It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dems worried census now asking about citizenship will cost Cali seat and money

page: 3
47
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: RickinVa
It's a census.

Are you a citizen?

Ummm sure.

Not like they are going to ask for papers to prove it.


Good point, though in the end it does not seem to matter.

Whether or not someone is a legal or illegal citizen is irrelevant to the census and it's usage in deciding how many seats are given to each state.

The number of seats apportioned are dependent upon population and does not take in to account the citizenship status of the people with the population.


That doesn't stop people from fearing the repercussions of being found here illegally.


True, which leads full circle back to what the OP's source discusses. Including a question about citizenship status serves no purpose in regards to the census count and the representation allotted based on population.

It only seems to serve as a potential scare tactic, hoping illegals will opt not to take part in the census, or downplay their household resident numbers, so that they do not raise potential red flags.



They shouldn't be here illegally. Many avoid the "cencus man" for those very reasons, while still drawing benefits from the state. Which creates an issue where people end up falling through the cracks because there's a a lack of annual social benefits funding, due to a misrepresented census number.




posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: RickinVa
It's a census.

Are you a citizen?

Ummm sure.

Not like they are going to ask for papers to prove it.


Good point, though in the end it does not seem to matter.

Whether or not someone is a legal or illegal citizen is irrelevant to the census and it's usage in deciding how many seats are given to each state.

The number of seats apportioned are dependent upon population and does not take in to account the citizenship status of the people with the population.


That doesn't stop people from fearing the repercussions of being found here illegally.


True, which leads full circle back to what the OP's source discusses. Including a question about citizenship status serves no purpose in regards to the census count and the representation allotted based on population.

It only seems to serve as a potential scare tactic, hoping illegals will opt not to take part in the census, or downplay their household resident numbers, so that they do not raise potential red flags.


Upon looking into it, you are right. The courts have ruled that all people count towards the seats, which would include illegals.

This makes the dems aversion to asking about citizenship even more puzzling.

The census asks all sorts of demographic questions. Isnt there value in knowing how many citizens and illegals are in each area?

Also, this goes against the argument that illegals dont have an adverse effect on citizens of this country. Tell that to the citizens that lose out on a house seat or federal funds because illegals are counted and boost Californias numbers.

Lastly, you cant say this is a scare tactic. There are perfectly legitimate reasons for asking about citizenship.

Unless you are claiming to know the INTENT of the people putting the question back in?
edit on 17-1-2018 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454



They shouldn't be here illegally.


They shouldn't be, but they are and even though they should not be here, the US constitution guarantees that all people receive representation according to population.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

It bases that on the understanding that we will not allow foreign nationals to remain here illegally.

How do you willingly allow foreign citizens to vote on national elections? Does that mean that Democrats are colluding with Mexicans?



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I would also add that the constitution allows representation for citizens. For the most part, allowing illegals to vote has been a states rights issue, with it changing based on the times.

100 years ago we were doing this same exercise....purging suffrage for aliens.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 11:42 AM
link   
It seems to me that a lot of people are missing the point here. Illegal means criminal, or crime. Would you allow someone to rob a bank, and say "Oh it's ok because he needs the money"? No you would call the cops and demand punishment. Would it be ok with you if I broke into your house and took your TV? I really could use a new one.
My point is crime is crime, from speeding to murder. It's called illegal immigration because it CAN be done Legally. When they came here that was a crime. To stay here is to continue the same crime. To then get a job is yet another crime. To give false information to rent a house, another crime.
By that reasoning I should be allowed to rob that bank any time I'm in need of extra money. How does that relate? Simple, it's called FDIC. I take the banks money and the federal government steps in a says "Here's your money back". Is that fair to you?



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: MikeA

I was with you until you called speeding a crime.

Its an infraction. A minor point to make, for sure...but when lumping it in with murder, I think its an important distinction to make.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



How do you willingly allow foreign citizens to vote on national elections? Does that mean that Democrats are colluding with Mexicans?


This has nothing to do with voting on national elections.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: introvert

I would also add that the constitution allows representation for citizens. For the most part, allowing illegals to vote has been a states rights issue, with it changing based on the times.

100 years ago we were doing this same exercise....purging suffrage for aliens.


The constitution, as it is now, allows for representation of all.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: MikeA

I was with you until you called speeding a crime.

Its an infraction. A minor point to make, for sure...but when lumping it in with murder, I think its an important distinction to make.

An infraction? So if I'm late for work, for example, it's ok with you if I put your life at risk just because I hit the snooze button one time to many. Speeding is a crime because it's putting a gun to head of every other driver on the road. If I blow through a red light because I'm going to fast stop and t-bone the soccer mom. Hit a puddle and jump the curb crashing into the daycare center. Just a couple of examples. Is this still JUST AN INFRACTION?



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: MikeA

You can save your moral outrage, and look up what the term "infraction" means from a legal sense.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: introvert

I would also add that the constitution allows representation for citizens. For the most part, allowing illegals to vote has been a states rights issue, with it changing based on the times.

100 years ago we were doing this same exercise....purging suffrage for aliens.


The constitution, as it is now, allows for representation of all.


It does.

The states, however, have the determination in how that actually works. Conducting the polling is a states right.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: introvert

I would also add that the constitution allows representation for citizens. For the most part, allowing illegals to vote has been a states rights issue, with it changing based on the times.

100 years ago we were doing this same exercise....purging suffrage for aliens.


The constitution, as it is now, allows for representation of all.


It does.

The states, however, have the determination in how that actually works. Conducting the polling is a states right.


Do you have a citation for that?



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Who knows what to make of the census these days, all these facts and figures...How about adding four lines at the end of the form with a simple question; 'how can we make our nation better?'

My friend got sent an extra census form by mistake so I introduce you to George De Katt, An astrophysicist whose religion is Jedi and his father is Persian and his Mother is Russian ( cats are quite sensitive when it comes to their heritage) However I never sent Georges' census form but my question still stands...Should there be a question at the end of a census that asks a civilian what changes can be made to make a nation better?
edit on 17-1-2018 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: MikeA

You can save your moral outrage, and look up what the term "infraction" means from a legal sense.


I know what it means. It means a minor violation. I'm not talking about having a party with the music a little too high. I'm talking about doing 50 through a school zone, not 26. You're right 26 is an infraction, 50 is a crime. They are called traffic laws, not traffic suggestions.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Here's a quick primer on the history of alien suffrage in the US:

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Having participated in the 2010 census I can verify that at no point were my family or I asked to prove we were citizens.

I can also tell you it wasn't just about how many people lived under my roof either. We were asked a huge amount of questions, from how much our income was, to what all federal aid (if any) we get, what types of jobs we have, schooling, etc, etc.

And they came out here 4 times over a period of 1 year, asking the same questions over and over, typing the answers into their little laptop computers.

So yah: census isn't just to see how many people live somewhere, or if you're a citizen or not, it's pretty much a data gathering on a massive scale about everything.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: MikeA

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: MikeA

You can save your moral outrage, and look up what the term "infraction" means from a legal sense.


I know what it means. It means a minor violation. I'm not talking about having a party with the music a little too high. I'm talking about doing 50 through a school zone, not 26. You're right 26 is an infraction, 50 is a crime. They are called traffic laws, not traffic suggestions.


No need to get so salty. You said "from speeding to murder". Without further qualification, I thought it best to at least make mention.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: MikeA

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: MikeA

You can save your moral outrage, and look up what the term "infraction" means from a legal sense.


I know what it means. It means a minor violation. I'm not talking about having a party with the music a little too high. I'm talking about doing 50 through a school zone, not 26. You're right 26 is an infraction, 50 is a crime. They are called traffic laws, not traffic suggestions.


No need to get so salty. You said "from speeding to murder". Without further qualification, I thought it best to at least make mention.


I'm not getting salty as you put it. I served in the Coast Guard chasing drug runners and illegals. My son is currently a cop, my daughter is an ADA, my youngest daughter is a CBP officer. My family has been protecting this country since 1729. For me it's black and white, something is a crime or it's not. We can vote for it but once it is we don't get to decide if we want to do it or not.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: MikeA

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: MikeA

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: MikeA

You can save your moral outrage, and look up what the term "infraction" means from a legal sense.


I know what it means. It means a minor violation. I'm not talking about having a party with the music a little too high. I'm talking about doing 50 through a school zone, not 26. You're right 26 is an infraction, 50 is a crime. They are called traffic laws, not traffic suggestions.


No need to get so salty. You said "from speeding to murder". Without further qualification, I thought it best to at least make mention.


I'm not getting salty as you put it. I served in the Coast Guard chasing drug runners and illegals. My son is currently a cop, my daughter is an ADA, my youngest daughter is a CBP officer. My family has been protecting this country since 1729. For me it's black and white, something is a crime or it's not. We can vote for it but once it is we don't get to decide if we want to do it or not.


I ignore laws that are inconvenient. I create no victims. And im cool with that.

The world doesn't sum to zero, and nothing is black and white.



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join