Serious question -- what do Trump supporters think the citizenship question was supposed to DO?

While simultaneously assuming that federal immigration law is enforced, instead of usurped.

 

That's because the 14th amendment spells out it is people, not citizens.

 

Completely bullshit, the Constitution included the census in it's original construction to determine the House and used the word people, before there were citizens of the US to be counted. It also did the three fifths thing counting slaves as people.

 

Right.

That's because people who aren't supposed to be here aren't supposed to be here.

Now do native americans.

 

You could start by looking at student and worker visas. Both of which were missing form your subtraction. But even if you fix your formula, it still won't work. It can only work if illegal immigrants are going to answer this question and answer it truthfully. Without that, you're plugging bad numbers into the formula. Garbage in, garbage out.

 

I guess the idea that people starting a country during Colonial times didn't care about immigration, more than getting people to immigrate to their colony, hasn't occurred to tRump supporters.

 

I have seen that argument as well, but either way, I believe the goal of the question being included comes down to benefits and representation for illegals.

I can't help but wonder, why would anyone want to give representation to illegals? Some things should be reserved for citizens.

 

Because it is the responsibility of the Federal govt. to control immigration. The states are victims.

 

It's not bad to know how many people are citizens versus here illegally, it's just not the point of the census.

People here illegally are usually here by 2 means. They came across the boarder on their own without going through any port of entry. Or they overstayed a VISA/vacation.

Now here's the thing. A person here illegally is STILL subject to our laws. They don't have immunity to any of them. They also pay taxes. Perhaps they aren't paying income taxes (I bet some actually are though a vast minority), but they are paying other taxes. While they can't vote, their presence makes them subject to US laws. They do contribute to the economy and thus the tax base.

So that in mind, remember that proportional representation wasn't just about people. It's about economics and where our government should get much of it's direction from. The founding father's believed that congress should get that direction from how many people RESIDE within those districts. NOT how many CITIZENS. They didn't use or say the word citizen on purpose. They didn't do things accidentally.

You are free to disagree with that, but the simple purpose of the census is to determine how many people live within the United States. It was NEVER intended to count ONLY citizens. Representation in the government doesn't always come with a direct vote. See those under 18 for a prime example. Yet, they do have representation in government, don't they. And that's just one example that you could apply to someone who is here illegally and can't vote.

 

See 233.

 

And also why the court busted them.
The question might very well be on the census if they hadn't lied about the reason for it.

 

Bad link, but look at this one.
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512/fact-check-has-citizenship-been-a-standard-census-question

 

Sure. That's why they spelled out who had the power to naturalize people as citizens, and spelled out rights for citizens and not non-citizens.

 

I read census data all the time that has all kinds of data on illegals, you name it.

 

Oh how cute.......You have ignored my link which told the entire story INCLUDING the nuance of the long and short form, and you instead used your link that addresses the bogus notion of "going to all homes" which specifically and purposefully IGNORES the notion of there being long-form version of that question on all but two census's between 1880 and present day. You clearly were confused the first time you looked at my link. For your convenience I will provide it again so that you can look at it after having been exposed to all nuances of this topic. I understand why you want to look at this in as narrow of a fashion as possible, but to anyone searching for true answers, MORE DETAIL ( my link) is preferable to less detail ( your link). When you skip the detail, your argument appears persuasive. Once the rest of the story is known?......not so much.

https://cis.org/Richwine/History-Census-Bureaus-Birthplace-and-Citizenship-Questions-One-Tabledidnt

 

Let me introduce you to another concept: addition.

You add up all the legally issued green cards and all the legally issued temporary visas, then you subtract from the total answer.

Can I help you with any other obvious math problems?

 

If someone breaks into your house and is living there when the form comes, are you going to count them as a resident when filling out your form?

 

Great so we don't have a crisis after all. Thanks for playing!

 

What harm would it do for the country if immigration was set to allow millions of more enter the country? Adding people is also an economic stimulus.

 

Still says page not found for me. Not real informative.

 

Beats going to jail.

 

But the Republicans don't care about the Constitution. They are just into lip service.

 

Yes.

What's the problem with bringing in millions of people from the most violent countries in the world, who don't speak english, have elementary level educations, have no money, and have probably never seen anything but a witchdoctor?

It's fine.

 

https://cis.org/Richwine/History-Census-Bureaus-Birthplace-and-Citizenship-Questions-One-Table

 

If a tree falls on you in the woods, does anyone care? The answer is yes, but it's about the tree...

I presume they have an address, they can use their address, not mine, and be counted that way. I also presume they aren't breaking in to fill out my census form. Either way, they should be counted as residing within the US, burglar or no. And if they are a burglar, then they should really be counted because they are going to have an interaction with the government more so than I will and thus they have an interest in there being appropriate representation.

Burglary isn't the same crime as staying in the US illegally. More over, the person breaking into my house is more likely to be a US citizen so clearly being born here really counts for something, eh?