From 1820 until 1950, census takers asked every single person "Are you a citizen of the USA?" From 1960 until 2000, the same question was asked of the 20% of those questioned who got the extended questionnaire in the census. (The census bureau has a fuller questionnaire for twenty percent of those interviewed in order to get a statistically valid picture of the entire nation.) From 2005 onward, the census bureau asked the citizenship question to those who get interviewed in the annual updates undertaken by the government. In the 2010 national census, however, no citizenship question was asked. Now, the Commerce Department has decided to put the citizenship question back into the basic census questionnaire.
If the information listed above doesn't sound like a national crisis (because it isn't), you must not be a Democrat activist. The uproar over the citizenship question has been extensive. According to Democrats, the question is a racist attempt to lower the numbers of Hispanics responding to the census because they will be afraid of getting caught by ICE and deported.
Think about that argument for a moment. No American citizen will be dissuaded from answering the question. No one here legally will be dissuaded from answering the question. The only ones who will be concerned at all will be those here illegally. But here's the point: the census doesn't follow up to ask if the person responding is here legally. It just asks about citizenship. An illegal alien who lies and says yes or tells the truth and says no to the citizenship question will just be lumped into either the group of citizens or of non-citizens and not separated out as an illegal.
Surely, it can't be improper for the government to determine how many US citizens there are.
Despite the custom of asking in the past about citizenship, a group of Democrat city and state governments ran to a Court in New York City and got an order stopping the census bureau from using the question. The judge ruled that it was "arbitrary and capricious" for the Secretary of Commerce to decide to reinstate the question. Yesterday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a direct appeal of that matter on an expedited basis. Oh, the horror! Many in the media are treating this as some sort of incredible development. It isn't. For a federal district court to interfere with the census questionnaire is incredible. For a judge to rule that using a question that has been in every census but one since 1820 is arbitrary and capricious is incredible. The reality is that the judge doesn't agree with the decision of the Secretary of Commerce; we all understand that. The rule of law, however, is that the Secretary is the one who decides, not the judge. The judge can only step in if the Secretary has no rational basis for his or her decision. Despite the ruling from a clearly biased judge, there's no way that the Supreme Court is going to find the Secretary's decision to be arbitrary and capricious.
By the end of June, this will all be decided. The question will go back into the census questionnaire. You can bank on it.
If the information listed above doesn't sound like a national crisis (because it isn't), you must not be a Democrat activist. The uproar over the citizenship question has been extensive. According to Democrats, the question is a racist attempt to lower the numbers of Hispanics responding to the census because they will be afraid of getting caught by ICE and deported.
Think about that argument for a moment. No American citizen will be dissuaded from answering the question. No one here legally will be dissuaded from answering the question. The only ones who will be concerned at all will be those here illegally. But here's the point: the census doesn't follow up to ask if the person responding is here legally. It just asks about citizenship. An illegal alien who lies and says yes or tells the truth and says no to the citizenship question will just be lumped into either the group of citizens or of non-citizens and not separated out as an illegal.
Surely, it can't be improper for the government to determine how many US citizens there are.
Despite the custom of asking in the past about citizenship, a group of Democrat city and state governments ran to a Court in New York City and got an order stopping the census bureau from using the question. The judge ruled that it was "arbitrary and capricious" for the Secretary of Commerce to decide to reinstate the question. Yesterday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a direct appeal of that matter on an expedited basis. Oh, the horror! Many in the media are treating this as some sort of incredible development. It isn't. For a federal district court to interfere with the census questionnaire is incredible. For a judge to rule that using a question that has been in every census but one since 1820 is arbitrary and capricious is incredible. The reality is that the judge doesn't agree with the decision of the Secretary of Commerce; we all understand that. The rule of law, however, is that the Secretary is the one who decides, not the judge. The judge can only step in if the Secretary has no rational basis for his or her decision. Despite the ruling from a clearly biased judge, there's no way that the Supreme Court is going to find the Secretary's decision to be arbitrary and capricious.
By the end of June, this will all be decided. The question will go back into the census questionnaire. You can bank on it.
No comments:
Post a Comment