From 1820 through 1950, the census almost always included a citizenship question, and in 2018, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross decided that the 2020 "Short-form" questionnaire, the one that goes to every household, should include one.
The district judge also said Ross "Materially mischaracterized" - translation: lied about - a conversation with a polling expert in order to obfuscate the expert's objections to the citizenship question.
Because more information is preferable to less, the citizenship question might seem sensible.
The question might result in less information because the Census Bureau's own experts believe that the citizenship question would cause 6.5 million people - almost one in ten households includes one or more noncitizens - to not respond to the questionnaire for fear of law-enforcement consequences.
The citizenship question is, the Trump administration insists, "a wholly unremarkable demographic question." But why was Ross so dishonest concerning its genesis? This is probably why: A substantial undercount would affect the formulas by which hundreds of billions of dollars of federal spending are dispersed, to the disadvantage of blue states and cities with large immigrant populations.
The district-court judge was scalding about the "Egregious" behavior of Ross, who "In a startling number of ways" either "Ignored, cherry-picked, or badly misconstrued" evidence and "Acted irrationally ... in light of that evidence." Yet the judge professed himself "Unable to determine - based on the existing record, at least - what Secretary Ross's real reasons for adding the citizenship question were." Perhaps the judge was precluded from coming to a conclusion about Ross's motives; the public is not.
The Supreme Court is apt to decide that Ross's wretched behavior does not alter the fact that Congress has granted to him sufficient discretion over the census to accommodate his decision to include the citizenship question.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/census-citizenship-question-supreme-court-case/
The district judge also said Ross "Materially mischaracterized" - translation: lied about - a conversation with a polling expert in order to obfuscate the expert's objections to the citizenship question.
Because more information is preferable to less, the citizenship question might seem sensible.
The question might result in less information because the Census Bureau's own experts believe that the citizenship question would cause 6.5 million people - almost one in ten households includes one or more noncitizens - to not respond to the questionnaire for fear of law-enforcement consequences.
The citizenship question is, the Trump administration insists, "a wholly unremarkable demographic question." But why was Ross so dishonest concerning its genesis? This is probably why: A substantial undercount would affect the formulas by which hundreds of billions of dollars of federal spending are dispersed, to the disadvantage of blue states and cities with large immigrant populations.
The district-court judge was scalding about the "Egregious" behavior of Ross, who "In a startling number of ways" either "Ignored, cherry-picked, or badly misconstrued" evidence and "Acted irrationally ... in light of that evidence." Yet the judge professed himself "Unable to determine - based on the existing record, at least - what Secretary Ross's real reasons for adding the citizenship question were." Perhaps the judge was precluded from coming to a conclusion about Ross's motives; the public is not.
The Supreme Court is apt to decide that Ross's wretched behavior does not alter the fact that Congress has granted to him sufficient discretion over the census to accommodate his decision to include the citizenship question.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/census-citizenship-question-supreme-court-case/
No comments:
Post a Comment