Thread: Plan wouldn't count noncitizens in deciding states' represen

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/breakingne ... nstitution

December 6, 2005


Plan wouldn't count noncitizens in deciding states' representation
BILLY HOUSE
The Arizona Republic
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Constitution should be changed so that only legal citizens are counted in deciding how many House seats each state gets, a Republican lawmaker argued Tuesday.

"This is about fundamental fairness and the American ideal ... of one man or one woman, one vote," said Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., testifying to a House subcommittee on federalism and the census.

The 14th Amendment requires that, "Representatives of the House shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state. ..."

But Miller, backed by 29 co-sponsors in the House, is proposing an amendment that would change the word "persons" to "citizens" and exclude noncitizens in deciding how many of the 435 House seats each state gets.

Miller's proposal comes amid a number of measures pushed by House Republicans to toughen up border security and crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants.

Recent studies, including one in May by the Congressional Research Office, found that if only U.S. citizens had been counted in the most recent apportionment, which was based on the 2000 census, California - with more than 5.4 million noncitizens - would have six fewer House seats. Texas, New York and Florida each would have one seat less.

Meanwhile, lower-immigration states such as Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin each would have one more seat.

A separate study by Polidata, a Lake Ridge, Va., firm that analyzes demographic information, shows the electoral vote margins in five of the past six presidential elections would have been affected if noncitizens had been excluded from the base apportionment numbers for congressional seats. For instance, President Bush would have won the disputed 2000 election by a margin of 12 electoral votes versus four, according to Clark Benson of Polidata.

"Allowing the enormous numbers of immigrants has created a situation in which the votes of American citizens living in low-immigration states and districts count much less than the votes of citizens living in high-immigration districts," Steve Camarota of the Washington D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies told the subcommittee.

According to the 2000 census, there were more than 18 million noncitizens in the country, representing about 6.6 percent of the nation's total population. They included as many as 8 million illegal aliens, along with other noncitizens such as guest workers, foreign students or others with temporary visas. More recent estimates from the Census Bureau show that, as of March, there were 21.7 million noncitizens in the country, comprising 7.4 percent of the total population.

Many Democrats and Hispanic leaders oppose Miller's proposed amendment.

"If you are a person in this country, you should be represented," said Lawrence Gonzalez of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials. He said that includes the thousands of U.S. soldiers fighting overseas who are not yet citizens but are lawful permanent residents.

Another recent study found that as many as half of the estimated 10 million legal permanent residents in the United States eligible to become citizens are Latinos and that 77 percent of them live in California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey or Arizona.

While not disputing that there are large undocumented populations in these states, Gonzalez said, "the reality is that these states also have hundreds of thousands of immigrants who are law-abiding citizens, have played by the rules and are preparing to become full participants in this nation."

Kenneth Prewitt, director of the Census Bureau from 1998-2000, said he also opposes an amendment because it would lead to less cooperation from a public that is too often already wary of census takers. The result: a less complete and accurate census, he said.

"The proposed amendment plays into this growing wariness by highlighting that the government has some need, block by block, to distinguish citizens from noncitizens," Prewitt said. "The question will be treated with suspicion."

Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., noted that her own state's one-man, one-vote potential in the Senate and the Electoral College has always been diluted because of the founding fathers' decision to give even small states such as Rhode Island the same number of U.S. senators.

"Maybe we should do away with the Senate," she quipped.

Miller's proposal faces a tough road. Two-thirds of the House and Senate must approve a constitutional amendment before it goes to the states for ratification. And Florida, New York and California - states that would suffer diminished representation by such a move - control roughly one-third of the House.

Three-fourths of the states also must approve.

It's unbelievable to me that this issue even needs to be debated.

"the reality is that these states also have hundreds of thousands of immigrants who are law-abiding citizens, have played by the rules and are preparing to become full participants in this nation."

This statement is laughable. What laws what rules? Participants also the the Mexician elections.