Census Question Goes to SCOTUS

The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to decide whether the Trump administration may add a question about citizenship to the next census questionnaire. Critics say that adding the question would undermine the accuracy of the census, because both legal and unauthorized immigrants might refuse to fill out the form. By one government estimate, about 6.5 million people might decide not to participate. That could reduce Democratic representation when congressional districts are drawn in 2021.

That’s what it was always about. It’s an electoral strategy. It’s about gerrymandering and winning elections without doing any work. It’s also about pleasing capital (which doesn’t exist, of course) by ensuring that there is an endless supply of underpaid and exploitable workers.

11 thoughts on “Census Question Goes to SCOTUS”

  1. Democrats whine endlessly about how low population, rural states get a disproportionate share of electoral votes and House seats, but when it comes to California getting more political power per citizen due to a large population of illegal immigrants, suddenly that’s ok.

    Like

    1. If only California voted, we’d be reliably Dem forever. The problem is the quality of that representation, and there I have doubts. Gavin Newsom sounds certifiable, I’m sorry.

      Like

      1. I hate California politics with a passion. I hate Newsom as a person, but surprisingly I’m liking him as governor so far. He’s actually forcing cities to build more housing or else they’ll lose out on tax money. Housing is California’s #1 problem so I’m glad he’s going after it aggressively. If he manages to accomplish something here I can overlook what are sure to be the many other stupid things he says and does.

        Like

    2. If you have that line of argumentation but shrug at the idea that prisoners count toward representation numbers for rural districts I can’t take you seriously.

      You might as well shriek about children and legal work visa holders and legal green card holders counting towards because they can’t vote either and yet they count as population for representation purposes too.

      California has more people and more electoral votes, it’s true.

      However, it doesn’t have “more political power per resident.” Each California senator represents more people than say a senator from Wyoming. And Wyoming’s at large Congressional district (hint they have one district) represents less people than say the Ohio district that includes Columbus. One vote in the House of Representatives from Wyoming counts just the same as one vote from Ohio. One vote in the Senate from Wyoming counts just the same as one vote in the Senate from Ohio. So if anything the small states have “more political power per resident.”

      Like

    1. The number of residents in a region determines the number of seats the region gets in the Congress. If you bring in a bunch of illegal immigrants into your district and make them count on a census, you might get a new seat opened up for you. This is a way to swell your ranks in congress without actually doing anything for the existing voters. This is called gerrymandering.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Our favorite idiot wants to tear down existing border barriers. If that doesn’t perfectly symbolize the direction the party is going in, I don’t know what does:

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/i-d-take-wall-down-says-beto-o-rourke-current-n971896

    Learned about this because a loyal Democrat I know was complaining that everyone running is acting like loonies. I’m hoping that there’s a lot of people like him and that we propel a sane person to victory.

    Like

    1. I agree! The majority of Democrat-leaning people are completely normal. We deserve a good candidate who will speak to our concerns.

      The way to beat Trump is not to out-crazy him. It’s too look reasonable standing next to him. And it shouldn’t be so hard given that the guy is a raging loon.

      Like

      1. My worry is that I see plenty of normal Democrats who seem fine with Kamala Harris (or someone else, but she’s the most common one.) A lot of people just don’t look into candidates that heavily is part of it.

        Like

Leave a Reply to David Gendron Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.