How are we supposed to get an accurate count of non citizens if we don’t ask the question? The very fact that some people are afraid of answering the question goes to show you that most illegal aliens know that they are breaking the law. What are you afraid of if you’re not living in the US illegally? The Census is very important yet so many people are undercounted. In the 21st century we need to find a better way to count everyone than using the same questionnaire format used for the past 200 years.
11
Responding, and responding accurately, to the census allows for an appropriate allocation of resources based on headcount. Illegal aliens can't have it both ways. They can't refuse to participate in the census and at the same time demand a full package of taxpayer-funded resources if their local area is undercounted. They are not citizens of this country and have no right to make demands. If they are unhappy here, they can return to their home countries.
But then again I recently spent too many hours at the local Social Security office, all services cannot be conducted online, and found myself wondering why there are so many foreigners (legal or not) in this country. So I may have a different answer on another day.
11
Maybe I'm old school but a census is trying to get information on citizens. The government then uses this data to make decisions about how to serve said citizens. Seems to me if you're not a citizen then really you should not be part of the equation. Being a citizen has rights and responsibilities non citizens do not have.
17
Census takers would continue to count every person in every state under the proposed change just as they did in previous decades when they asked the citizenship question. Instead of criticizing the citizenship question, critics should work to persuade undocumented immigrants to answer the citizenship question truthfully for the benefit of themselves and their children. The U.S. Census Bureau is bound by Title 13 of the United States Code. This law provides strong protection for the information the bureau collects from individuals and businesses. As a result, the Census Bureau has one of the strongest confidentiality guarantees in the federal government. It is against the law for any Census Bureau employee to disclose or publish any census or survey information that identifies an individual or business. This is true even for inter-agency communication: the FBI and other government entities do not have the legal right to access this information. The National Archives releases census records to the public only 72 years after they were collected.
10
It's time to remove the economic incentive of "sanctuary cities and states" allowing and even encouraging illegal immigration.
9
I'm sure the founding fathers were not under any illusion that everyone would participate in the census. We can only do what is reasonable to get as accurate a count as possible. But the notion that we ought to take into account the baseless paranoia and mistrust that some non-citizens (or citizens) may have for the uses that the census will be put to by government, by eliminating legitimate, neutral questions, is absurd. Pandering to the public's irrational fears and ignorance of the facts is a fundamental problem with our political system that needs to curbed, not expanded.
8
People who support asking this question typically reference the fact that Congressional representation is determined by the Census numbers. If you don't answer the question, they say, you will be under-represented.
However, as a Democrat I am already under-represented by virtue of the utterly indefensible gerrymandering perpetrated by Republicans from one end of the country to the other. I am also under-represented because of all those states out west where Republican voters get way more bang for their votes when it comes to the Electoral College. But I would bet Mr. Trump and his supporters are perfectly OK with that.
8
I think many citizens will decline to state their citizenship status out of solidarity with undocumented residents.
4
What if we all refuse to answer that question? Are we not counted then?
3
The census taking in Florida has been fearful for senior citizens who live in gated communities, even if they are citizens. The rumors go around that the census takers ask a lot of questions outside of the actual so called legal questions that scare the seniors who are wary that scam artists are trying to come back and break into their places. So the seniors are reluctant to open their doors to any strangers. A sad, but true story here.
3
The optics of opposing the citizenship question isn't good for Democrats. Asking whether a person is a citizen is a legitimate question to ask on a census form, just like asking for a photo ID at the polling place is reasonable. Opposing such simple measures just feeds into the Right wing's paranoid fantasies about "millions of illegal voters" that don't exist. The bigger scandal, as most reasonable people know, is the widespread gerrymandering by the GOP aimed at controlling the House no matter how voters vote.
8
Checked the 1940 census, last one available to the public. Question was "Citizenship of the foreign born". The records I checked were answered with "NA" not applicable.
Seems there's an easy way around it. My father, his brothers and sisters, and grandparents were all "NA". And I know better, have done their genealogy.
1
I do not want populations under-counted, but as long as the census is not being used by immigration (and we must ensure that it isn't), then I do believe it is up to the communities (geographical or cultural) to make sure that their members are participating as widely as possible.
4
I have great sympathy for Daca recipients, and would like to see the receive legal status.
But I am so, at this point, tired of hearing about illegal immigration and its effects on everything from budgets being passed to the US census.
11
The purpose of the census is to count residents. It has always included non citizens. But now it would seem that the census will be intimidate honesty.
7
What if every one simply refuses to answer? That would render the question null. What is the point of the census? To count residents or to aid in ICE investigations. Or what if everyone answers that they are US citizens? There is no method for verification. If someone stopped me right now, I could not prove my citizenship.
24
What is the point of the Census? Are you serious? Talk about a need to revive American Civics Class!
3
The results are used to determine degree of representation in the House(not the Senate where it’s 2 per state).
What if everyone lied and was dishonest? Why then have any virtue?
2
The census has been counting the citizens for many decades. It is of interest in genealogy especially when information about origin and arrival here are included. Make it what it is - not another story to tear our citizens apart - a picture of our world today for years to come.
6
I don't care how many illegal aliens want to be counted in the Census. Congressional representation is based on the Census, and Congress represents US citizens—not illegal aliens. The Census is for US citizens only.
11
I agree with you, but, unfortunately, the 14th Amendment does not.
7
Not every non citizen is illegal. You would be surprised how many people have been here legally since ww2 era who are not citizens but still live, work, and pay taxes LEGALLY. Don’t be ignorant.
1
Not according to the Constitution.
1
I worked as a canvasser in the 1980 Census in South San Francisco, where there was a high number of Hispanic residency. I often met resistance and mistrust, but was able to explain in Spanish that being honest about number of people in the household would not result in investigation or arrest as at that time there was no inter-agency cooperation with immigration or law enforcement. It was still tough to convince them that they would benefit if true numbers were reported, meaning more schools and community resources based on population. It seems like a far more innocent and less xenophobic time.
8
The debate on whether any services should be provided is quite different from the role of the census. The fearful of the unauthorized consumer of services should immediately volunteer to personally designate those to be denied emergency medical care or food to those they determine unworthy....or get over yourself in the least needy county on the planet.
Should a homeless citizen get a classier appliance box to live in
1
Given the increasing numbers of non-citizens (mostly illegal aliens) in this country, and their increasing drain on taxpayer dollars, it makes all the sense in the world for the census to identify them. We cannot afford to take care of our needy citizens (elderly, infirm, veterans, et al.), much less all the non-citizens. If the US attempted to admit and support all the hundreds of millions of non-citizens who would like to come here we would be bankrupt immediately.
15
We can afford it. We just choose not to do it in order to spend more on giving tax breaks to the rich and to buy more weapons of war for regime change in other countries.
They aren’t a drain. Research shows they are a net positive as they are not eligible for federal benefits, underuse they system for fear of being deported, yet pay sales tax and other taxes. Their children whom are sometimes non citizens do use the system, however, they are more likely to go on to contribute and add net positives to this country including supporting social security and Medicare, even though their parents are not eligible. This is very tiring and saddening having to explain this over and over again. I’m afraid that the demagoguery and scapegoating by the powers that has created a blanket effect of willful ignorance. Perhaps you should be angrier about the corporate give away that happened in December. Your emotional feelings towards “illegals” are not data points.
1
When asked our race on countless forms my wife and I decline to answer. We can think of little which is more odious and un-American. I'm sure we're not alone. So whoever is keeping track for purposes of government policy is getting unreliable information, in all likelihood.
13
The question about citizenship is important to distinguish which residents are legally allowed to use public medical care, welfare benefits, unemployment benefits, public education, so if there are residents who do not have social security numbers or legal citizenship papers then they will not be placing demands on any of these programs. So the question is useful for determining the national needs in those public programs. Illegal immigrants should not be allowed to break the law, and the federal and state governments should not enable illegal law-breaking behaviors. If the federal and state governments are complicit with law-breakers then they are losing their legitimacy as creators of legislation. Police lose their legitimacy when they turn a blind eye to violations of laws. Citizens lose their legitimacy when they hire illegal immigrants to save money. The loss of legitimate authorities will produce cynicism, corruption, and distrustfulness by Americans. Illegal immigration is another crime and allowing it to flourish will make the United States a corrupt country like Mexico and like other corrupted countries where the governments are powerless to stop criminals from violating laws.
22
This is not true, at least with respect to public education, because the Supreme Court decided in the 1980's that public schools must open their doors to illegal aliens. It may have been well-intentioned decision at the time, when there were many fewer illegal aliens, but the decision has not stood up well over time. Ask any public school teacher or administrator facing budget challenges.
Together with the special education legislation (Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act) and other legislation, schools must not only take in all illegal aliens but are also under federal mandates to provide English as Second Language instruction, which generally results in much higher per pupil spending rate for illegal alien children than for US citizen children attending same schools. Effective ESL instruction requires much smaller student-teacher ratio.
Conveniently, many of the elite of both parties, including federal judges such as Supreme Court Justice John Roberts and appeals court judge Merrick Garland, send or have sent their children to private school, completely exempt from the impact of this decision and legislation. Of course Chelsea Clinton, the Bush girls, Obama children, etc. all attended private school as well. So nice to opt-out from the impact of decisions they impose on the rest of Americans!
9
At the bottom of the "great recession" in 2009, unemployed, I worked for a month or so for the 2010 census, doing "address canvassing", walking through neighborhoods to verify addresses and identify individual housing units (for $12/hour; only people with perfect scores on the exam were hired). They gave us cheesy looking ID badges with no photos and handwritten names. We were supposed to ring each doorbell to interview the resident and confirm the address.
On more than one occasion, I was chased off someone's property and followed back to my car by residents who were apparently suspicious that I was from law enforcement, immigration or someone else official who was lying about being a census enumerator to snoop around.
With this understandable background of mistrust (and the fact that law enforcement does often pose as utility workers and such to do surveillance of criminal targets), I believe the "citizenship" questions, never asked before and irrelevant to the primary constitutional purpose of the census to determine congressional representation, is simply a cynical attempt to scare undocumented immigrants from being counted. It's pretty similar to and of a piece with the GOP notions of "voter fraud" to systematically disenfranchise voters from blue states.
22
The fall of all past civilizations didn't stem from one gigantic collapse; usually it began little by little-- death by a thousand paper cuts--finally leading to an ultimate demise. Those who sexually assault people--or serial killers for that matter--usually start with little tale-tale indications of future misdeeds: a whisper, a look, an assumption-- starting small fires or killing small animals, testing what they can successfully get away with, all on a small scale. Those who break the law will lead to further laws broken. Ask any psychologist or social scientist. Ask yourself. A corporation who successfully gets away with cheating on their taxes will cheat again. More. It's happened time and again. And so begins the circling of the drain into, eventually, a death spiral. You can kid yourselves. Just don't try to kid me. One is either a citizen or not. It's not about morals, or fear, or social justice, It's about truth. You either speak it or you don't.
29
Anyone here trust the GOP with this info even a tiny, itty bit???? Nope...didn't think so. LEAVE THAT QUESTION BLANK!
14
Yes, leave it blank. "Refuse to answer."
7
Born here six decades ago. Will not answer the question.
What's next in our country? Yellow badges?
32
You're not strange at all.
2
Thank you ridgeguy. Had the same thought myself.
6
My first thought was not to participate in the census at all. But this is easier. I just won't answer that one question.
10
If we had a President, and if we had a trustworthy non-sabotaged government, it would be easy, even a duty, to fill out the Census and do so with truthful answers about race and ethnic background.
But now we have the Gerrymander GOP in control of the government in general, and covfefe as White House occupant in particular. The former's (lack of) regard (and worse) for minorities is well-known. The latter...well it's safe to say, from his old days when he helped Filthy Father Fred discriminate in their tenements (and inherited his money, and bigotry), to the Central Park Five thing, to Many Sides and the Muslim Bans and the Paper Towel Toss, that (except for the token weirdo he calls out or seats right in front of the rally camera) he regards an assertion of minority background like an attention-grabbing gold star.
And not the award or family kind, either.
8
As American citizens, don't we all have a right to know who is in this country? And if you are here illegally, hey sorry. But that is the law.
23
Not for long.
2
It also used to be the law that slaves who escaped to the North had to be returned if caught.
1
This highlights how illegal aliens already have the right to "vote".
Of course, they cannot go to the voting booth. But the apportionment of Congressional seats and electoral votes is based on the number of residents in an area, not the number of citizens.
If this were done strictly for citizens, Democrat-leaning states would lose both Congressional seats and electoral votes. In a closely contested presidential election or tightly balanced House of Representative, there could be enough illegal aliens to tip the balance.
https://fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/congressional-seats-and-fed...
21
Texas would lose representation too...
1
You might want to re-read the Constitution and spend additional time on the Fourteenth Amendment.
1
And if DC was represented, there'd be more Dems in office. And if representation was balanced across populations (ie Wyoming vs California), there'd be more Dems. And if the GOP hadn't gerrymandered so extremely, there'd be more Dems.
Remember, representation in Congress is based on total population, not number of citizens. If Latino non-citizens in Arizona aren't counted, then Arizona may end up with one less congressman to work against the Latinos.
If you want to encourage Latinos to be counted, do it in California or Maryland.
4
When the 1990 census took place, we had Korean neighbors. When the block statistics came out. it was obvious that they had counted themselves as white. certainly the accuracy of the census is dependent on honesty and if people feel threatened they willeither not answer or answer incorrectly.
1
Hold on one second, I am confused. The question is "Are you a US citizen or not" but not "are you an American or not"? We should absolutely avoid politics and ambiguity. Not a citizen does not mean the person is illegal or undocumented. Greed card holders are not citizens either. Having said that, this question does open a door to manipulation. We all know that conservatives only want to count citizens. The policy by "sanctuary cities" are making things worse. It should not take a rocket scientist to figure out that conservatives want to cut funding and representation from minority groups. But what other options are there for minority groups? Participation is the best option. We all want to be counted!
3
All citizens should be counted. Those here illegally should play no part in political representation or funding for social services. So called sanctuary cities should not be rewarded for aiding and abetting law breaking.
Green card holders are not citizens but presumably here to take advantage of an opportunity to earn a better life. Not be dependent on social services.
12
I love that the default is that any non-citizens are leaching off the system. Be gone with your nativist prejudices
Sanctuary cities are not aiding and abetting law breaking. They are refusing to use their resources to do jobs the Feds are supposed to do.
The Republicans are pushing this issue out of fear that the growing Hispanic population will continue voting for Democrats. They would love to see an undercount of Hispanics so that big blue states like California might get less congressional seats alloted to them than they deserve. The irony here is that the biggest Republican state Texas could also find itself underrepresented in Congress.
2
Should you decide to protest this by saying they are not a US citizen or leaving the question blank to invalidate the results, you would be breaking the law. Relevant laws are Title 18 U.S.C Section 3571 and Section 3559, which amends Title 13 U.S.C. Section 221. I'm not advocating one way or the other, just saying.
8
Trump has lied over 2,000 times this year, so it is laughable to think someone would get in trouble over the census. I will be putting down myself as a Muslim--how will you refute that? You won't and you can't.
14
Unacceptable, just as intrusive as the phony federal commission on voter frauds attempt to gather our personal information and party affiliation through state election agencies. The fraud commission was disbanded after several lawsuits were filed against it, yet Trump plans to turn over the task to Homeland Security.
What has happened to the republican party? Most of them have deserted their values and integrity to keep from being castigated by Trump. Shameful and disheartening.
4
Because god forbid a census of America’s citizens ask if you’re a citizen. When did the U.S. census become yet another instrument for protecting illegal immigrants?
32
I can't think of a single good reason for the government not to inquire about citizenship on the Census and lots of good reasons why it should. Note, too, the question doesn't ask about whether the respondent is a legal or illegal alien, so responding doesn't expose anyone to any police action, even if the Census weren't anonymous. It just asks about citizenship, and why shouldn't Congress and the public want to know how many non-citizens are living in the US? The answer to that question is directly relevant to how many immigrants we want to let in in the future.
19
If I trusted our current government, I'd agree with you. Data like that would be useful. But I cannot imagine this information not being immediately abused for political gain
3
So the governent must assume the population will not be truthful. As a result, they can not ask the question, for a census poll. I think this is very telling about what we have become as a nation.
5
The census, as stated in the Constitution, requires a count of all persons in the country. It does not require any information gathering than that. It would seem that the GOP, being all strict Constitutionalists and all, would only want what is enumerated in the Constitution, only a count of the persons in the country, nothing else.
8
The census is primarily used for political representation and allocating money for social services and government benefits. Why would non citizens be counted for political power or taxpayer funded benefits especially if they are here illegally?
17
The Census count also includes counts of individuals under 18 years old, i.e., can't vote ... so it is not just about who can vote or not.
5
A heck of a lot of people live here legally but are not citizens. They use the roads, the schools; they pay taxes (as do many who are not here legally). Why would you not count them?
6
The current swamp in DC cannot be trusted, and will use both answers and non-answers for purposes besides those for which the census is intended. Full stop.
We are getting to where it is government against the wishes of the people.
2
Anther indirect attack on the Constitution, which covers everybody who lives in the US, regardless of citizenship. The resulting undercount will reduce the number of Representatives alert to their needs because Congressional seats are determined by population. No surprise, the high undercount states and congressional districts tend to vote Democratic. Asking this question will yield diminish the representational power of everyone living in these states and districts.
And a great share of federal spending is population driven. Again, Democratic leaning states and districts will tend to lose appropriates for things like social services. And many states use federal census counts for their own service distribution. Democratic districts will, again, lose out.
4
Born here, will decline to answer that question.
8
Great idea. Less representation and funds for you, and Sacramento.
17
It's just a regular everyday public question. It's not a Sophie's Choice question. Just answer the softball question.
6
What happens if that question is left blank? I stopped answering questions about race, ethnicity, gender, etc a long time ago. Or, depending on who is asking the question, I answer whatever I feel like. I've gotten some very interesting junk mail.
7
The 2010 response refusals were accepted as "blank". The blanks were primarily race/ethnicity and age. The premise is the actual number of persons at the address on the data collection day , 4/1/2010. . If the location was the residence on that day, allI had to have.
We were encouraged to get full data , but, the respondents control the interaction
1
This effort is clear indication that the Trump Admin intends to craft and conduct the census for political purposes. We can expect them to underfund and mismanage collection efforts in areas with higher proportions of registered Democrats and increase funding and collection efforts in high concentration, Republican registered areas. The recent shift of the voter fraud effort to the Dept. of Homeland Security is a similar effort to disenfranchise Americans who might be hostile to this administration.
6
It's a terrible idea. I worked the Census for several months in 2020, and one of my routes covered a very Latino area. Were many here illegally? Probably, but I didn't, and wouldn't want to ask. The fear on the faces of those who answered the door, especially the kids, was palpable. Only after multiple assurances that they were safe did they relax. Their legal status doesn't matter when a community needs to know how many cops are needed, what the housing issues are, and whether traffic patterns are correct, based on the population. What an awful thing to do to people and to local communities.
11
You worked in the future?
11
Why doesn’t Perla have her own show by now?
If the Trump-run census asks me that question. I will leave it blank or refuse to answer. Its 100% political. Every American should do the same.
28
The United States Constitution specifically states that the census should count the "whole Number of free Persons." It says nothing about counting citizens, and hence the question of citizenship should not be asked. Indeed, the word "Citizen" appears in the Constitution only a few times, and the Constitution consistently declares its commitment to protect the rights of all PERSONS.
41
Nice, but the current occupant of the WH does not care much about some Constitution.
4
This isn't just about discouraging some people from completing the census and therefore not be included in the population counts. They want to change the apportioning rules that currently use total population of each state relative to the total population of the country to only counting citizens as the basis for apportioning representatives. This would be effective in redistributing the apportionment from urban areas to rural areas.
The Republicans want to use the census data to move the "no" responses into the "does not count toward the population" box. They can't do this without the "are you a citizen" question - hence why they want it on this census.
9
"...it could lead Hispanic people to avoid being counted..."
Mission accomplished.
21
I worked the census as a field data collector in 2010 and can guarantee that I would not have received the same level of cooperation had a citizenship question been Involved. The level of trust extended to census workers was mixed then and the embrace of strangers asking unsolicited questions has not improved.
The field workers are pursuing folks who did not respond initially for whatever reason, second residence, lost mail, "I forgot", and a number of' black helicopter what do THEY want to know about me' folks . The vast majority were fine once the scope of question were understood.....and no the GOVT is not trying to get into your life and the data is secret from every one else.
The perception of the citizenship issue is enough to have scared off the two largest households I interviewed , 27 people. One had 18 people on April 1 , the official count day residing in one residence to aid with the opening of a restaurant and long gone by late May , and the other a family attending local schools ,using local services and contributing . The family is shall we say an ethnicity unwelcome at 1600 Penn Ave these days. I showed up for the interview in my blue blazer and friendly attitude and had a nice visit with the family elder. Was he a citizen? Don't know , don't know why I would care.
Could I have been in a position to cause fear of the midnight knock? Why would I want to take the risk?
20
Another enumerator: I did meet a few undocumented people - including some young guys who started to flee - but they heard me out and cooperated. Some families were more than gracious, despite any misgivings.
There were some native paranoid types, adherents of Rush Limbaugh, who were less forthcoming.
It is a Constitutional requirement to count every one. It is vitally important that the country and each locality - have an accurate ( as accurate as possible) count of every person. Obviously, it has to do with allocation of resources - it also is vital for health or disaster planning, education, everything that occurs in an organized society. The Founders knew it. What is with these supposed Constitutional hard liners who veer from its principals whenever it suits their interests?
There is a certain group of folks who think that pretending things - and people - don't exist makes them disappear. It is a self defeating way to respond to change.
10
Put the question on. Then let’s do a grass roots out reach to everyone in this country: fill out the census but DO NOT respond to that’s question. Enumeration accomplished without giving up potentially sensitive information.
8
Better yet, let's all say we're Hispanic and immigrant. That would be a shock to my French-Canadian ancestors but what a great way to invalidate the citizenship question.
2
BINGO!!! Thinking the same thing!
2
If this is about voting (which it is not, but we'll pretend it is) then the census should also count "ex pats" and their families who live abroad but can vote in their "home" districts during all elections. Right now ex pats are not counted in the census.
7
A properly conducted census, lib, is essential to the integrity of future elections: enumerating populations has all to do with then defining voting districts.
Which is why, inter alia, Republicans are so intent on disabling the 2020 Census. If you can distort the truth by miscounting, distorting true representation is a logical follow-on. Which is a central element of conservatism.
15
I noticed that the censuses in 1920 and 1930 included citizenship info.
22
Even the democrats must know that if you want the opportunity for honest redistricting you must know where your citizens are. You know, citizens, the ones who can vote.
25
Stop Ted, you are making too much sense.
9
Redistricting does not depend on the number of eligible voters. Nor does the number of Representatives. It depends on population. If you are correct, our state’s representation must by reduced to reflect the vast numbers of convicted felons who cannot vote.
And we can start with Vern Buchanan. You with me?
16
So Ted, according to you the census would not count persons under the age of 18 because they cannot vote.
3
It's a good idea. The census asks for so much other information, why shouldn't they also seek to understand the number of U.S. citizens versus citizens of other countries residing in US territory?
29
How do you suppose it will help the count when recipients refuse to answer the question?
7
This question is of course being brought back to suppress the count. The idea that Mr Sessions, who has a well documented history of being anti-immigrant, wants this info to 'support' the Voting Rights Act. is Orwellian.
16
I think I'll pass on that question and just respond with my own question: what do you think after tracking me for 68 years?
7
In 2022, individual results from the 1950 Census will become available. So you can look yourself up!
6
bill, I like your answer! I may use it myself! thanks for the belly laugh.
1
I'm not Hispanic, I'm white and I'm a native born US citizen and a veteran. But if the citizenship question goes on the census, I'm not going to participate either.
That question is virtually guaranteed to skew the results for Hispanics, rendering the census void. No need for me to participate in adding to the foolishness.
15
So, in addition to Latinos, Democrats like yourself are also not going to be counted.
Double win for the Republicans. They shot you in one foot, you shot yourself in the other.
4
Wait, are you saying some people actually DO trust the government?
2
The Constitution does not use the word census, but calls for an "enumeration" every 10 years. While enumerate usually is used to mean an exact count, it also can mean a statistical poll of a sample of the population. The call for an enumeration in the Constitution calls for enumerating of "all free persons" plus slaves (each of whom was to be considered 3/5 a person), and excluding Indians, who are not taxed. This was amended in the Fourteenth Amendment to drop the 3/5 person for slaves, since slavery had been outlawed. There is nothing in the Constitution that restricts this enumeration to American Citizens (or green-card immigrants) only.
5
One more reason the DACA must be enacted immediately!
4
"Distrust of the government's intentions toward noncitizens may be hard to overcome, research suggests, and political developments have increased levels of distrust. . ."
The government's recently reported, long overdue efforts to enforce existing immigration laws may have had the incidental benefit of creating unease among members of the very large sub-population of illegal "noncitizens"
Those laws include, inter al, requirements that illegal aliens resident more than 30 days come forward for registration and fingerprinting; and they indicate that those who aid and abet illegals in maintaining illegal residence are subject to relatively severe penalties.
For a pertinent summary of such legal provisions, see http://www.reportillegals.com/law.html
The potential benefits to the country of enforcing immigration law, far outweigh the possible effects of a possible increase in the standard error of measurement in the census count.
30
Special, what exactly are the benefits of enforcing immigration law? Anti-immigrants apparently never think they have to make the case for costly enforcement of long-ago minor violations of law against productive people when even an armed robber who is a citizen is protected by a statute of limitations.
10
JMcF, if a person is continuing to reside here illegally, he or she is continuing to break the law.
"The potential benefits to the country of enforcing immigration law, far outweigh the possible effects of a possible increase in the standard error of measurement in the census count."
The twisted untruth of your observation, spec, is breathtaking (although one year in to this administration, unsurprising.) Sacrificing accurate population measurements as a means of punishing aliens is misguided, not least because those it ultimately punishes are Americans collectively and the society they form. "Cutting off your nose to spite your face" is another way to say it.
Your view also exposes the racism and xenophobia underlying -indeed, essential to- your nativist philosophy. You mildly applaud "creating unease", but let's call it out truly: you and your fellows are happy to turn the USA into a Republic of Fear.
I understand that that goal appeals to many, but must be resisted stridently. I myself have lived in such republics, and none of them were good, honorable or free. I wouldn't want my own country to turn into something so small and so mean.
3