Last week, Senators David Vitter (R-LA) and Bob Bennett (R-UT) drafted a controversial amendment to H.R. 2847, the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies appropriations bill, that would add questions on citizenship and immigration status to the 2010 census. The amendment is only the latest in conservatives' efforts to keep undocumented immigrants from the national headcount. Caving to concerns that an immigration question would intimidate some respondents, Vitter and Bennett have now changed their amendment so that it would add a question on citizenship, not legal status, to the 2010 census.
But we still need to fact check them and other conservatives who want to ignore constitutional and census history.
For decades, the census has counted undocumented immigrants and other non-citizens for apportionment and redistricting purposes. The 14th Amendment plainly states that representatives should be distributed to states according to a count of the "whole number of persons in each state." The Constitution doesn't limit the count to citizens or even voters-it makes clear that to be counted is a right of all persons residing in the United States, regardless of immigration status.
Vitter and Bennett are worried about re-apportionment of Congressional seats and want to drive a wedge between winners and losers, claiming that counting the growing numbers of undocumented immigrants and non-citizens in blue states will unfairly take away Congressional seats from citizens in red states. States like Iowa and Pennsylvania are likely to lose seats in Congress after next year's count, while "illegal-magnets" like Arizona and Florida are set to gain. But let's be clear on this issue: some states will lose seats next year, and some will gain. This is how our political system has always worked; it just isn't true to say that counting non-citizens and the undocumented distorts this process. States receive representation based on how many people live there, not through unfairly and artificially excluding residents in other states.
There's also a significant economic dimension here.
Population totals will direct the distribution of more than $300 billion in federal funding to states, and billions in state grants to localities over the next decade. That means nothing less than economic recovery is at stake in the 2010 census. So it's in our shared economic interest to support a full count of undocumented immigrants in the upcoming census. Without a full count of an estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants and their families, the cities and states where they live cannot receive adequate funding for critical public services like schools, hospitals and public transportation. It's crucial that local governments receive their fair share of funding to address crumbling bridges, overcrowded health clinics and other public needs.
Andrea Nill at ThinkProgress rightly points out that states like Louisiana have benefited from recent growth in immigrant populations, which means it's counter-intuitive to advocate excluding a population that will bring much-needed state funding for local needs. This is an important fight for progressives. It's about our interconnected lives as residents of this country, and standing up for our undocumented neighbors and friends.
Bottom line: undocumented immigrants are part of the economic fabric of our country and should be counted as such. Our flawed immigration policies have left them at the margins of the labor market and in the shadows of where they work and live. A full census count would be a major step toward integrating them into our society. Elected officials, advocates and average citizens must work together on this. Law enforcement and business leaders can play an equally pivotal role, reassuring this population that they will not be penalized for coming forward.
STATE BLOGS
