The 2020 Census (Page 5): Yes, the object is to count all the people in the country. BUT, the issue about citizenship exists BECAUSE our government issues federal monies to states for...

maryjane

Lonewolf wrote:

What difference does it make the object is to get the total number of people liveing in the country.

Yes, the object is to count all the people in the country. BUT, the issue about citizenship exists BECAUSE our government issues federal monies to states for assistance in welfare services, law enforcement, public colleges and universities, infrastructure, etc. And the amounts of those federal Grant's fir the various uses are based on population reported by each state, so California with it's great numbers of i*****l a***ns and other forrign non-citizens reap a bonanza from the rest of the nation's taxpayers to take good care of their noncitizens. BUT, even more important is that, after every census report, a new look is taken at each state's number of representatives in the USA Congressionsl House chamber. Each state's number of representatives is based on population. Again, counting noncitizens, especially i******s, hugely skews this, so states like California having large numbers of noncitizens likely will get more representation in Congress while state's like Wisconsin having few noncitizens could lose representation in Congress. And all this because i*****l a***ns and other foreign noncitizens are counted equally to actual citizens, greatly impacting the operation of our USA government.

maryjane

moldyoldy wrote:

typical right wing lies. br br The census has bee... (show quote)

Yep, quite a few things related to immigration in our country changed in the 60s. And look at the results after 50 years of this.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

kemmer wrote:

Maybe that would be an acceptable counter to the way GOP controlled states have been suppressing v**er rolls of suspected Democrats and gerrymandering the hell out of their states to effectively cancel Democratic v**ers. The SCOTUS gutted the V****g Rights Act, and within 24 hours, the Republicans redrew their districts, closed polling places in Dem areas and colleges, and demanded new IDs which had never been necessary before.

And the Democrats are just as bad at redistricting for their benefit. Illinois is a prime example.

I.D.s are always necessary. For an honest e******n that is. But you probably wouldn't care about that.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

kemmer wrote:

One’s race has zero bearing on allocated funding or representation. It’s only for statistics. I put down Danish became my great great grandparents came from Denmark.

Then, why not citizenship. It is just for statistics.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

Navigator wrote:

Please, Gerrymandering has been going on since 1811 and its done by both parties, whoever happens to be in power at the time. Taking dead people and people who have moved out of their districts off the v****g roles and requiring v**er ID is not v**er suppression, it is v**er accuracy.

Well said. But he won't understand that.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

Comment wrote:

All i******s should not be represented in congress period.

Agreed.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

Navigator wrote:

Its survived for 209 years and is still going strong despite a few negative rulings in very limited venues. Gerrymandering is legal unless it is based upon race; for political purposes it is still as legal as it always has been. To the victor go the spoils.

Gerrymandering is legal unless it is based upon race; for political purposes it is still as legal as it always has been. To the victor go the spoils.

>>>In Illinois they always use gerrymandering to insure that the b****s s and Hispanics get there fair representation. Hmmm. Now how does that work? You should see the twisted districts we've had to insure a Hispanic Representative.

JimMe

LogicallyRight wrote:

And the Democrats are just as bad at redistricting for their benefit. Illinois is a prime example.

I.D.s are always necessary. For an honest e******n that is. But you probably wouldn't care about that.

I've been v****g since 1971 in 3 different States, and I've had to show ID to prove I'm a registered v**er in that v****g District for not only Federal E******ns, but State and Local E******ns... States and Local V****g Sites who don't require IDs are openly providing V***r F***d... States and Local V****g Sites who allow Third Party V****g are openly providing V***r F***d...

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

JimMe wrote:

I've been v****g since 1971 in 3 different States, and I've had to show ID to prove I'm a registered v**er in that v****g District for not only Federal E******ns, but State and Local E******ns... States and Local V****g Sites who don't require IDs are openly providing V***r F***d... States and Local V****g Sites who allow Third Party V****g are openly providing V***r F***d...

In Illinois I've had E******n Judges actually refuse to look at my I. D. Fact.

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

LogicallyRight wrote:

In Illinois I've had E******n Judges actually refuse to look at my I. D. Fact.

In Illinois (Champaign County) I've never had to show my ID. Just "sign-in" and have it matched against my signature of record. My handwriting has gotten much worse over the years and in my opinion doesn't even come close to the one on record. But they say nothing and allow me to v**e.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

Isn't Illinois great. No real proof in the land known for letting the dead v**e. Solidly Democrat. Right Jose.

moldyoldy

Parky60 wrote:

In Illinois (Champaign County) I've never had to show my ID. Just "sign-in" and have it matched against my signature of record. My handwriting has gotten much worse over the years and in my opinion doesn't even come close to the one on record. But they say nothing and allow me to v**e.

The poll workers in flyover country probably know everyone by their red hats

promilitary

no propaganda please wrote:

Obama asked that it be removed.

That's odd.....wonder why....???????

PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco

Parky60 wrote:

moldy specifically said, "The census has only one purpose, to count the number of people in the country."

I addressed by answering that they should only ask me one question then: How many people are in my household?

Why don't you get with the program kemmy?

Why don’t you just not answer questions to which you object? As far as I know, there’s no penalty for leaving the race question unanswered.

promilitary

PaulPisces wrote:

Why don’t you just not answer questions to which you object? As far as I know, there’s no penalty for leaving the race question unanswered.

I don't think there is a penalty except for ignoring the census altogether.
But I do know that you might have a census taker show up at your door......I did,
and so did my son.....wanting the form filled out more completely. We both
refused and she went away..