efin98

2010 is the decennial census...Massachusetts is going to lose a seat in the House by all projections, down from 10 seats to 9 while Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire stay the same.

The big losers appear to be "blue states": in additon to the 1 from Massachusetts, New York loses 2 and Pennsylvania, New Jersey, California, Minnesota, Michigan, and Illinois lose 1 each. "red states" see Louisiana, Iowa, Missouri losing 1 and Ohio losing 2.

The big winners in the census may be "red" states: Texas may gain 4, Arizona 2, Georgia, Utah, North Carolina, South Carolina, Nevada 1. Florida may be a swing state with 2 more seats gain.

__________________
"As long as we have Belichick, I always think that we're going to be just fine."...Tom Brady, in reference to his coach.

“It is what it is, but it ain’t what you think.”...Brandon Spikes

DarrylS

You never know if Michelle Bachman et al continue to run their mouth about the Obama Acorn "Census conspiracy", a lot of the folks in red states may not respond.. the law of unintended consequences...

__________________
"Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.

efin98

From what I'm seeing, they may be looking at a Supreme Court ruling at some point regarding censuses...whether to include or exclude illegals and/or people who refuse to respond to the surveys and workers' visits.

California could by all means gain four instead of losing one seat with the force of the illegals...New York and Massachusetts maybe stay the same.

__________________
"As long as we have Belichick, I always think that we're going to be just fine."...Tom Brady, in reference to his coach.

“It is what it is, but it ain’t what you think.”...Brandon Spikes

Stokes

Should illegal numbers affect representation in Congress if they're not allowed to vote? I could understand (but disagree with) the idea that you have to know how many are in the state to estimate costs, but there's no reason I can see to include them in a head count for # of reps.

Fogbuster

All those southern states are the first stop for the tens of thousands of illegals that sneak into America each month.

Great. Give all those states the extra seats, take 'em away from the northeast bastion of liberal wonk wankers, ... but-t-t-t in order for people to vote, they MUST pass a strict English language test; no pass, no vote, PERIOD. To hell with all this "bi-lingual" education crap. Do they have "bi-lingual" education in Mexico??? In Nicaragua??? in Venezuela??? Nahh, didn't think so. Speak English well, be legal, or NO VOTE. And if you ain't legal, send you back, C.O.D.



//

__________________
"All that is required for evil to triumph is for good to do nothing."

PatriotsReign

Illegals can't be counted in any US census...nor should they be. Representation in congress is determined by the number os US CITIZENS in their districts. Illegals don't count in many ways. They don't count in determining gov't representation AND they don't count as far as policy. In other words, it would be unconstitutional for any law to be passed that would help illegals with our tax dollars.

Once again, that's the way it should be.

DarrylS

I suspect that the talk about including illegals is just a talking point, from a constitutional point of view and from a illegal point of view, Michelle Bachman started some of the hysteria when she whined about how there is no question on it regarding resident status.... most illegals do not want to fill out personal information about themselves and their situation.

__________________
"Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.

efin98

That is your interpretation of how things MAY be...but it's not you who will make that determination, it's the nine justices in Washington who eventually will.

__________________
"As long as we have Belichick, I always think that we're going to be just fine."...Tom Brady, in reference to his coach.

“It is what it is, but it ain’t what you think.”...Brandon Spikes

Stokes

But how could there be any legal justification? That case would be 9-0 against I suspect. There is simply no way the Constitution allows for changing representation in Congress in order to account for people who do not vote and should have no representation in Congress, right?

sdaniels7114

The Constitution mentions people, not citizens. Specifically it says 'free people' but that's in reference to slaves counting as 3/5's of a person for enumeration purposes. They do exempt untaxed Indians in the document, maybe illegals would be considered Indians today; but they do say untaxed Indians and nobody escapes all taxes.