Politics / We The People

Census Must Abide Constitution – Asking Citizenship Key

census liberals

How complex can simple things get – or be made? How convoluted must the left make American life, before we all fall down laughing, or crying? The latest test of America’s patience, prudence, and common sense comes in the form of a challenge to the standard ten-year Census. The US Supreme Court needs to stop this challenge cold.

Under the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 2, a census is to be held every ten years. The reason for that provision is to identify how many “citizens” reside in each state, and from that assessment to “apportion” seats to the US House of Representatives. Simple, right? The more “citizens” per state, the more seats will be “apportioned” to that state, versus all the other states.

Of course, how this process is conducted is important – since it affects the sovereignty of our country. Only citizens of a country are allowed to vote, or the country has no sovereignty. Citizenship is and was based on being born in the United States or being proper naturalized, which involves mastering language, history, and civic duties of citizenship. 

And that is why, from 1820 through 2000, with the exception of one decennial period, our US Census has included a question on citizenship. If we are going to base our entire electoral system – including US House members apportioned by state and within the Electoral College, which picks presidents – on how many citizens each state has, we need to know if the respondent is a citizen. Right? Common sense. 

However, during the Obama years, a change was made – omitting that citizenship question. The public rationale involved – like attacking “enumeration” versus “sampling” in an earlier era – the fact that census numbers also support other kinds of apportionment. Specifically, how much federal aid goes to States is calculated on census numbers. Thus States – like California, New York, Illinois, and Florida – with high numbers of non-citizens (which tend to drive up social costs) have long wanted to “game” the census and include non-citizens in the overall “tally.”

This is transparently unconstitutional, and so should be easily set aside. Just as the constitution requires “enumeration” (which means actual counting, not sampling and guesswork subject to manipulation), the Constitution also requires those counted be citizens. More, enforcing statutory assurances of fairness within the process – including the Voting Rights Act – requires knowing how many citizens (not non-citizens) reside within each state.

That is why the Secretary of Commerce in the Trump Administration, which manages the Census Bureau, planned to return to our two-hundred-year practice of asking a “citizenship” question on the 2020 Census. And on the left, that is why all hell broke loose – as the Administration tries to keep the nation’s sovereignty intact, and preserve the integrity of our voting system, which really means of our Republic. They sued to stop the question from being included, and in a clutter-headed opinion, a lower federal court granted the left its wish – and blocked the citizenship question. 

That, in turn, is why the Trump Administration is formally asking the US Supreme Court to weigh in – now – and to allow return to American history, traditional Census practice, and enforcement of constitutional and statutory requirements. That is why the Justice Department is asking the US Supreme Court to expedite review, permitting the Administration – just like all prior administrations – to place a citizenship question on the 2020 Census. 

Ironically, America’s presently divided political climate – and a growing propensity for voter fraud, including by allowing illegal aliens – makes this especially relevant at this time in American history. Knowing exactly how many citizens – not non-citizens – reside in each state is critically important, as a proper calculation will affect how many House seats states get – including those states heavy on giving “sanctuary” to illegal aliens.

By most estimates, illegal aliens in the United States now number between 11 and 25 million.  Accordingly, as a matter of common sense, the threat to our Republic’s voting system is real, and requires real protections – including a high integrity Census. 

Those who argue the other side, who do not want to see the traditional “citizenship” question on this census do so for highly suspect reasons. Yes, they may get more federal benefits if they can successfully fudge the truth, and boost numbers. Yes, the question may cause some who would claim citizenship falsely not to complete the form. Yes, some motivation for illegal aliens not completing the Census form may be fear of being outed and deported. But none of these reasons justifies – or begins to justify – not including the question.

Behind all this, deep in the political shadows, is another motivation. The Democrats seem to believe that illegal aliens – more than half of whom live in Democrat-heavy “sanctuary” cities and states – will vote Democrat. Here, the left is probably right. Since these individuals find a way into our elections, and the Democrat party has made a point of catering to their entitlement – and apparently opposes a border security wall for that reason – the reality is stark: Leaders in the Democrat party appear to oppose the common sense, historical, longstanding “citizenship” question – to boost their own voting numbers, to quietly grease the skids for more House seats in “sanctuary” or hide-out states. 

The come-back, of course, is high emotion on the left – as always. They shout and holler that anyone wanting to ask about citizenship is a racist, anti-immigrant (which is ironic, since naturalized citizens are often loudest proponents of citizenship requirements and assimilation), decry the inhumanity of Republicans, and assert that there is minimal voter fraud by illegal aliens. As the Founders brilliantly foresaw – and books have been written on this – states or political parties might someday try to “game the system” by importing non-citizens, which is why they insisted on full “enumeration” of “citizens,” and why the question has been asked with nearly unbroken rigor since 1820. The integrity of our citizenship process, electoral process and the Republic are paramount – and that has nothing to do with unjustified discrimination, wishing to discourage legal immigration or inhumanity. Period.

And on the question of voter fraud, there is no time like the present to make the point – and powerfully. Last week, putting a cherry on top of the legal argument for the US Supreme Court, the Texas Attorney General concluded an investigation that “discovered 95,000 non-citizens on the voter rolls, going back to 1996 … of whom 58,000 have voted in one Texas election.” Do we need more reason than that?  The process depends on knowing who is a citizen, insisting that only citizens vote, and enforcing rule of law – including both the US Constitution’s reliance on citizenship and statutory provisions within the constitutional framework. 

Now, all that needs to be done is for Americans to value citizenship highly, borders and electoral process to be properly protected, and US Supreme Court to let our 2020 Census go forward – doing what all but one Census from 1820 to now has done, ask a citizenship question. The absurdities on the political left keep coming, and do threaten to overtake us, but if we keep our heads, maintain fidelity to history, truth and honor, we will be fine – We, the  People – We, the current crop of American citizens. Our obligation is to stay true to the Constitution.  It is no more complicated than that.

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Read more articles by AMAC, Robert B. Charles
Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rob
1 year ago

This article leaves out exact wording key enough to cast doubt on the entirety of the article by Mr. Charles: “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.”
 
That is Section 2 of the 14th Amendment.
 
The article also fails to make clear that while the question was removed under Obama, it was irrelevant to being counted even before Obama- meaning that if you answered the Citizenship question “NO” you were still counted for the census.

Rob
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob

Whoops- actually, the question was NOT removed under Obama. The article is dishonest, and should be deleted.

Terry North
1 year ago

I’m trying to find out what the least requirements are for filling out the census. Exactly which questions am I legally bound to answer, as a native born American citizen? There are mixed responses over the internet, so I’m hoping you can help. Thanks.

david
2 years ago

Not quite “citizens only”–to government anyone who breathes air and some who don’t, should pay. Read the 1st three paragraphs of Art 1 , sect 2 in the constitution again paying close attention to words such as citizen, person, free person, etc. This is a law document so don’t assume words don’t matter. They were referring to “free persons”. Hint: Government wanted the most tax money…..get it? Tax everyone that ….shhh ….appears on THEIR federal territory. This section is a direct hangover from the Northwest Ordinance whereby those upon that big chunk of land awarded to the United States of America…i.e. land owned by the feds…were made to pay for the war: NWO: The inhabitants and settlers in the said territory shall be subject to pay a part of the federal debts contracted or to be contracted, and a proportional part of the expenses of government, to be apportioned on them by Congress according to the same common rule and measure by which apportionments thereof shall be made on the other States; and the taxes for paying their proportion shall be laid and levied by the authority and direction of the legislatures of the district or districts, or new States, as in the original States, within the time agreed upon by the United States in Congress assembled.

Kim
2 years ago

Yes, Mr. Charles, we Republicans stay true to the Constitution. We play by the rules—at least most of us do. It’s the other side that seeks to game the system, and they usually succeed because there’s no photo ID for voters, there’s inadequate monitoring at the polls, state and local boards of election hold no one accountable for reported cases of fraud (absentee ballots missing/”rediscovered”, dead people and illegals voting), and Republicans are either woefully uninformed or spineless when it comes to PROSECUTING cases of suspected fraud!

Until measures are taken to stop this process before it begins, Democrats will continue to take advantage of every opportunity to garner votes, legal or illegal. BUILD THE WALL! PHOTO ID! COUNT ONLY CITIZENS IN THE CENSUS! PURGE THE RECORDS OF NON-ELIGIBLE VOTERS! PROPERLY ESCORT ABSENTEE VOTES!

One last thing, and it pains me to make this assessment: Democrats, liberals, progressives—whatever you want to call them—I do not call them patriots. They care only for their power and their party, NOT FOR OUR COUNTRY!! CONSTITUTION BE D^MNED!!

PaulE
2 years ago
Reply to  Kim

Very well said Kim. However, I fear it falls on deaf ears. We routinely see articles like this published from various authors, all of whom are terrified of being referred to as politically incorrect in political circles. So rather than outlining the actual policy stands and goals of both parties to show the stark contrasts, they instead “play dumb” and portray both sides as just having some minor differences of opinion on a few minor issues. Offering what amount to be empty platitudes and bromides in place of realistic solutions and offering practical means to push back against an opposition determined to undermine the country for both political gain and financial reward. Articles such as this exist merely to keep the author’s name in public eye and maintain a sense of relevance.

Ivan Berry
2 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

?
“Play dumb”,PaulE? Art I, Section 2 says nothing about limiting the count to citizens, and originally included non-citizen blacks at 3/5ths. The census included everyone except so-called indians not taxed.
Voting, of course is another matter and was and should be restricted to citizens alone.
Texas’ officials have made an effort to do something about illegal voters, but it’s still an early stage effort. We’ll just have to wait and see what results.
So far as Federal Aid went, that was not authorized by the Constitution for States regardless of a census count. But, they get what we pay for. Not right nor fair, but thats how it is.

PaulE
2 years ago
Reply to  Ivan Berry

The census should count everyone, but it should also be able to distinguish between citizens and non-citizens. After all, from a Congressional representation standard, members of Congress are there to represent the citizens of the country. Since we no longer have slavery in this country, that is effectively an obsolete part of Article 1. We’re talking today, not the pre-Civil War era. Congressional representatives are not there to represent illegals or temporary residents or visitors, who may be residing in the country at the time of census. We need an accurate count of all those residing in the country and we have to be able to accurately determine what portion of the population are citizens. All so we can have the legally correct number of Congressional representation for the citizens of the country. The Blue States all want the citizenship question struck, because then their high counts of illegal aliens will help them get greater representation (more seats) in the House.

As for my play dumb comment, a lot of authors simply go over the same, well worn subject from the politically correct, first grade level over and over again. After a while it is like going to school, but all that is taught is what is covered in first grade for all 12 years of grade school and high school. Exactly the same material taught over and over again, with the subjects never evolving to cover more in-depth, more challenging aspects of how to effectively solve the problems. Nothing new is ever added. Everything is kept very rudimentary. We cannot keep treating all these issues as if they just became known recently and we have to wait potentially years to address them seriously. The left keeps steadily advancing their agenda, while many of us are stuck running in circles discussing the same rudimentary aspects of all these issues. Nit a recipe for success. At least not on our side of the equation. Just a thought.

Kim
2 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

I should have added that counting illegals and other non-citizens residing in the country will give the feds much-needed data. But Congressional districts should be based on only legal residents of the district, and not count illegals for that purpose.

Wayne D Peterkin
2 years ago
Reply to  Kim

And do not ever allow non-citizens to be included in any count that is used to reapportion congressional representation. A main purpose of the census is to apportion congressional seats in the House, and counting non-citizens is a purely fraudulent means of giving districts with high levels of non-citizens including illegal residents more seats in Congress, which is one huge reason the Democrats/liberals support counting those non-citizens. The sanctuaries in this country have a very tangible benefit for them.

10
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x