National
Why count illegals in the Census?
Can't find the messages you're looking for? Need help? Click Here for help and tips.
Sent: Monday, November 2, 2009 04:59 PM
Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican, has introduced legislation that, if passed, would instruct the U.S. Census Bureau not to take into account illegal immigrants and other noncitizens in the 2010 census. I'm all for it. Furthermore, I propose that the government no longer recognize deficits in budgets, record violent crimes in police reports, acknowledge casualties of war or count -- let alone give proper names! -- to hurricanes in weather reports.http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rodriguez2-2009...
Sent: Monday, November 2, 2009 05:02 PM
...That said, the capaciousness of our Constitution grants basic protections to all people within our borders, even those who do not enjoy the privileges of citizenship. In other words, even if we deny noncitizens political and civil rights, the principles of our Constitution require that we grant them certain human rights -- some level of personal safety and dignity. When it comes to the census, what that suggests is that even though we may not count them as full members of our polity, we are still obliged to count them as individuals who occupy physical space within our national boundaries.
Discounting the existence of illegal immigrants not only has ethical significance, it has a number of practical consequences, not least of which is that a well-regulated nation needs to know how many people reside within its territory. Even rabid restrictionists would agree that, say, a police department might benefit from knowing how many individuals live in a given district. That means that some level of official recognition of illegal immigrants is required for the proper operation of government.
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 06:17 AM
Absoutely, count them in the census, get their addresses and pay them a visit later, with an air conditioned bus so as not to violate basic human rights while they are headed South.
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 07:22 AM
its funny , they were happy in a Conex box on the way here , with a coffee can to crap in , or walking across the desert
they dont want to count them because they know that there's WAY more than any conservative estimate
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 08:27 AM
Yes and if we all knew how many were really here they might discover that we would not like it. Without counting we can continue pretending like there really is not a problem, it is just a few racists making noise.
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 08:46 AM
If we don't count the illegals, how would we know how much of our tax dollars to send to any given area to use for social programs, education, and jail services?
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 11:54 AM
It is clear that so far none of the responses are from those who followed the link and actually read the good reasons offered.
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 12:40 PM
Issa, objected to the amendment offered by the two republicans, Vitter and Bennett.
I pretty sure everyone must be counted regardless of their citizenship status.
Some think that this gives certain states an unfair advantage in congressional seats. While other states lose seats.
As a result of the apportionment based on Census 2000, 12 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives will shift among 18 states. Eight states will have more representatives in the 108th Congress, which convenes in January 2003, and ten states will have fewer representatives (see Figure 1 and Table 2).
Of the eight states gaining seats, four — Arizona, Florida, Georgia, and Texas — will each gain two seats. The other four — California, Colorado, Nevada, and North Carolina — will each gain one seat.
Of the ten states losing seats, two — New York and Pennsylvania — will each lose two seats. The other eight — Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin — will each lose one seat.The shift seems to be towards the west with the exception of Florida, North Carolina, and Georgia.
Whats the solution? I don't know, but I didn't see any answers in this article.
http://www.nationalatlas.gov/articles/boundaries/a_conApp...Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 01:21 PM
From: Roncpp It is clear that so far none of the responses are from those who followed the link and actually read the good reasons offered.
Why should we?
Can't we just make up our own facts and ignore reality like some posters tend to do?
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 01:23 PM
Can't we just make up our own facts and ignore reality like some posters tend to do?
You are entitled to your own opinion... and to make up your own facts and ignore reality with impunity.
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2009 02:05 PM
is it made up , when ppl i work with tell me how easy it was to get here , and even some who have been deported and come back , "head north , till ya get to the rio grande , look both ways , cross when safe , hang a left"
Want to be part of the discussion? Sign In with your RIMOFTHEWORLD.net account. If you don't have an account, sign up as a New User now! Who Writes These?These messages are posted by RIMOFTHEWORLD.net users. RIMOFTHEWORLD.net does not screen the content of these messages, and only removes messages that we receive complaints about, and clearly violate our
Terms of Service. Some of these messages may contain political views, religious content, criticisms, or other content that some users may find offensive or disagree with. We encourage the free exchange of ideas and try to foster an environment where everyone can be heard. RIMOFTHEWORLD.net, its advertisers, affiliates, columnists, volunteers, and stakeholders do not necessarily endorse any specific statement contained in these messages.