My ass he has no positionâŚ
I never fully appreciated how many ways one could rig the elections in this countryâŚ
Trump was shooting straight when he said things were rigged, a brilliant political ployâŚ
Did anyone at the hearing really press him on the completely ludicrous assertion that this has anything to do with VRA enforcement?
Somehow, every DOJ from 1965-2018 has managed to enforce the VRA, often against great opposition, without it ever occurring to them to ask the Commerce Dept. to put a citizenship question on the Census â perhaps because adding that question will make VRA enforcement harder, not easier, by making the Census less accurate!
But this guy has the audacity to go with VRA enforcement as the fig leaf for this means of suppressing the Latino census count. I hope the hearing at least included some Democrats â maybe even a sane Republican? Is that too much to wish for? â pushing hard on this point.
If youâre at the hearing Iâd love to hear how he responds. This is the most important story of this hearing. Itâs not often that we can be absolutely sure, in real time, that the government is telling us a fake story for why they are taking an action, but this is one of those times.
The Constitution says that U.S. congressional districts should be drawn using total population.
No it doesnât. The Constitution only says that the number of Representatives to which a state is entitled âshall be apportioned among the several states . . . according to their respective numbers.â This may imply, but does not mandate, that Congressional districts be based on total population.
Writing the opinion for the unanimous ruling in Evenwell v Abbott Justice Ginsberg said âBy ensuring that each representative is subject to requests and suggestions from the same number of constituents, total population apportionment promotes equitable and effective representation,â but the decision did not require districting be based on total population. In his concurring opinion Justice Alito specifically stated that âWhether a state is permitted to use some measure other than total population is an important and sensitive question that we can consider if and when we have before us a state districting plan that, unlike the current Texas plan, uses something other than total population as the basis for equalizing the size of districts." Justice Thomas went even further in encouraging states to manipulate Congressional representation by opining that a state âcan use total population, eligible voters, or any other nondiscriminatory voter base.â
As usual, the Constitution draws very broad strokes (for the most part) and leaves it to the legislature and the courts to decide ambiguous questions. âAccording to their respective numbersâ does not specify citizenship, in my opinion. And, lest we forget, when written, Native Americans and blacks were counted as â3/5thâ of a person. The argument of the âoriginalistsâ is bullshit; the Constitution is meant to be a living document, subject to amendment and interpretation. As for Goreâs assertion that the Trump DoJ takes âno positionâ? More bovine excrement.
The Constitution says that U.S. congressional districts should be drawn using total population. But some believe itâs an open question whether states can exclude non-citizens in drawing state legislative districts.
Iâm sure at the time the Founding Fathers didnât want to piss off the wealthy French or Spanish landowners in the newly founded Union. Itâs always about money. Besides, theyâd have to figure out this wholly new âcitizenshipâ bullshit and the states wouldnât want the feds to dictate who they counted on their team.
If that the Royal âWeâ or is it the âDOJ has no positionâ because they farm it out to the Dept. of Agriculture or wherever they house the âanimalsâ ???
At some point, the majority population is going to whittle down to almost nothing. There will not be enough white women of child bearing age to continue to produce a population to keep them in control. What will you do then? It wonât matter if they are all citizens or not, the numbers wonât be there.
To quote Billy PrestonâŚâNothing from nothing leaves nothing.â
Blacks (actually, all chattel slaves â indentured servants bound for a fixed term were counted as 1 person) were counted as 3/5th of a person. Indians not taxed were excluded completely from the apportionment count.
I think that pretty much settles the matter of who counts for apportionment purposes: anyone who pays taxes is counted (except that chattel slaves were counted as a fraction of other persons).