The President Trump Immigration Thread

[JettaKnight]

They're not slaves, unless you count their quid pro quo obligations to the Democratic party (which I count as subversion)

Did I really need purple?

Or, are you arguing that they should count as a full free person when it comes to representation and other things?





Oh, I don't like subversion, I prefer git.




Hi Bug! I'm six posts from 16K!

 

[JettaKnight]

Serious question - If I mark "I am not a legal citizen" then how does that affect representation and federal funding?

 

[T.Lex]

Back in the day, I think we used OpenCVS on a couple projects. I liked it, but didn't do much with the source code side.

 

[JettaKnight]

Back in the day, I think we used OpenCVS on a couple projects. I liked it, but didn't do much with the source code side.

I remember those dark days in college...

 

[T.Lex]

I remember those dark days in college...

The more tequila, the less gets remembered.

 

[Sylvain]

I still don't get what's the big deal with the citizenship question to the 2020 census.

I don't see how it's discriminatory towards immigrants (legal or otherwise).
The question is "Are you a citizen?", not "Are you here legally?".

If you answer "no" it doesn't automatically imply that you are in the country illegally.

 

[Dead Duck]

The more tequila, the less gets remembered.

THANK GOD!

Some dates are better left blank.

 

[JettaKnight]

I still don't get what's the big deal with the citizenship question to the 2020 census.

I don't see how it's discriminatory towards immigrants (legal or otherwise).
The question is "Are you a citizen?", not "Are you here legally?".

If you answer "no" it doesn't automatically imply that you are in the country illegally.

You're expecting Juan and Juanita to come to the same conclusion.

Democrats have whipped up such a boogieman view of Trump that anything like this can be viewed as punching your own ticket back to Central America.



At this point my attitude is, "just quit wasting time and money over this issue and accept the SCOTUS ruling." As an engineer, if there's a problem that can reduce accuracy, eliminate that problem.

 

[BugI02]

Serious question - If I mark "I am not a legal citizen" then how does that affect representation and federal funding?

Consider federal funding for medicaid, although in California I'm not sure if you have to be a citizen to be eligible. If California were to claim say 14 million people eligible for medicaid but the FedGov could make the case that the numbers do not align with the census would it not be evidence that California was seeking to lay some of the costs of its immigration policies (which are at odds with the US govt) off upon the US gov't

In that circumstance I would expect the gov't to deny some of the claim and I would fully support that. As a state, California has a broad range to adopt foolish policies but should bear the costs of such entirely themselves











But how many of them are quality posts (Hi Jetta)

 

[BugI02]

You're expecting Juan and Juanita to come to the same conclusion.

Democrats have whipped up such a boogieman view of Trump that anything like this can be viewed as punching your own ticket back to Central America.



At this point my attitude is, "just quit wasting time and money over this issue and accept the SCOTUS ruling." As an engineer, if there's a problem that can reduce accuracy, eliminate that problem.

I am glad you agree we need to eliminate Democrats and their influence in the interest of accuracy

 

[JettaKnight]

I am glad you agree we need to eliminate Democrats and their influence in the interest of accuracy

Yup. And cut out a lot of this federal funding that we're worried about. Let's the states handle their own needs. States have become the welfare queens du jour.

 

[Sylvain]

I took part in the 2010 census but there was no question about citizenship back then.

In 2000 there was a citizenship question.

 

[BugI02]

Do you know a source for Republicans with backbones, as opposed to business (literally) as usual Real Republicans®

 

[BugI02]

I took part in the 2010 census but there was no question about citizenship back then.

In 2000 there was a citizenship question.

Obama bowed to pressure (just like he bowed to everyone else) and eliminated it (first time in 190 years). I believe it was still on the long form

 

[Sylvain]

Obama bowed to pressure (just like he bowed to everyone else) and eliminated it (first time in 190 years). I believe it was still on the long form

I'm not sure how many people get the long form.

Either it's important to ask or not important.

I thought it was weird that I had to be counted just like a US citizen, when I'm not a US citizen.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I'm not a US citizen.

 

[2A_Tom]

Did question 9 question your status, Visa, work document, resident or illegal.


I just realized in the last few posts that this is not about putting the question on the Census but putting it BACK on the Census.

 

[BugI02]

I'm not sure how many people get the long form.

[most recently about 1 in 6 households]

Either it's important to ask or not important.

[It was lobbied for by no less a light than Thomas Jefferson, beginning in 1800 and first included in the 1820 census]

A question about citizenship was proposed for the first time in 1800 by Thomas Jefferson, who advocated for an inquiry into “the respective numbers of native citizens, citizens of foreign birth, and of aliens.” His straightforward reason for wanting such a question was “for the purpose of more exactly distinguishing the increase of population by birth and immigration.” Jefferson got his wish just two decades later, when a version of his question appeared on the census of 1820, which asked how many “foreigners not naturalized” lived in each household.

I thought it was weird that I had to be counted just like a US citizen, when I'm not a US citizen.

[Mandated, by the language of The Constitution, to everyone 'present' in the US, language adjusted by the 14th amendment (why should be obvious)]

The United States Census is a decennial census mandated by Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, which states: “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States... according to their respective Numbers... . The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years”. Section 2 of the 14th Amendment amended Article I, Section 2 to include that the "respective Numbers" of the "several States" will be determined by "counting the whole number of persons in each State... excluding Indians not taxed...”

 

[HoughMade]

I took part in the 2010 census but there was no question about citizenship back then.

In 2000 there was a citizenship question.

Shocking and offensive...

 

[JettaKnight]

Did question 9 question your status, Visa, work document, resident or illegal.


I just realized in the last few posts that this is not about putting the question on the Census but putting it BACK on the Census.

I'll admit it: Ditto.


Which makes this kerfuffle even more baffling.