In order for Ramirez’s ’toon to come anywhere near an approximation of reality, he has to replace the Democratic donkey with the Republican elephant.
It is the Democrats who want to count EVERYBODY, regardless of citizenship status, as reguired by the U.S. Constitution.
It is the REPUBLICANS who want to suppress the constitutionally-mandated count of EVERYBODY, by including a question that its designer admitted in (what he thought were private) emails (revealed when his daughter found them after his death) that is real intent was to REDUCE participation by Democrats and non-whites.
The express purpose of the census as explicitly mandated in the Constitution is for the purpose of determining apportionment of legislative districts. The specification is for all RESIDENTS, regardless of citizenship or legal status. This is a constitutional requirement — counting people for determination of congressional representation.
Certainly it is also an excellent opportunity to collect additional demographic data that is useful in determining public policy needs, and one could argue that citizenship vs. non-citizenship is useful demographic data.
But if any aspect of collecting demographic data (not the Constitutionally-stated purpose) interferes with the specific, expressed Constitutional purpose by reducing participation, then collection of that data violates the Constitution.
The citizenship question is therefore unconstitutional, which of course means nothing to current right-wing extremist judges, and even Chief Justice Roberts, a less extreme conservative, could see that.
Part of the reason for the census is to decide the amount of representation in the UNITED STATES national government. If you are NOT a CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES that need to be known so you are not counted for the purpose of representation. I think it’s an important question to ask.
I think the citizenship question on the census ranks right up there with the “rampant voter fraud” alleged in the last presidential election (in case you missed it, there was none: it was alleged – no proof or evidence was ever produced). But hang on, folks. The SCOTUS approved gerrymandering, so the citizenship question isn’t dead. And after that, there’ll be the Citizenship question and a party affiliation question. After all, how can you gerrymander districts if you don’t know where your supporters and your opponents are?
So I interpret your overly long and boring attempt at acting judicial that a person who is in the country at the time of the census taking should be included in the plans for voting in legislative districts. That is moronic.
I never thought I’d write that Ramirez would be the least offensive of the conservative so-called political cartoonists although as usual, his offering is not funny.
Twisting the facts again.. counting “noses” and counting party allegiances.. religious leanings.. club memberships.. are not the same.. Evidently your constitution reads “population”.. not Americans
Both parties have a vested interest in the position they have staked out and have even admitted (rarely) their primary reason.
The Dems want the illegals to participate so the total count in blue states and cities boosts the number of House seats in “safe” areas.
The GOP wants to be able to set the stage for a SCOTUS challenge to reduce the number of seats in those areas by excluding illegals from being counted in the calculation used to apportion House seats.
Yes, there are other factors, but the above is far and away the single most critical issue on the table for the partisans on both sides. Any claim to the contrary by either side is a blatant lie.
The SCOTUS decision was a narrow ruling on procedure, not on the Constitutionality of the question. The people objecting to the question were most likely hoping for enough of a delay to keep the question off the 2020 census. In this they are almost certainly successful. But is unlikely that they believe they will ultimately win the issue. Once the “reason” has been revised and resubmitted by the Interior Dept the case will be argued again and the question will be allowed.
There was a citizenship question of some type on the basic questionnaire in every census from 1820-1950. It has also been included on the long form in every census except for 1970. The notion that the Constitution somehow forbids the government from asking a citizenship question is patently absurd. The notion that the Executive branch does not have broad power and authority in the formation of the census is also absurd.
Congress has the power to propose legislation forbidding the question, but this seems unlikely to be able to pass, much less be signed into law or overridden when vetoed.
In the end, absent a specific law prohibiting it, the citizen question will almost certainly reappear on a future census.
It is contrary to both our constitution and what I hope is our national spirit to attempt to undercount any particular segment of our population. The question, as even the right-stacked Supreme Court has ruled, is designed and intended to undercount hispanics and others whose populations tend to be targeted by ICE.
Good Job, Ramirez: fulfilling your contract to denigrate, deny and divide if at all possible.
Census question on citizenship began as GOP plan to hurt Democrats, documents show
Newly revealed documents appeared to confirm Thursday what many critics had long suspected — that the Trump administration’s drive to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census began as a plan to bolster Republicans and to undercut Democrats in state legislatures and Congress […]
With this data, states could draw new election maps based on the number of eligible voters, not the total population. That “would be advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites” and “would clearly be a disadvantage for the Democrats,” he wrote.
The entire question of the census misses the bigger issue. There are 11million people in the US who do not have government permission to be here.
The regressives like Andylit haven’t figured out how to demagogue the reality, yet. I guess they like denial of difficult realities. Of course the Constitution says “persons” shall be counted, not citizens. This was to disenfranchise their slaves. But it says “persons” so that’s what it says. Andy thinks that all 11 million would vote Democratic, which is just not been shown to be true. Many regressives simply don’t like brown people, although the they won’t admit this is their problem.
The reality is you need to deal with the 11 million people already here. First, eliminate the motive for coming here by fining, and perhaps even incarcerating those employers (like trump) who regularly employ those not authorized to be here. Create a guest worker program for seasonal workers. Make those here decide what to do—become citizens or guest workers, or leave.
Once the employment opportunities without government permission are eliminated, the problem will slow down to a trickle. Plus, help the Central Americans quell their violent right wing gangs, and you reduce the incentives even further.
The rest of this blather about the Census is dumb. Now that even the SCOTUS has seen through the regressives’ stated, written motives at least we’re following the Constitution by counting all persons. But the way out of this thicket is simple and straightforward if the regressives would simply deal with reality—and not their fantasies.
Sanction the employers first. Then bring ALL of the immigrants out into the open. Establish a system to sort through the path to citizenship, work visas, or deportation. Fund the border properly to suss out asylum claims. Hire judges, build decent accommodations while cases are being heard. Fund ICE to go after EMPLOYERS.
Really, not so hard. A rrational and compassionate solution is obvious.
DD Wiz Premium Member almost 5 years ago
In order for Ramirez’s ’toon to come anywhere near an approximation of reality, he has to replace the Democratic donkey with the Republican elephant.
It is the Democrats who want to count EVERYBODY, regardless of citizenship status, as reguired by the U.S. Constitution.
It is the REPUBLICANS who want to suppress the constitutionally-mandated count of EVERYBODY, by including a question that its designer admitted in (what he thought were private) emails (revealed when his daughter found them after his death) that is real intent was to REDUCE participation by Democrats and non-whites.
The express purpose of the census as explicitly mandated in the Constitution is for the purpose of determining apportionment of legislative districts. The specification is for all RESIDENTS, regardless of citizenship or legal status. This is a constitutional requirement — counting people for determination of congressional representation.
Certainly it is also an excellent opportunity to collect additional demographic data that is useful in determining public policy needs, and one could argue that citizenship vs. non-citizenship is useful demographic data.
But if any aspect of collecting demographic data (not the Constitutionally-stated purpose) interferes with the specific, expressed Constitutional purpose by reducing participation, then collection of that data violates the Constitution.
The citizenship question is therefore unconstitutional, which of course means nothing to current right-wing extremist judges, and even Chief Justice Roberts, a less extreme conservative, could see that.
Judge Magney almost 5 years ago
And that’s why Wilbur Ross lied about it under oath.
wyneaux almost 5 years ago
Central Americans are Americans too…. hence the word American in their title…. or am I just being too literal?…. er, or is that just too liberal?
suzalee almost 5 years ago
Taking census is meant to count the actual number of people here
Brian G Premium Member almost 5 years ago
It is a pity but disregarding the US Constitution is being seen as more “Real American” by some these days.
aldo962 almost 5 years ago
Part of the reason for the census is to decide the amount of representation in the UNITED STATES national government. If you are NOT a CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES that need to be known so you are not counted for the purpose of representation. I think it’s an important question to ask.
Bookworm almost 5 years ago
I think the citizenship question on the census ranks right up there with the “rampant voter fraud” alleged in the last presidential election (in case you missed it, there was none: it was alleged – no proof or evidence was ever produced). But hang on, folks. The SCOTUS approved gerrymandering, so the citizenship question isn’t dead. And after that, there’ll be the Citizenship question and a party affiliation question. After all, how can you gerrymander districts if you don’t know where your supporters and your opponents are?
RAGs almost 5 years ago
Ramirez has taken leave of his senses, and, by past rantings, only thinks republicans should be counted.
Durak Premium Member almost 5 years ago
And right here we have an example of the warning signs of Nationalism, boys and girls.
When the question of how many Americans becomes more important than how many people.
Zebrastripes almost 5 years ago
Reality and truth is the enemy of conservatives….you should know this by NOW!
lonecat almost 5 years ago
I recommend “The City and the City”, a wonderful novel by China Mieville, about making people invisible.
reg4uny almost 5 years ago
So I interpret your overly long and boring attempt at acting judicial that a person who is in the country at the time of the census taking should be included in the plans for voting in legislative districts. That is moronic.
Librarylady almost 5 years ago
I never thought I’d write that Ramirez would be the least offensive of the conservative so-called political cartoonists although as usual, his offering is not funny.
NeoconMan almost 5 years ago
Maybe if we ignore the non-whites, they’ll go away….
Alberta Oil Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Twisting the facts again.. counting “noses” and counting party allegiances.. religious leanings.. club memberships.. are not the same.. Evidently your constitution reads “population”.. not Americans
Patjade almost 5 years ago
Poor Micheal, doesn’t know that the census language says persons, not citizens.
DrDon1 almost 5 years ago
Ramirez … a civics and cultural illiterate, doesn’t understand the purpose of the Census!
Andylit Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Both parties have a vested interest in the position they have staked out and have even admitted (rarely) their primary reason.
The Dems want the illegals to participate so the total count in blue states and cities boosts the number of House seats in “safe” areas.
The GOP wants to be able to set the stage for a SCOTUS challenge to reduce the number of seats in those areas by excluding illegals from being counted in the calculation used to apportion House seats.
Yes, there are other factors, but the above is far and away the single most critical issue on the table for the partisans on both sides. Any claim to the contrary by either side is a blatant lie.
The SCOTUS decision was a narrow ruling on procedure, not on the Constitutionality of the question. The people objecting to the question were most likely hoping for enough of a delay to keep the question off the 2020 census. In this they are almost certainly successful. But is unlikely that they believe they will ultimately win the issue. Once the “reason” has been revised and resubmitted by the Interior Dept the case will be argued again and the question will be allowed.
There was a citizenship question of some type on the basic questionnaire in every census from 1820-1950. It has also been included on the long form in every census except for 1970. The notion that the Constitution somehow forbids the government from asking a citizenship question is patently absurd. The notion that the Executive branch does not have broad power and authority in the formation of the census is also absurd.
Congress has the power to propose legislation forbidding the question, but this seems unlikely to be able to pass, much less be signed into law or overridden when vetoed.
In the end, absent a specific law prohibiting it, the citizen question will almost certainly reappear on a future census.
Concretionist almost 5 years ago
It is contrary to both our constitution and what I hope is our national spirit to attempt to undercount any particular segment of our population. The question, as even the right-stacked Supreme Court has ruled, is designed and intended to undercount hispanics and others whose populations tend to be targeted by ICE.
Good Job, Ramirez: fulfilling your contract to denigrate, deny and divide if at all possible.
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] almost 5 years ago
Census question on citizenship began as GOP plan to hurt Democrats, documents show
Newly revealed documents appeared to confirm Thursday what many critics had long suspected — that the Trump administration’s drive to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census began as a plan to bolster Republicans and to undercut Democrats in state legislatures and Congress […]
With this data, states could draw new election maps based on the number of eligible voters, not the total population. That “would be advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites” and “would clearly be a disadvantage for the Democrats,” he wrote.
Typical for them.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-supreme-court-census-republican-advantage-20190530-story.html
mysterysciencefreezer almost 5 years ago
The lack of a question about immigration status wasn’t an issue for every other GOP POTUS. Did they lack “common census” as well?
twclix almost 5 years ago
The entire question of the census misses the bigger issue. There are 11million people in the US who do not have government permission to be here.
The regressives like Andylit haven’t figured out how to demagogue the reality, yet. I guess they like denial of difficult realities. Of course the Constitution says “persons” shall be counted, not citizens. This was to disenfranchise their slaves. But it says “persons” so that’s what it says. Andy thinks that all 11 million would vote Democratic, which is just not been shown to be true. Many regressives simply don’t like brown people, although the they won’t admit this is their problem.
The reality is you need to deal with the 11 million people already here. First, eliminate the motive for coming here by fining, and perhaps even incarcerating those employers (like trump) who regularly employ those not authorized to be here. Create a guest worker program for seasonal workers. Make those here decide what to do—become citizens or guest workers, or leave.
Once the employment opportunities without government permission are eliminated, the problem will slow down to a trickle. Plus, help the Central Americans quell their violent right wing gangs, and you reduce the incentives even further.
The rest of this blather about the Census is dumb. Now that even the SCOTUS has seen through the regressives’ stated, written motives at least we’re following the Constitution by counting all persons. But the way out of this thicket is simple and straightforward if the regressives would simply deal with reality—and not their fantasies.
Sanction the employers first. Then bring ALL of the immigrants out into the open. Establish a system to sort through the path to citizenship, work visas, or deportation. Fund the border properly to suss out asylum claims. Hire judges, build decent accommodations while cases are being heard. Fund ICE to go after EMPLOYERS.
Really, not so hard. A rrational and compassionate solution is obvious.
newyorkslim almost 5 years ago
Long-winded fantasy, as usual. A census should count how many, what age, what sex, what residence, whether a citizen of not. BFD.