Bill Sargent presents what he pretends is a thoughtful, balanced opinion on the census citizenship question (“Census citizenship question neither new nor wrong,” The Daily News, June 22), but his glaring omissions show that it’s neither.

Districts get all manner of federal funding based, reasonably, on how many people — not how many citizens — live in a district, and that has always been a key reason for the census.

The U.S. Supreme Court, packed as it is with GOP-appointed conservatives, will probably rule as Sargent wants them to, because they will also ignore the fact that the Trump administration is seeking this change for blatantly partisan reasons, and not the fake reason they cited (to improve Voting Rights Act compliance).

Thomas Hofeller, a now deceased GOP strategist who communicated directly with the Census Bureau, did a study, according to the Washington Post’s Tara Bahrampour, "that concluded a citizenship question on the census would result in a structural electoral advantage for Republicans and non-Hispanic whites.” And Hofeller also suggested the fake rationale.

Those of us who know all the facts oppose this addition to the census.

Ed Buckner

Atlanta, Georgia

(38) comments

Carlos Ponce

To read the Oral Arguments in this case, Department of Justice v New York, go to: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2018/18-966_i4dj.pdf The question does not ask for legal status. In the 2000 Census I helped my parents fill out their Census. Question 13: Is this person a citizen of the United States? For Dad: Yes, a U. S. citizen by naturalization. For Mom: No, not a citizen of the United States. A very simple question, a very simple answer. Did it prevent anyone from answering the census? No. It was only on the long form. For the 2020 Census there will be no short, no long, just a single form. To picture anyone running scared of this question is ridiculous.

Ron Woody

Hear! Hear!

Emile Pope

The question was put on the census for one reason...to try and intimidate non-citizens from filling one out and getting proportional representation. That was the only reason and newly discovered information proves it. Plus, notice how none of the people involved in adding the question are answering questions about it and are having Justice Department lawyers run interference for them. What are they trying to hide? Collusion?

Carlos Ponce

That's not the reason, Emile. Take time to read the oral arguments (link provided in the first post).

Emile Pope

The arguments are irrelevant. That's just the excuse they are trying to give. Unless you think that they would give the real reason for their attempt at suppression...

Ed Buckner

US Sup Ct ruled that Emile Pope is correct.

Carlos Ponce

Emile posts: "The arguments are irrelevant." Oral arguments have been used throughout the history of the Supreme Court. If you BOTHERED to read the link provided you would see both sides presented.

Ed Buckner

Yes, Emile Pope--nailed it.

Ed Buckner

Interesting, Carlos Ponce, that the majority of the US Sup Ct, led by the Chief Justice, just ruled against this. Ridiculous? Or, as the Court held, contrived. (Yes, the Census Bureau can add a quetion, but it must have real justification, not the Trump admin's fake rationale.)

Carlos Ponce

"the majority of the US Sup Ct, led by the Chief Justice, just ruled against this." False, the opinion calls for a continuation. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-966_bq7c.pdf

Gary Miller

(Those of us who know all the facts oppose this addition to the census.) If you knew all the facts you would be for this re use of the citizenship question. One fact you omitted is liberals want to use the non citizen census count to inflate their electoral college count. Using a law to break a law.

Emile Pope

Non-citizens deserve representation.

Ed Buckner

Chief Justice Roberts and I respectfully disagree, Mr. Miller.

Dan Freeman

Mr. Miller, the Constitution does not limit apportionment to citizens. It says: "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons...." The count is of people, including children, old people, and non-citizens. The Census Bureau makes every effort to count everyone. As part of the effort they regularly test alternative forms of the enumeration form. The citizenship question was dropped from the long form in 1950 because it tended to reduce the total count of people, thereby depriving states like Texas of their legitimate number of Representatives and share of Federal dollars. The relative number of citizens can be estimated more accurately using other surveys. After 1960 through 2000 only a portion of the population received the long form. Since 2005 the American Community Survey is used to make estimates. Because it is a sample of about 350,000 people each month, confidentiality is believably maintained. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-citizenship-question-could-break-the-census/ Bottom line, because of its large immigrant population, the citizenship question will deprive Texas of both representation and federal dollars.

Carlos Ponce

"the citizenship question will deprive Texas of both representation and federal dollars." How, Dan? By FEAR mongering? What happens to someone who answers HONESTLY that he or she is not a citizen? Nothing to the questioned. The question for my Mom was answered, "No, not a citizen." The numbers are used in budget appropriations to see what services to non-citizens must be increased or cut. Then we have fear mongers who flail their arms and scream, "DON'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION!!! THEY'LL TEAR DOWN YOUR DOORS TO DEPORT YOU!!!" Do you REALLY believe that? The question only asks about citizenship, NOT legal status in the country. My Mom answered "No, not a citizen, " and was never deported nor threatened with deportation. She is now a permanent resident of Mt. Olivet Cemetery in Dickinson.

Gary Scoggin

The story of your late Mom, who was no doubt a kind and good person, is anecdotal evidence, not statistical evidence, and is in reality illustrative of nothing.

Carlos Ponce

It's a common, Gary. Just ask any of the 1,985,316 non-citizens in Texas in 2000. Or the 5,390,989 non-citizens in California in 2000. Or the 2,084,389 non-citizens in New York in 2000. Do you want me to go through all the states, Gary? http://www.censusscope.org/us/rank_mig_non_citizens.html

Ed Buckner

Correct, Gary Scoggin.

Emile Pope

Garbage. What services to non-citizens?

Carlos Ponce

"What services to non-citizens?" English as a Second Language for students and adults, naturalization classes: instruction and testing to name a couple.

Emile Pope

How ridiculous. Non-citizens know English and some citizens should learn it. And exactly how do you know that non-citizens cannot speak English?

Carlos Ponce

"Non-citizens know English..." Good, Emile! Now we can do AWAY WITH the ESL classes mandated in public schools! That ought to save $2 Billion. And it will save the state of Texas spending money on Spanish versions of the STAAR tests for Math, Reading, Writing and Science. Questions like: "¿Qué propiedad de los suelos es más probable que el estudiant esté investigando con este procedimiento?" will no longer appear on the 5th Grade STAAR Science Test. And there will no longer be any bi-lingual election material as required by Texas Law: "Sec. 272.001. BILINGUAL ELECTION MATERIALS REQUIRED. Bilingual election materials printed in English and Spanish shall be used in elections in this state as provided by this chapter." Nor will hiring bilingual election clerks as required by Texas Law: "Sec. 272.009. BILINGUAL ELECTION CLERKS. (a) The presiding judge of an election precinct subject to Section 272.002 shall make reasonable efforts to appoint a sufficient number of election clerks who are fluent in both English and Spanish to serve the needs of the Spanish-speaking voters of the precinct." I wish what you posted were true. It isn't.

Carlos Ponce

"And exactly how do you know that non-citizens cannot speak English?" I knew quite a few who were legal resident non-citizens who do not English. Saying they can speak English is like saying someone speaks Spanish because he or she can say "taco" and "burrito".

Emile Pope

“Who do not English”??? Non-citizens know English and some citizens should learn it....

Carlos Ponce

"Non-citizens know English" Some do, some don't. Billions of dollars spent on teaching English to non-citizens for "nothing"?

Ed Buckner

Mr. Ponce, the answer to your question is in Dan Miller's comment. Re-read, maybe?

Carlos Ponce

No "Dan Miller" made a contribution to this forum.

Ed Buckner

Dan Freeman, like Chief Justice Roberts, is in possession of all the facts.

Ed Buckner

Right you are, for once, Carlos Ponce--I meant Dan Freeman.

Bailey Jones

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday handed President Donald Trump a stinging defeat, ruling that his administration gave a “contrived” explanation for its plan to include a contentious citizenship question in the 2020 census in a decision that will make it difficult to add the query to the population survey. Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the 5-4 ruling and joined the court’s four liberals in the majority, upholding part of a federal judge’s January decision barring the question in a victory for a group of states including New York and immigrant rights organizations that had challenged the plan. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-census/supreme-court-to-issue-major-census-electoral-map-decisions-idUSKCN1TS1BL In other SC news, the court decided today not to challenge the Republican Party's use of partisan gerrymandering to eliminate competitive districts. You win some, you lose some.

Carlos Ponce

"The judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion." https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-966_bq7c.pdf So there will be a continuation. This case is not settled.

Bailey Jones

I should correct what I wrote. The gerrymandering cases before the SC were brought against both Republican and Democrat gerrymandering schemes. I applaud the liberal members of the court for putting principle above party and voting to rule against for Republican and Democrat shenanigans, in vain, unfortunately.

Mike Zeller

Carlos, “There are things that we don't want to happen but have to accept, things we don't want to know but have to learn, and sometimes you just have to let it go.” How bout them Supremes. [thumbup]

Ed Buckner

I often disagree with the Supremes, and I don't consider their decisions to be automatically correct (though do have the last word on US Constitution and law, though they can--and have--reverse(d) themselves). They're right, IMNHO, on this one, including that the Census Bureau can add such a question for good reasons (not just to increase voting power for one party or the other).

Carlos Ponce

"How bout them Supremes." If you are posting about the Supreme Court , Mike Zeller, they did not object to the presence of a citizenship question, they just wanted more questions answered. President Trump can delay implementing the Census until those questions are satisfied.

Ed Buckner

Trump will try, but he probably won't succeed. See, for example, https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/450773-trump-digs-in-on-citizenship-question-after-supreme-court-setback.

Carlos Ponce

We'll see what happens.

Jose' Boix

Perhaps we need to consider the requirements to "legally" and under the penalties established by our laws: Application for Texas Driver License or Texas Identification Card: 1. Are you a citizen of the United States? Texas Voter Registration Application: 1. Are you a United States Citizen? 2. Texas Driver's License No. or Texas Personal I.D. No. 3. If no Texas Driver's License or Personal Identification, give last 4 digits of your Social Security Number. Social Security Card Application: Provide Evidence of U.S. Citizenship or Immigration Status.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.