2020 census to include citizenship question

[Jhhnn]

The count of illegals is mostly crap anyway as most do not participate out of fear in my opinion

You really don't understand truthiness, do you?

How many illegals do or don't participate in the census is unknowable. What I'm sure of is that the Constitution specifically calls for everybody to be counted & that we should offer no discouragement to participation. Anything interfering with an honest count is contemptuous of the spirit in which that document was created.

I'm sure that local authorities are doing what they can to encourage participation but it runs counter to what the Admin has been saying since they took office. Trump tweeted out some magnificent fear mongering earlier today.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

Kee-rist. The mental gyrations that modern conservatives go through to put liberals in the position of defending our institutions & traditions against partisan attack are truly astounding. It's not conservative in the slightest but rather right-reactionary, an attempt to seize control w/o an honest majority.

 

[fskimospy]

And exactly why most will not participate in a census be begin with. They will stay in shadows where they feel safe. The only real answer is for people that feel strongly about it to educate them that the census cannot tell if they are legal or illegal from that question.
You need to use some common sense.




They have every right to be paranoid as they have broken the law. I would be paranoid also and would not fill out a census form with my data of any kind on it.

I agree that it is common sense to not participate if you are an illegal alien regardless of the questions asked. I wouldn't if I were breaking the law.

So you now agree why the question is dumb. Your tribalism is impressive.

 

[OutHouse]

It's not conservative in the slightest but rather right-reactionary, an attempt to seize control

did you forget the Republicans are in control?

 

[OutHouse]

You really don't understand truthiness, do you?

How many illegals do or don't participate in the census is unknowable. What I'm sure of is that the Constitution specifically calls for everybody to be counted & that we should offer no discouragement to participation. Anything interfering with an honest count is contemptuous of the spirit in which that document was created.

I'm sure that local authorities are doing what they can to encourage participation but it runs counter to what the Admin has been saying since they took office. Trump tweeted out some magnificent fear mongering earlier today.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

Kee-rist. The mental gyrations that modern conservatives go through to put liberals in the position of defending our institutions & traditions against partisan attack are truly astounding. It's not conservative in the slightest but rather right-reactionary, an attempt to seize control w/o an honest majority.

Translation: The left wants to help criminals. It took me awhile to come to that conclusion, but once I did everything they do makes sense. The left isn't soft on crime, they are allied with it

 

[Jhhnn]

did you forget the Republicans are in control?

It's not like Trump won a majority of votes or that the GOP hasn't gerrymandered & suppressed voting to get where they are. This is just another way to accomplish the same ends- twisting honest democracy into a grotesque caricature of itself. They're more than eager to twist it further.

 

[Jhhnn]

Translation: The left wants to help criminals. It took me awhile to come to that conclusion, but once I did everything they do makes sense. The left isn't soft on crime, they are allied with it

Illegal presence is a civil matter, not a criminal matter, so that's shot in the ass, again, just like it always is.

I just want the most accurate count as defined by the Constitution. I oppose anything that inhibits that which including the immigration question obviously & admittedly will do.

It's just another attempt by the GOP to obtain unfair partisan advantage.

 

[Brainonska511]

They would have to be pretty stupid to risk their entire lives on the fact that agencies would strictly adhere to that law. I mean would you? Use common sense.

One needs only look to WWII to see the risks some people might feel they are taking by answering the census:

https://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/17/us/report-says-census-bureau-helped-relocate-japanese.html

Two scholars say in a new research paper that despite earlier denials, the Census Bureau was deeply involved in the roundup and internment of Japanese-Americans at the onset of American entry into World War II.

The academics say the bureau's involvement included identifying concentrations of people of Japanese ancestry in geographic units as small as city blocks, lending a senior Census Bureau official to work with the War Department on the relocation program and a willingness to disclose names and addresses of Japanese-Americans.

While it is common today for the Census Bureau to publish reports that would detail the number of people of a given race living in an area as small as a city block, such information was generally not available in the 1940's. But the authors of the paper contend that the Census Bureau provided such detailed information as well as age, sex, citizenship and country of birth to the War Department, now the Defense Department, on only one group, Japanese-Americans.

Even more damning, an article 7 years after this one was published:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/confirmed-the-us-census-b/

Despite decades of denials, government records confirm that the U.S. Census Bureau provided the U.S. Secret Service with names and addresses of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

The Census Bureau surveys the population every decade with detailed questionnaires but is barred by law from revealing data that could be linked to specific individuals. The Second War Powers Act of 1942 temporarily repealed that protection to assist in the roundup of Japanese-Americans for imprisonment in internment camps in California and six other states during the war. The Bureau previously has acknowledged that it provided neighborhood information on Japanese-Americans for that purpose, but it has maintained that it never provided "microdata," meaning names and specific information about them, to other agencies.

 

[Lanyap]

This issue is all about a political fight for more power. The dems want illegals counted to bump up the number of their representatives. The rebups don't want them counted to bump up their representatives. Here is a pretty good article from HuffPost in 2007 when this issue came up for the 2010 census.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/should-the-census-count-i_b_66897.html

The San Jose Mercury News ran a front-page article yesterday which was kind of interesting, as it posed the question: “Should illegal immigrants count in the census for determining how many seats each state gets in the House of Representatives?”

While at first glance, this seems like an easy question to answer, it really isn’t. Historically, up until now, they have counted — ever since the Fourteenth Amendment was passed.

First, the numbers. By their figures (credited to the “Connecticut State Data Center”), if the 2010 U.S. Census counts illegal immigrants towards apportioning House seats (as it has been doing), five states would lose House seats. Missouri, Illinois, and Michigan would each lose one seat; and Ohio and New York would both lose two seats. Three states would gain seats. Arizona and Texas would each gain two seats, and Florida would gain three. All other states would remain the same.

But if illegal immigrants were excluded from the census count, only four states would lose seats. New York, New Jersey, and Ohio would each lose one, and (surprise) California would lose two. Four states would gain seats, with one going to each of Montana, Arizona, and Texas. Florida would pick up two seats.

 

[Jhhnn]

This issue is all about a political fight for more power. The dems want illegals counted to bump up the number of their representatives. The rebups don't want them counted to bump up their representatives. Here is a pretty good article from HuffPost in 2007 when this issue came up for the 2010 census.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/should-the-census-count-i_b_66897.html

What does the Constitution say? It says everybody should be counted & that representation is based on headcount regardless of citizenship. It's basically been that way since 1790 & affirmatively so since the end of the Civil War.

Now tell us which side fights to uphold the Constitution in this regard & which side does not.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

So you admit that the intent is to cheat places like LA out of the representation the Constitution says they deserve?

Been smoking your favorite Colorado product again?

 

[Jhhnn]

Been smoking your favorite Colorado product again?

Just advocating respect for the Constitution. You obviously can't make the same claim with any authority.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Just advocating respect for the Constitution. You obviously can't make the same claim with any authority.

Where does it say that a question about citizenship is illegal?

 

[pcgeek11]

You really don't understand truthiness, do you?

How many illegals do or don't participate in the census is unknowable. What I'm sure of is that the Constitution specifically calls for everybody to be counted & that we should offer no discouragement to participation. Anything interfering with an honest count is contemptuous of the spirit in which that document was created.

I'm sure that local authorities are doing what they can to encourage participation but it runs counter to what the Admin has been saying since they took office. Trump tweeted out some magnificent fear mongering earlier today.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

Kee-rist. The mental gyrations that modern conservatives go through to put liberals in the position of defending our institutions & traditions against partisan attack are truly astounding. It's not conservative in the slightest but rather right-reactionary, an attempt to seize control w/o an honest majority.

I've said that ( bolded ) about 3 or 4 times already. Obviously you don't read very well.

 

[pcgeek11]

So you now agree why the question is dumb. Your tribalism is impressive.

No, You are trying to put words in my mouth. You are as bad as Jhhnn. Tiresome.
Your lack of reading comprehension is impressive.

 

[Jhhnn]

I've said that ( bolded ) about 3 or 4 times already. Obviously you don't read very well.

That isn't what you've said at all. You discount their participation entirely which is a false premise-

No, That is not what I said. Not even close. If you have read what I have posted here in this thread is.

1.) The count of illegals is mostly crap anyway as most do not participate out of fear in my opinion.

2.) So asking the citizen status will have a minimal impact on the overall count due to 1 above.

3.) If the "high illegal alien" areas want them counted they should have an education program in place to inform them of the Facts and not the fear induced crap on display here in the forum.

My personal feelings is that If you are here illegally you should not have any government benefits or representation. Regardless of what color you are. But this simple question "Are you a US Citizen? answer Yes or No" is not going to peg anyone for deportation as there are many thousands of Legal Non US Citizens here in the US that will answer that they are not a US Citizen.

So if we further discourage their participation it won't make a significant difference anyway, according to you.

 

[Jhhnn]

Where does it say that a question about citizenship is illegal?

So dishonest. It's like saying the way to accurately count deer is to fire several shots in the air before you start & keep firing as you go.

Ne deer around here!

 

[pcgeek11]

That isn't what you've said at all. You discount their participation entirely which is a false premise-



So if we further discourage their participation it won't make a significant difference anyway, according to you.

I didn't say that none participate.

Let me help this is what I have said and I'm done with this stupidity:

Post # 134:
I would say neither more or less as most illegal aliens do not even participate for fear of deportation IMO. There is no real way to quantify the effects good or bad, with or without a citizenship question. It would all be guesswork.

Post # 140:
Do you know of a way to Quantify the effects of the question when you do not know how many illegals participate in the census or how many do not?

Post # 184:
That doesn't say we know exactly how many do or don't participate. They don't even know exactly how many illegals are here.

Post #244:
So the results of this question may have some negligible effect on the total count. Actual numbers are unknown to begin with so any impact cannot be determined neither positive or negative.

Post 247:
What I believe is that there is a negligible difference between with or without the question. As the numbers are unknown it cannot be proven one way or the other.

Post # 275:
As I said earlier and you did not read was that we do not know the numbers that do and the numbers that don't so it cannot be determined what effect if any this will have on the overall outcome of the census.

 

[fskimospy]

I didn't say that none participate.

Let me help this is what I have said and I'm done with this stupidity:

Post # 134:
I would say neither more or less as most illegal aliens do not even participate for fear of deportation IMO. There is no real way to quantify the effects good or bad, with or without a citizenship question. It would all be guesswork.

Post # 140:
Do you know of a way to Quantify the effects of the question when you do not know how many illegals participate in the census or how many do not?

Post # 184:
That doesn't say we know exactly how many do or don't participate. They don't even know exactly how many illegals are here.

Post #244:
So the results of this question may have some negligible effect on the total count. Actual numbers are unknown to begin with so any impact cannot be determined neither positive or negative.

Post 247:
What I believe is that there is a negligible difference between with or without the question. As the numbers are unknown it cannot be proven one way or the other.

Post # 275:
As I said earlier and you did not read was that we do not know the numbers that do and the numbers that don't so it cannot be determined what effect if any this will have on the overall outcome of the census.

This is extraordinarily silly reasoning. We know that illegal immigrants shy away from using government services because they may be asked about their citizenship status. Basic logic says the same will hold true for the census.

I don't know why, outside of extreme tribalism, you would still be trying to argue this nonsense.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Just advocating respect for the Constitution. You obviously can't make the same claim with any authority.

So does this mean you will stop complaining about the electoral college?

 

[glenn1]

This is extraordinarily silly reasoning. We know that illegal immigrants shy away from using government services because they may be asked about their citizenship status. Basic logic says the same will hold true for the census.

I don't know why, outside of extreme tribalism, you would still be trying to argue this nonsense.

Progressives have upgraded from sanctuary cities to sanctuary census.

 

[fskimospy]

Progressives have upgraded from sanctuary cities to sanctuary census.

Except of course the question was removed from the standard census form about 60 years ago, haha. Again, this is just common sense as we want the most accurate census possible. If a question is going to depress return rates then it's probably a bad idea, especially if that will happen in a population we already have difficulty counting.

Also, I find the hate from conservatives about sanctuary cities to be hilariously hypocritical. Conservatives should be overjoyed that state and local jurisdictions are exercising their powers under the 10th amendment. I thought they loved the 10th amendment!

 

[glenn1]

Except of course the question was removed from the standard census form about 60 years ago, haha. Again, this is just common sense as we want the most accurate census possible. If a question is going to depress return rates then it's probably a bad idea, especially if that will happen in a population we already have difficulty counting.

Also, I find the hate from conservatives about sanctuary cities to be hilariously hypocritical. Conservatives should be overjoyed that state and local jurisdictions are exercising their powers under the 10th amendment. I thought they loved the 10th amendment!

It's been on the "long form" census all that time until that was effectively replaced by the American Community Survey where it remained until 2010. Saying "it was removed" is as misleading as saying capital gains were removed from IRS Form 1040-EZ while ignoring it's still on other 1040 forms. And personally the means I'd prefer that "return rates" were depressed is via deportation rather than non-response.

 

[Jhhnn]

This is extraordinarily silly reasoning. We know that illegal immigrants shy away from using government services because they may be asked about their citizenship status. Basic logic says the same will hold true for the census.

I don't know why, outside of extreme tribalism, you would still be trying to argue this nonsense.

He's dancing around the central issue- Do we want to follow the Constitutional mandate to count everybody regardless of our personal politics or their citizenship, or not?

I say we need to do what we can to obtain the fullest participation and that including the citizenship question runs contrary to that basic & honest purpose.

The truth? The GOP doesn't want to know the truth. They're past that. They want to create perception of the truth that defies reality & succeed with all too many people.

 

[fskimospy]

It's been on the "long form" census all that time until that was effectively replaced by the American Community Survey where it remained until 2010. Saying "it was removed" is as misleading as saying capital gains were removed from IRS Form 1040-EZ while ignoring it's still on other 1040 forms.

The short form is the one sent to 85% of people so for the vast majority it was removed. It's misleading to argue otherwise. The ACS is not used for apportionment of political power so what they include on that is irrelevant to what's on the census.

And personally the means I'd prefer that "return rates" were depressed is via deportation rather than non-response.

Life is all about not being able to get what we want. For example I would prefer that we came up with a sane immigration and guest worker policy.

 

[ivwshane]

This is extraordinarily silly reasoning. We know that illegal immigrants shy away from using government services because they may be asked about their citizenship status. Basic logic says the same will hold true for the census.

I don't know why, outside of extreme tribalism, you would still be trying to argue this nonsense.

Not only that but we know the effects because their testing/sampling they do, of which I linked to earlier in this thread.