Posted on 09/30/2007 10:50:30 AM PDT by vietvet67
Border states in America's South and West are battlegrounds in the debate over illegal immigration, but when it's time to pass out seats in Congress, they are beneficiaries as well, a new study says.
Because of their large populations of undocumented residents, Texas and Arizona will each get one extra seat in the U.S. House of Representatives after the 2010 Census, the Connecticut State Data Center projects in a report being released today. California will keep two seats it otherwise would have lost.
Overall, the South and West each stand to gain five seats in the House, the center at the University of Connecticut says. If it weren't for their populations of illegal immigrants, each of these regions would gain only three.
The big loser in the reapportionment will be the Midwest, the center says. Five states in that region are projected to lose a total of six seats, four more than they would have if illegal immigrants were not included in the census tally.
Connecticut, which lost a seat in the last reapportionment, should keep the five it now has, but the Northeast as a whole will lose four - two in New York and one each in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.
(Excerpt) Read more at courant.com ...
I’d say “no representation without taxation” might be an apt yardstick.
Not Resident Aliens
Not Illegals
Not whatever other cockamamie identification for a power grab that Libs have
No one other than,...
U.S. Citizens!
Since most illegals are NOT paying taxes, or even taking false EIC payments, they certainly should NOT get representation.
AZ will gain two seats. The growth out here is scary.
Are they illegally going to “estimate” the number of people and the racial/sexual/economic breakdown in a community again as they did in 2000? It caused some people to not submit the forms because “their kind” wasn’t the right response wanted in Clinton’s America.
We elect our representatives. They cannot VOTE for the representatives. They are not entitled to representation by apportionment since they are considered to just be “passing through”.
Why not tally all the visitors to Vegas and Florida as “residents” too?
Agree.
“Members of Congress “are elected to represent constituents. They don’t just represent citizens,” Vargas said. “They don’t just represent the people who vote for them. They represent everybody in that congressional district.”
What a total load of BS..
Exactly: and I can see where this is going, pretty soon the libs are going to equate being illigal with slavery!
Then they will try to force us to recognize them through the 14th Amendment+ Such.
Most of the illegal immigrants from the Latin American countries have at least some Indian ancestry. Maybe Congress could pass a law that for purposes of representation, illegal immigrants with Indian ancestry shall be regarded as "Indians not taxed." Are they paying any taxes, other than sales tax or taxes included in items such as gasoline?
I just ended up at the 14th.... very odd.
I think you are correct. This is an end play for votes. They do not care how it damages the country if it results in the Democrats staying in power.
I think everyone should be counted and your citizen status be identified. It will make the illegals easier to find. Once counted, only valid citizens are used for the items out lined in the constitution. All others are placed on a list for rapid repatriation.
See any Republicans trying to reverse it??
B T T T
Legal votes ONLY!
“See any Republicans trying to reverse it??”
Yes but damn few!
Yep.
Just Tancredo.
This is outrageous. These are illegals. They do not need to be counted.
Gasp!
And disrupt the dogma of the DNC in their promotion to achieve a larger base of supporters?
“The 14th amendment says “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.”
Most of the illegal immigrants from the Latin American countries have at least some Indian ancestry. Maybe Congress could pass a law that for purposes of representation, illegal immigrants with Indian ancestry shall be regarded as “Indians not taxed.” Are they paying any taxes, other than sales tax or taxes included in items such as gasoline?”
I think the US government had Indians from the US and territories in mind, not Indians from Mexico, Canada, Central America, South America or the Carribean.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.