How Progressives Will Steal Votes with 2010 Census

2010 Census Won't Question Legal Status

Once every 10 years the federal government conducts a census, as mandated under Article 1 Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The express purpose of a decennial census is to apportion seats in the House of Representatives, as well as determine each state's assigned number of electoral college votes. With the potential to influence presidential elections and individual state's voting rights, clearly the political stakes involved in an accurately-recorded census are huge.

Since 1911, there have been a fixed number (435) of voting members in the House of Representatives to represent all 50 states. Each state is guaranteed one representative, and the remaining House seats are apportioned based on a state's total population in relation to the rest of the country. So as census results show certain states have increased in population and should gain representation, likewise as a result, other states, would equally lose representation. Many worry that the high number of illegal immigrants now living in the country, if counted, will skew the 2010 census outcome.  According to the Center for Immigration Studies, those fears have merit. In the 2000 Census, for example, it was estimated by the INS that almost seven million illegal aliens had been counted, and those numbers had a significant impact on several states.

According to an American Community Survey put together by the U.S. Census Bureau, there are approximately 21 million non-citizens, legal and illegal, now living in the United States. Of that number, it is estimated that approximately two-thirds currently reside in just six states. About 5.7 million reside in California alone. If those 5.7 million are included in the 2010 census, the state of California will look to gain up to nine more seats in the House. Keep in mind that for every seat California gains, another state must lose a seat. So just about every state stands to be impacted by the results of the upcoming census in one way or another if the upcoming census does not any question citizenship status. While it is true that non-citizens are not supposed to vote in elections, if the census does not distinguish citizenship status, areas having higher concentrations of non-citizens will get higher per-person representation than other areas. They may not physically go to the polls and cast a vote for the next president or representative to the House, but they have a voice just the same. Their neighbors, in essence, will cast their votes for them.

The issue of citizenship was addressed in early census questionnaires, but that format has changed over the years. Congress has within its power the authority to instruct the Census Bureau on what data will be collected and settle these legal status concerns; but since certain states, political parties, and civic groups are expected to benefit in a big way from not asking about legal status, no questions regarding citizenship have yet been included on the 2010 census questionnaire. Six months out, that debate still continues as any request for qualifying language in the upcoming census continues to meet with staunch opposition. For whatever reason, that resistance appears to be coming mainly from Democrats.

Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) has submitted S. AMDT. 2644 to H.R. 2847 that would provide that "none of the funds made available in the Act or any other Act for any fiscal year may be used for collection of census data that does not include questions regarding United States citizenship and immigration status." Sen. Vitter of Louisiana comes from one of those states likely to lose a representative because of the illegal immigration issue. As Louisiana only has seven representatives total for that entire state, the loss of one House representative would be quite significant. Sen. Robert Bennett (R-UT), Sen. Michael Enzi (R-WY), and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) have signed on as cosponsors to the Vitter amendment, though some question whether it is too little, too late.

Regarding illegal immigration issues, Sen. Vitter also submitted S. Amdt. 2630 to H.R. 2847, which would have prohibited the distribution of funds to sanctuary cities. The Democratic Senate, along with Olympia Snowe of Maine and George Voinovich of Ohio, minus Sen. Byrd of W.V.,who did not vote, chose to table the Vitter amendment by a 61-38 vote on October 7th, 2009. (To table an amendment is to virtually end further advancement of the amendment.)

Voting Results on Amendment That Would Have Ended Sanctuary City Funding

Voted Yes to Table Amendment 2630: (Yes vote was against an amendment that would have prohibited the distribution of funds to sanctuary cities. Again, Snowe and Voinovich voted with Democrat majority on table motion. )

• Akaka (D-HI)
• Baucus (D-MT)
• Bayh (D-IN)
• Begich (D-AK)
• Bennet, M. (D-CO)
• Bingaman (D-NM)
• Boxer (D-CA)
• Brown (D-OH)
• Burris (D-IL)
• Cantwell (D-WA)
• Cardin (D-MD)
• Carper (D-DE)
• Casey (D-PA)
• Conrad (D-ND)
• Dodd (D-CT)
• Dorgan (D-ND)
• Durbin (D-IL)
• Feingold (D-WI)
• Feinstein (D-CA)
• Franken (D-MN)
• Gillibrand (D-NY)
• Hagan (D-NC)
• Harkin (D-IA)
• Inouye (D-HI)
• Johnson (D-SD)
• Kaufman (D-DE)
• Kerry (D-MA)
• Kirk (D-MA)
• Klobuchar (D-MN)
• Kohl (D-WI)
• Lautenberg (D-NJ)
• Leahy (D-VT)
• Levin (D-MI)
• Lieberman (I-CT)
• Lincoln (D-AR)
• McCaskill (D-MO)
• Menendez (D-NJ)
• Merkley (D-OR)
• Mikulski (D-MD)
• Murkowski (R-AK)
• Murray (D-WA)
• Nelson, Ben (D-NE)
• Nelson, Bill (D-FL)
• Pryor (D-AR)
• Reed (D-RI)
• Reid (D-NV)
• Rockefeller (D-WV)
• Sanders (I-VT)
• Schumer (D-NY)
• Shaheen (D-NH)
• Snowe (R-ME)
• Specter (D-PA)
• Stabenow (D-MI)
• Tester (D-MT)
• Udall, M. (D-CO)
• Udall, T. (D-NM)
• Voinovich (R-OH)
• Warner (D-VA)
• Webb (D-VA)
• Whitehouse (D-RI)
• Wyden (D-OR)

Voted NO To Table Amendment 2630: (No vote would have supported the amendment to prohibit distribution of funds to sanctuary cities)

• Alexander (R-TN)
• Barrasso (R-WY)
• Bennett (R-UT)
• Bond (R-MO)
• Brownback (R-KS)
• Bunning (R-KY)
• Burr (R-NC)
• Chambliss (R-GA)
• Coburn (R-OK)
• Cochran (R-MS)
• Collins (R-ME)
• Corker (R-TN)
• Cornyn (R-TX)
• Crapo (R-ID)
• DeMint (R-SC)
• Ensign (R-NV)
• Enzi (R-WY)
• Graham (R-SC)
• Grassley (R-IA)
• Gregg (R-NH)
• Hatch (R-UT)
• Hutchison (R-TX)
• Inhofe (R-OK)
• Isakson (R-GA)
• Johanns (R-NE)
• Kyl (R-AZ)
• Landrieu (D-LA)
• LeMieux (R-FL)
• Lugar (R-IN)
• McCain (R-AZ)
• McConnell (R-KY)
• Risch (R-ID)
• Roberts (R-KS)
• Sessions (R-AL)
• Shelby (R-AL)
• Thune (R-SD)
• Vitter (R-LA)
• Wicker (R-MS)