Trump's Solution to the Census Debacle - GENIUS!

a reply to: TheRedneck

I guess I'm not seeing the end game here. If the question was on the Census, OK... anyone who is not a legal citizen either admits as much and is not counted towards representation numbers, or perjures themselves and opens the door for fraud prosecution, imprisonment, and a world of pain. Let's say the agency coordination shows, say, 500,000 illegals in California... then? Any effort to trim the results of the Census, which is the only document used to determine representation in Congress, by that 500,000 will be immediately challenged in court and the challenge will win. I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me the simplest argument the challengers can make would be "they have to prove that these 500,000 illegals actually filled out a Census form" and, as Trump himself admitted in the discussion of this (calling the new idea "more accurate") a lot of aliens do not even fill out the form out of fear of consequences.

Sorry man, I don't see this as a solution in any way. He should have stuck to his guns and taken the opening the SCOTUS gave him for figuring out a Constitutional way to include the question on the Census. Barring that, he should simply carry through his previous threat/promise of mass deportations and actually resolve this national issue as it should have been resolved to begin with. No illegals present = no illegals voting illegally in our elections = problem truly resolved.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I have to agree

I really hate having to wipe the door knob to enter my friends house

I refuse to use the bathroom there..

(we aren't close friends, he pays cash for PC repairs from porn pop-ups, go figure)

a reply to: burdman30ott6

My mistake.

Either way, privacy is being eroded. 9/11 gave us the Patriot Act, Citizens United basically legalized political bribery and Trump has given us the corporate tax cuts and now this. Privacy and freedom are evaporating with every little "chip" they take out of us.

How can you not see what's happening? It's the same story every time, the rich get richer while they chip away at our freedoms. The bogeyman has struck again.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

this could be easy, add drivers license amount + state welfare + SS# - Census = most illegals

( just a spit ball estimate you could used lots of other data as well.)

the best part is, like California could withold data but then it wont get Government monies either

winning 😁😁😁😁😁

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Well, you and I wholeheartedly disagree on economic issues (pretty much ALL economic issues). I don't respect your position there, mainly because I don't find you very economically intelligent... so that part is a non starter here. BUT, I sort of agree with you on the Patriot Act. I supported the idea of the initial Patriot Act without thinking of the long term potential once other ideologies got their hands on the law. So long as the Patriot Act was kept to it's initial stated intent, that being eyes directed outside the country and trained on every foreign nation, I thought it was a wonderful idea. It was when the law was polluted and those eyes turned inward that it became a monsterous abortion of a federal bill.

Citizens United? Peh! It holds a tiny fraction of the importance progressives have placed on it and, frankly, those who are the loudest critics of it would cut their own noses off simply to spite their faces. CU, they often forget, also laid the backbone for the massive amount of union money that's flowed to the hands of the same people waxing poetically against corporate money in politics... as if getting humped to death against your will by public sector unions is somehow a better fate than having the choice over where your money goes in the consumer markets.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

The thing about putting the question on the Census is they ran out of time to get it for 2020. The next Census is in 2030, 6 years after he leaves office. It's now or never.

The delay opened up this option, though, which will be more accurate for purposes of verifying citizenship.

TheRedneck

a reply to: thedigirati

California cannot withhold data. The Census is Federal, and Constitutionally mandated. All of the data being used is coming from the various departments within the Trump administration. He specified DHS and SS; there may be more.

TheRedneck

Having worked in conjunction with the IRS for more than 20 years, I do know that the IRS, at least, is legally prohibited from disclosing Any information regard specific tax filers/taxpayers (note the distinction) without a specific court order, in lieu of that person’s written permission.

An executive order from a president cannot supersede that prohibition; it would require an act of Congress, I believe, to repeal the prohibition.

And bare in mind, the existence of a “duplicate” tax filing is in no way “proof” of an “illegal” filing a return. Duplicate filings occur for many legitimate reasons, usually as the result of human error.

In short, I just don’t see how this action will provide anything approaching it’s desired outcome.

a reply to: Bhadhidar

Trump's got em fooled again !! 😎

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: DBCowboy

I'm not exactly sure either... but we both know there is a world of data available on people in the US. Apparently his administration has come up with an algorithm that will flag people as being likely illegal aliens. Likely something similar to what Google has been doing to us for years.

Likely? 'Tis more that a bit shuddery don't you really think...the genius bit though, a stretch since Trump has been advised by his team who must surely know already, (without telling Trump of course)...as we in the UK do already know that everyone is under surveillance, and records kept, and not just casual referencing as we were all told at one stage.
....is that what you are really saying?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Tempter

Does this even change the representation?

Isn't that the goal?

Actually, it prevents the representation from being changed. Only citizens are allowed to vote, and the districting is in place to ensure that different areas receive proportional representation based on the number of voters. If Illegal aliens (or even legal aliens) are counted in with the citizens without differentiation, that skews the results for representation.

As I understand it, 2010 was the first and only US Census that did not mention citizenship. I know it surprised me when I saw it wasn't even asked.

TheRedneck

What if representation has been skewed already? Wouldn't it then balance out (lower) representation from states of which there are a high number of falsely counted illegals?

a reply to: TheRedneck

The Executive has as Much POWER as the Judicial Branch . PUSH... The Superior WILL Prevails there ........

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Why should a billionaire have more of a voice than you or me?

Like I've said before, money speaks louder than words. You don't need to be an economics genius to figure that out. Common sense is common sense. Lobbying and money in politics is the biggest issue in America right now, along with the liberal agenda they're pushing through the media. One is the same as the other if you ask me. Do you know how the corporate world works? You do what you're told or you're replaced. Only the biggest ass kissers make it to the top, same goes for the heavily corporate-influenced political arena and the media.

The most important question though, why should one person's voice be louder than yours? Why is a billionaire allowed to influence your laws and freedoms more than you? How is that fair for the common working family?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

" The most important question though, why should one person's voice be louder than yours? Why is a billionaire allowed to influence your laws and freedoms more than you? "


Because WE THE PEOPLE Elected him , and Bestowed Upon Him that POWER Mr. Braniac .Duh ?

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Huh? I'm not talking about Trump, though Trump has been involved in political bribery in the past. I'm talking about lobbying and money in politics. Duh.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

If ANYONE Enters my Home Unannounced , then it is MY Business to KNOW About it , Right ?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

" I'm talking about lobbying and money in politics. "


Ah yes , things that Do Not Concern the President , but do Concern Crooked Politicians from ALL Parties in Government .

a reply to: TheRedneck

A Well Respected Man Outside the Media Coverage . Thank You President Trump .

a reply to: TheRedneck

This was a brilliant move. The dems can try the privacy route but it's a bit late. This information has already been collected and it wasn't a privacy issue then. Just because it has more than one purpose doesn't make it any more invasive. Well done, Mr. President. Well done indeed.

As for the apportionment question, it is plainly stated in the 14th Amendment, Section 2

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

This is augmented by the 19th and 26th amendment, including both sexes rather than just males and changing the age to 18 from 21.

so the apportionment should be based on.

the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such citizens shall bear to the whole number of citizens eighteen years of age in such state.

beyond that, illegal aliens are precluded from being counted in apportionment of due to their criminal nature.