAtlantis
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 791


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: March 27, 2018, 11:02:45 PM »

Maybe, consider it a difference of how I view representation. These people are here whether you like it or not, and they are vital cogs in the economy, whether you like it or not. Representatives should represent the people in their district, undocumented or not.

I am not trying to start a fight on this, but I'm legit curious: Is there evidence to suggest that having non-citizens as neighbors makes you more likely to vote in a way that represents the interests of non-citizens?  Has this been studied?  Because even if you are apportioning seats based on total population, it's only the actual citizens of voting age in those districts who are doing the voting.

What if, hypothetically, the evidence actually went the other way?: That living near non-citizens made people more racist, and therefore more likely to vote in representatives who advocated policies that non-citizens didn't like?  Would that change the calculus?


I don't know about policies per se but there seems to be some evidence that high number of immigrants force natives to vote more conservative/Republican. This seems to be the case in almost every country.

It doesn't quite answer your question but I would find it hard to believe that natives would not become more racist and less tolerant.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: March 27, 2018, 11:21:34 PM »

The Administration is Lying About the Census

https://balkin.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-administration-is-lying-about-census.html

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

There is more to it, but the part I quoted is really what the article is about. The rest is history/etc to set up the basis of their claim.

Honestly, for those who follow politics, an explanation like this shouldn't even be needed. Republicans hate the Voting Rights Act (well, mostly, I'm sure they like packing African Americans into opportunity districts), and for them to say that this is all to enable better enforcement of the VRA is side-splittingly laughable - to the point where it is insulting even. Given that we know that there are very beneficial reasons conservatives would want to question people on their citizenship reason (apportionment of citizens only = whiter, more conservative districts), it makes this lie pretty illustrating of their real motives. Everything from the Trump administration seems like some partisan game or some new power grab. As if they hadn't gerrymandered enough maps as it is.
Logged
KingSweden
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,227
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: March 28, 2018, 10:11:07 AM »

I have to imagine that undocumented immigrants *already* have a minimal response rate when it comes to the Census, no?

Im clearly in the minority in that I think this is a bad rule that should not be instituted on its own merits, but that it’s effect will be negligible overall compared to how the Census already undercounts people primarily in poor rural areas.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.066 seconds with 14 queries.