You are not logged in. Would you like to login?
With the exception of "The Back Alley", CIVIL DISCUSSION IS EXPECTED
Offline
It doesn't seem to cause them any problems. Why would it be such a big deal here?
Last edited by BornToFarm (7/12/2019 6:13 am)
Offline
Because of WHY it was being added, the negative social & fiscal ramifications of non-compliance, and the ability of the GOP to use the fear of non-citizens, legal or not, to gerrymander even more districts in their favor.
Non-citizens, legal or not, are HIGHLY RELUCTANT to call attention to themselves because they FEAR the government, often with good reason.
That translates into millions of folks hiding from the census, skewing the results BIG TIME so that federal monies for schools, colleges, roads, housing, and other services are not accurate.
PLUS, it tends to skew results to favor rural areas instead of urban cities where the vast majority of non-citizens live, thus helping the GOP (whose support is heavier in rural areas). It changes how many congressional seats each area gets and what party they are most likely to be.
IOW, it's a partisan ploy to neutralize as many as 6.5 million LEGAL non-citizens and who knows how many illegal residents in favor of the GOP.
It really has NOTHING to do with voting rights or anything of the sort as some GOP have claimed. It's completely unnecessary and Thomas Hofella's posthumous release of the details of his plan PROVES that the GOP wants it ONLY to skew results towards more GOP seats.
Offline
Bingo
For enrichment of information is one thing
For satisfaction of an agenda rooted to punitive discovery and enforcement is another.
One is Constitutional. The other is not.
Offline
Pikes Peak 14115 wrote:
Bingo
For enrichment of information is one thing
For satisfaction of an agenda rooted to punitive discovery and enforcement is another.
One is Constitutional. The other is not.
=====================================
Exactly, which is why the SCOTUS ruled against it