This new census debate really has me scratching my head and it's just one more reason why I'm baffled by liberal ideology. Why would anyone want a census that does not break down the population by citizens and non-citizens? Seems like even the left is ok with breaking it down by race and gender, but for some reason they think it's somehow unconstitutional to know how many people in this country are citizens with the absolute right to vote and how many are not citizens with no rights to vote. Should the states with the highest number of residents get the most representation in Washington even if those numbers are inflated by non-citizens who are not YET allowed to vote for that representation?
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
I am probably one of those "leftists" because my right-wing friends (fondly, I hope) call me a libtard. However, as with many labels, this does not apply in this case, because I agree with you. I think a true picture of the country REQUIRES a picture of voting citizens and non-voting immigrants. It gives a more accurate picture of representation, when it comes to politics. Citizens get representation, non-citizens don't. It also gives information when it comes to social issues, such as school enrollment and social services. A child in school is a child in school and the voting ability of the parents is less applicable. And I am NOT saying here that the immigrant population puts a higher demand on assistance programs, (though in some cases and regions, that may or may not be true.). I have always been a believer that the more information one has, the better decisions can be made.
Gov. Hickenlooper signed onto the suit opposing the citizenship question on the 2020 census.
The other signatories are the Attorneys General of 18 states. Interestingly Cynthia Coffman our AG did not sign onto this suit.
Carrie wrote: I am probably one of those "leftists" because my right-wing friends (fondly, I hope) call me a libtard. However, as with many labels, this does not apply in this case, because I agree with you. I think a true picture of the country REQUIRES a picture of voting citizens and non-voting immigrants. It gives a more accurate picture of representation, when it comes to politics. Citizens get representation, non-citizens don't. It also gives information when it comes to social issues, such as school enrollment and social services. A child in school is a child in school and the voting ability of the parents is less applicable. And I am NOT saying here that the immigrant population puts a higher demand on assistance programs, (though in some cases and regions, that may or may not be true.). I have always been a believer that the more information one has, the better decisions can be made.
Your post is pretty much spot on for me Carrie, thank you for putting it down so well.
The concern I've seen brought up that also does make me hesitate on adding this question is that it could cause non-citizens or minorities to not fill it out. Then we end up biasing the results because of that question. How can this data be used as a weapon? Information is power, as we've all been reminded too well recently. How will it be used?
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
How can it be used? It could be turned over to ICE and have them deport EVERYBODY who is not a citizen. And yes, there are many times I say "What about the word "ILLEGAL" does no one understand? But, having 38 hours of college logic, ethics and philosophy under my belt, I am also a believer in Situational Ethics. In other words, evaluate each case on its merits. That is DEFINITELY not being done, when we are deporting illegals who have served to terms in Afghanistan for our country. There was no hearing where the deportee was able to plead his case. The law has no interest in, nor room for, situational ethics. Granted, judges have some leeway, but cannot countermand the law. Right is not always black & white. I learned a long time ago that there is little correlation between "legal" and "justice".
I saw on the news this morning (to get slightly off of the subject) a proposal to build a wall, similar to the Viet Nam Veterans wall, for those who overdosed on opioids, to bring awareness to the problem. ARE THEY OUT OF THEIR FLIPPING MINDS??? We have idiots who are applying 21st century values on 18th and 19th century lifestyles by trying to negate history by pulling down Civil War (and before) statues and they want to build a wall for addicts??!!??? Beam me up, Scotty--there is NO intelligent life down here!
