Illegal immigrants don't need to vote to help Hillary win

Published: 20 hours ago
LEO HOHMANN

Could illegal immigrants and refugees help put Hillary Clinton in the White House next year?

Yes, because the nation’s Electoral College system is tailor-made for Democrats when combined with the mass immigration policies of the last 45 years.

Unprecedented numbers of immigrants – both legal and illegal – have been pouring into the United States since the former Sen. Teddy Kennedy rewrote the nation’s immigration laws with the landmark Immigration Act of 1965. The nation’s immigrant population – legal and illegal – swelled to a record 42.4 million in July of 2013, an increase of 2.4 million since July of 2010. The 42.4 million is double the number in 1990, triple the number in 1980 and quadruple the number in 1970, according to Census data.

This unprecedented influx is having a profound effect not only on how many seats each state gets allotted in Congress but also on the election every four years of the president, according to demographers.

As most Americans are aware, the president isn’t elected by popular vote. The office goes to the candidate who wins the majority of the 538 Electoral College votes, and these “electoral” votes are not equal in every state.

This “college,” which isn’t really a college at all, consists of 538 electors divvied up according to each state’s population. The states with higher populations get more electoral votes and those with less population get fewer.

Mark Steyn book coverMark Steyn, author of several books about demographic trends including “America Alone: The End of the World as we Know It” said this explains why Democrats love immigrants, both legal and illegal. Not only do they tend to become citizens and vote for Democrats, but even as non-voters they count toward a state’s population and, therefore, its number of allotted electoral votes.

“How many votes each state gets in the Electoral College includes the number of illegal immigrants in each state,” Steyn said in a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity. “So, for example, a state like California, if you didn’t count illegal immigrants, that state would have five fewer electoral votes. Now my entire state of New Hampshire has just four votes.”

"The illegal immigrants in California out-punch the entire state of New Hampshire and every legitimate U.S. citizen living in New Hampshire," he said. "In fact, if you take the five Electoral College votes that are allocated on the basis of illegals in California and you add the one Electoral College vote in New York and one in Washington state, basically the number of illegal immigrants in each state out-punches the whole of New England. They might as well not even vote because their votes are canceled out by illegal immigrants.

"As this Electoral College thing indicates, they don't even need them to become citizens. They just need them to come across the border."

Democrats are smarter

So while it's easy to see why Democrats love legal and illegal immigrants, it's less clear what the long-term advantages of mass immigration would bring to Republicans.

Democrats are smarter than the Republicans on this issue, Steyn said.

The Democrats' reason for supporting illegal immigration is they want to expand the dependency class and, therefore, the bureaucracy that serves it, he said.

"Whereas the Republicans, the kind of Chamber of Commerce Republicans, just want cheap labor. Well the problem is, there isn't going to be a Republican Party if you don't get this issue under control because as we've seen right now illegal immigrants account for about 10 Electoral College votes," Steyn said. "A couple of election cycles down the line, what's it going to be, 18 to 20 electoral votes? This is an issue. This is an existential issue for the Republican Party.

"When the entire U.S. takes on the demographics of California, there will never be another Republican president again. So there's absolutely no point in worrying about whether we should, oh, shave a couple of points off the capital gains tax when on this core issue you're basically surrendering turf … every single day."

An article by Mark Rozell and Paul Goldman recently came to the same conclusion as Steyn. "Illegal immigrants – along with other non-citizens without the right to vote – may pick the 2016 presidential winner," they wrote in Politico magazine.

It's all about the math, and the way the Electoral College is set up.

The college includes 538 electoral votes. But 435 of those votes – 80 percent of them – are fluid, changing every 10 years based on the U.S. Census' headcount of population in each state. The fastest-growing states, which are those with the most immigrants, get more electoral votes and the no-growth states can actually lose electoral votes.

GOP base 'sick of two-party, one-party state'

Steyn said this is why political outsiders are doing the best with likely GOP primary voters. They've recognized the scam cooked up by the two parties and how it really only benefits one of the parties.

"I think we're getting very late for any of the official politicians to snatch this thing out from under Trump and Carson in Iowa and Trump and Fiorina in New Hampshire, and I think that gets back to the immigration issue," he told Hannity. "The GOP base is sick of basically a two-party, one-party state, which is what America has. And the two-party, one-party state operates very well if you're a liberal. It gives you Obamacare. It gives you all kinds of things, but if you're a conservative, it doesn't work so well. And that's why I think one of these non-politicians is going to scoop it up in Iowa and New Hampshire."

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, also noted the phenomenon and how the Founding Fathers, in crafting Section 2 of Article I of the Constitution and Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, clearly did not envision a time when the U.S. would allow mass immigration.

If they had, they may not have devised a system of reapportionment every 10 years that rewards states receiving large numbers of illegals by giving them additional congressmen and additional votes in the Electoral College. But there is no way they could have foreseen not only a system that allows vast amounts of illegal immigration but also that the vast majority of illegals would vote for one particular political party, Democrats.

Spakovsky explains:

"There are 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives. Under Sec. 2 of Article I of the Constitution and Sec. 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment, every ten years, after the 'Enumeration' (the Census), we redistribute those 435 seats based on the 'whole number of persons in each State. In other words, the number of members of the House that each state gets is based on the total population of each state relative to the total population of the U.S., which includes non-citizens. Thus, the upwards of 12 million illegal aliens present in the U.S., combined with other aliens who are here legally but are not citizens and have no right to vote, distort representation in the House.

"All of this stems from the way apportionment is conducted. There are 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives. Under Sec. 2 of Article I of the Constitution and Sec. 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment, every ten years, after the 'Enumeration' (the Census), we redistribute those 435 seats based on the 'whole number of persons in each State.' In other words, the number of members of the House that each state gets is based on the total population of each state relative to the total population of the U.S., which includes non-citizens. Thus, the upwards of 12 million illegal aliens present in the U.S., combined with other aliens who are here legally but are not citizens and have no right to vote, distort representation in the House.

"This is fundamentally unfair, because these states are benefiting from illegal conduct and gaining political representation for individuals who have no entitlement to such representation or to even be present in the country."


http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/illegal-i...p-hillary-win/