Irvin Mayfield Jr. will be running for Mayor of New Orleans.He will be running as the “Tourism and Cultural” candidate although he has not officially announced.Mayfield is well-known in New Orleans and throughout the world.He has been serving as Cultural Ambassador of the City of New Orleans and State of Louisiana since 2003.
Mayfield has been honored by playing at the White House under George Bush.There has been much speculation during the past year whether he would be a candidate.
So far, the general consensus among the political community has been that the top official and non-official candidates would be John Georges and Sen. Edwin Murray.Although George has not official declared, his wife, Dathel Georges has recently sent out an email under “John Georges Mayor” and stated that she is forming a “Women For Georges” organization.News reports have indicated that he will make it official next week.Meanwhile, news reports have also indicated that Murray’s fundraising has picked up since some major candidate possibilities have declined to run for Mayor.
Meanwhile, James Perry, Judge Nadine Ramsey, Troy Henry, Eddie Sapir, Rob Couhig and others are either declaring or flirting with the race for Mayor, With approximately one month left before qualifying and with more hopefuls holding fundraisers, it might be interesting to see where the dollars and the momentum flow until the candidates are official.
The Census Reapportionment Issue
As I mentioned days ago in a column, the question of reapportionment, the census and illegal aliens is becoming a very explosive political and legal issue.
David Vitter will be holding a press conference today at the state capitol regarding the matter.He is in favor of not counting illegal aliens and just counting “citizens” in the 2010 census and he feels that by counting illegal aliens, it puts Louisiana in a numerical disadvantage that would result in Louisiana losing a Congressman based upon the upcoming census.Many people are suspicious about Senator Vitter’s motives (championing this issue at election time and attempting to raise the question that invokes very emotional issues appeals to his political base since it involves illegal aliens.No doubt others support him in his efforts including possibly his U.S. opponent, Congressman, Charlie Melancon.
I have very strong belief that the constitution is very clear on this question.The 14th Amendment clear refers to counting “persons” (not citizens) as the criteria for reapportionment and any court decision to the contrary would be the product of “judges making up the law”.Those are the very words that Senator Vitter uttered that Judges should not do when he was asked about the Bardwell case.
It has been reported by John Maginnis in his Fax Weekly that Senator Vitter is looking to take the matter on a fast track to the Supreme Court.If indeed, Senator Vitter and others were able to obtain a very expedited declaration on this issue (without numerous or substantial appeals), he might prevail, but, in doing so, there is also a substantial downside.Since the issue is so legally clear, any decision by the Supreme Court go against the principals of those advocating strict construction adjudicating of the law.
Also, according to the US Census Bureau, it would add an estimated one billion dollars to redo the census and a minimum of at least two years to rework the entire process.In addition, the cost to the United States government in changing the process that has been going on for years to make this 2010 census work would result in a 400 billion dollar loss to United States citizens, per year until the census is determined and money is allocated by the federal government since funding to the states is based upon the census count.
It truly is a shame that Louisiana might be losing a Congressman it so desperately needs, especially after Hurricane Katrina.If Vitter were to prevail, it would surely cost America and our state a tremendous amount.It would also put a dagger into the heart of the notion of judiciary adhering to the words and meaning of the law, especially the constitution.Unfortunately, this issue was not brought up years ago so that a legal challenge could not have been launched then or that a constitutional amendment effort could not have been made.Now, we might be going down a very tenuous legal course that we can all agree has merit (maintaining our Congressional representation) but also presents much direct collateral damage.The ultimate question we should ask ourselves as a state and as a nation is what should be the price we pay to violate “strict constructionist” judicial principles, cost at least 400 billion dollars per year for at least two years and the same time raise criticisms of xenophobia.No matter what, it will not be a pretty sight.
Vincent Barabba: LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Apportionment, the Census and the Constitution
08/28/2009 Wall Street Journal - New York, NY
As a former director of the Census Bureau, I feel the interpretation of the constitutional mandate on who is to be counted has been clear and consistent since 1790. The census is mandated to attempt to count every person resident in the country.
The authors of "Our Unconstitutional Census" chose to use a definition of the word "inhabitant" as defined in the Oxford English Dictionary because it fit their point of view. The census mandate relative to counting inhabitants is based on a constitutional fact, subsequent congressional laws, and supported by Supreme Court decisions.
Not until 1820 did the census ask about citizenship. Place of birth was first asked in 1850 and ancestry was not asked until 1980. More importantly, these questions were not asked for the purpose of excluding anyone from the census as the authors imply, but, as is the case with all census questions, to gather information to better understand the changes occurring in our nation.
Every census since the first has included citizens and noncitizens alike. Presidential administrations of both parties have repeatedly upheld the interpretation that the apportionment and census clauses of Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution and Section 2 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, as well as the 1790 Census Act and its successors, require that every person resident in the country, no matter his legal status, must be included in the census count.
The census provides a clear and detailed picture of the entire population. It is not only the foundation of our nation's representative democracy, it is also the basis for the distribution of over $400 billion every year in federal funds to state and local areas. In short, the census is what unites us.
Kp, do not fall into the trap of confusing the U.S. Constituion with "programmed law".... This Habeas Corpus thing is about to become endangered.... It is simply time to clean the books, clear the ledgers, and get on down to business... The news media as we now see it is nothing more than a national tabloid run by gossipers and shite heads.... And our mindless and clueless and valueless representatives actually believe what they see on the T.V.,,, Nothing in moderation, no real world understanding, just a bunch of zombies out there in zombie land.... Look at that hack Pelosi, she is unbelievable, about as unbelievable as Hillary Clinton and that's what's being propped up in our face... Among others on the GOP side of things... What a bizzare waste... Written by
on 11/4/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
One of the primary reasons the Constitution was created was to ensure power would not be centralized. Now the states have little power; the Supreme Court rubber stamps what congress passes. Those who are so happy with what they "get done" while they hold the reigns are worried (rightfully so) when the other party has power. Since this has been the case for decades - and one hears hardly a peep from the citizenry - perhaps the dumbing down is near completion. On the other hand - to have a more optistimic viewpoint - it is encouraging to see many university campuses starting to have growing membership in Constitutionally-minded groups such as Young Americans for Liberty. Written by kpf
on 11/4/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The Constitution also states that "All persons born or naturalized in the US...are citizens..." The words "people" and "persons" as listed in the Constitution refer to citizens of the country. "Illegal" aliens or "illegal" immigrants refer to people that don't belong here. They are here illegally. There are laws on the books to handle these cases. We just choose to ignore them and use these poor people as pawns for political gain. The census determines numbers of citizens in a district, not the number of illegals that one party wants to count, etc. I find it interesting that progressives usually bent on ignoring and by-passing the Constitution have now become Constitutional experts and strict interpreters of the document. Get a life. Written by CN
on 11/4/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Capitola, California…. My how that place has changed over the course of the past 150 years.. Particularly during the past 4 or 5 decades….. There was a time that it was the perfect ‘summer’ residence… Santa Cruz was nice, folks were vibrant, self reliant… And now? Oh well……. Sort of reminds a person of Hawthorne, and Inglewood just a short jaunt down Sepulveda Blvd from Northridge… Of course there is always Watts, and Compton to go visit. Simply lovely places…. I used to enjoy reading the writings of John Steinbeck when I was a kid… Tortilla Flat and Cannery Row were among my favorites and of course East of Eden and Grapes of Wrath….. Of Mice and Men was good also, never did finish Travels with Charlie…. Doris Gates wrote a very good book Blue Willow, read it when I was 6 or 7 years old… I would suggest its reading in many schools…. Samuel Clemens frequented places I used to venture out to when I was a kid…. The celebrated jumping bullfrog of Calaveras County was a favorite short story of mine.. He used to run a newspaper up in Virginia City, Nevada for awhile, lot’s of folks don’t know that, they think he is only famous for Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn…. And of course, here I am, living down river from Hannibal near the Mighty Missisipp, in the god fersaken bayous and swamps of Louisiana…. Odd thing I have noticed in some of my travels, now the libraries across the nation are taking those books I named and many others like them off the shelves, and I suppose they are being thrown away….. Vincent Barabba speaks of the census and “It is not only the foundation of our nation's representative democracy, it is also the basis for the distribution of over $400 billion every year in federal funds to state and local areas. In short, the census is what unites us.”….. No, in short the census does not unite us, it is crushing us… It is being used as a tool against us…. I take quite a few things with a grain of salt when reading stories in the Bible, I like to read lots of different books, even looked at the Koran to see what all the fuss was all about, anyways, somewhere there in the Bible, King David got into more than just a little bit of trouble when he conducted a census… Not sure where the story is, I have read so much over the years and I forget page numbers and titles, getting old I suppose, or perhaps there are other causes for some ‘memory’ loss….. Funny how a bus trip when I was 6 weeks old still sticks in my mind though… Did you know that when you are an infant you only see in shades of gray? It makes waterfalls look quite cold and powerful… Anyways, this census is being used for entirely the wrong purposes…. And illegitimate entities are benefitting from it in illegitimate ways… for illegitimate purposes.. It is being used to debase our society in much the same fashion the disappearance of books from the shelves in libraries are being used to debase and “dumb down” our society… Our Constitution is becoming a national joke, and an embarrassment as a whole anymore… Our population is becoming a nation of sheep, and too afraid to really speak up on anything anymore… The bullies are our politicians, and their accomplices are the pollsters… Ehh, why bother talking about it, most folks out there wouldn’t know a diamond if they held it in their hand, the things they think are useless I just don’t understand….. Enjoy your new reality out there folks, you are working gawddamed hard for it and you deserve every result you make happen…… Written by
on 11/4/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Mortimer says, "Then America's black population won't be able to blame others for the lack of jobs that they are too well-entitled to accept." Dear Rat-Face, why do you hate black people so much? Why do you spew nothing but hate? Written by KjunLady
on 11/4/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Isn't our "legal" system charged with locating, arresting and punishing illegalality? It is ridiculous to balk at any opportunity for halting illegal activities. Haul them all back as often as necessary if they aren't legal. Then America's black population won't be able to blame others for the lack of jobs that they are too well-entitled to accept. Written by
on 11/4/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
"Effectiveness" is largely a matter of perspective Mr. Quidd. I feel that a senator who sleeps in the chamber - only to wake up to vote "no" to any additional spending - is being effective in exactly the way we need. With our level of deficit spending, "just saying no" to new spending is equivalent to slowing down a runaway train. Of course Vitter isn't above "pork" spending himself - and he does advocate using cheaper Canadian drugs (which is a mistake in ways you'll never understand) - and he is a hypocrite - and he is a pervert - but he does spend less than a member of the other party would which makes him the lesser of two evils. Written by kpf
on 11/3/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Vitter won't be able to save Louisiana from losing a congressional seat and he knows that. He's simply wasting everyone's time with his grandstanding amendment, not what an effective US Senator would be doing. Written by David Quidd
on 11/2/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
God help New Orleans. Another bald headed incompetent egotist. Let's hope the pundits are right and that Mayfiels is in outfield. Written by Noladude
on 11/2/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Nah Kp, you wuz thinkin' of Viva Las Vegas!!! Viva Las Vegas!!! Viva!!, Viva!!!, Viagra!!!!!!!!!!!! - - - - - Yeah, we gots our priorities right here in the good ole ewwww esssss of aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Written by
on 11/2/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
When people disagree with you, you don’t talk to them anymore. But it’s smarter to use the law to silence them. Yeah folks, it's commin' roun' the bend.....
Written by
on 11/2/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
"Viva la Raza" is something I heard Burt lancaster say in a western - don't try to make sense of what I say - "large quantities of low quality drugs" have made me ... uh ... what was I talikn' about? Written by kpf
on 11/2/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Viva la raza, Baby, are you talking about AZTECAS? Or Latinos? or Chicanos? (Now there's a term you haven't heard in a decade or two I am sure, Chicanos, ha-ha!) LaRAZA? Que es La RAZA? Oh, are you talking about Pizzaro, Cortez, DeSoto, Ponce DeLeon? OH, I rembember, the Pope gave them divine providence over a chunk of land no one had really seen or mapped governed by 'heathens' that later became known as 'Indians' or 'Redskins', or 'Injuns'.... Do you really think that Gengis Kahn gave a rats bunghole about the Punjabs? How about the Hotentots or the Zulu, or the Vandals or the Gauls, how about the Spartans and the Greeks, or the Greeks and the Romans, or the Phonecians and the Minoeans? What about the Neanderthal? Just what is your point? Oh, the Cheorkee over the Pawnee, the Sioux over the Apache, the Hopi over the Navajo, the Tuolumne over the Miwok tribes, Apache and Commanche? How about Inca versus the Mayas, or how about just the Abipon's?? Just wut is La RAZA?????? What a joke.... Written by
on 11/2/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I'm not defending Vitter - we should (ac)count (for) illegals - and since we both want to "follow the law" - each and every illegal alien should be arrested and deported, since they are breaking the law by breathing while standing on our soil. Which, amusingly enough, we took from their ancestors by military force without any justification. Written by Viva la raza, Baby
on 11/2/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I always hear some people say, "follow the law, don't make up the law. Be a strict constrictionist". The litmus test always seems to be, is the judge just making up the law for political reasons. Ok. I know that illegal aliens are a problem in that we should take care of those who are here legal and not who are not here legally. But, somebody tell me how is the Vitter Amendment following the most important law in the country, the constitution, which considers persons, not citizens. Read the 14th Amendment. I think it is much more important to follow the law than to make political points to promote an agenda that has no constitutional basis. So, somebody tell me, how can we only count citizens when the constitution says persons for reapportion purposes. I know it is unfair that other states get a better deal. So, let us change the constitution which will take years. That is the legal thing to do. Senator Vitter is taking us to never, neverland. He should have made his argument years ago. Even the former head of the census is telling us what the constitution says. This whole thing is political and quite silly and I think for political reasons, but I still want somebody to tell me how do we count only citizens when the constitution is so explicit. It says persons, not citizens. Plain and simple. Louisiana is looking goofy, once again. Written by Oh, Gee
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
As far as "following the law" - I will again reference slavery. If you were a northerner, and the law required you to turn in runaway slaves, would you "follow the law?" The very idea of our government's founding AND THE VERY REASON to have a document LIMITING what government can do - is that people in control of the government can - and will - be tyrannical if left to their own devices. So the Constitution was devised to make passing laws difficult, it was put in place to protect the people from government tyranny. "The people" are sheep who think the government is there to "help them" and "provide for their needs." I think they are fools to believe this; others ("most" in fact) would disagree with me. I will again quote Fredric Bastiat: “Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” ____ “The state is the great fictitious entity by which everyone seeks to live at the expense of everyone else.” .. and this simple, profound, but largely denied bit of wisdom: ____ “Taxes must, in the end, fall upon the consumer" Written by kpf
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
"Strict constructionist?" I make no claim to be an expert on the Constitution. I do know it was intended to spell out what the Federal Government can do, and ANY other laws would require 3/4 of the state's legislatures to approve any other legislation (by a Constitutional Amendment). That is why - back when the Federal government did not simply do as they wish - it took a Constitutional Amendment to enact alcohol prohibition - and also a Constitutional Amendment to repeal prohibition. The government's powers were to be few and limited - not "whatever the majority in congress decides their power will be." We are so far beyond following the Constitution, it is meaningless to reference it, IMHO. That said, it would be in the people's best interest for the government to follow it (to have its power limited by it" specifically) - but even the people do not desire this, the only exception being sections of the Constitution that pertain to their interests. Written by kpf
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Kpf, so, what should strict constructionist do? No matter the party, shouldn't they follow the law as written and not make up laws to fit their agenda?
Written by Ron
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Oh, one last thing Ron. No need to "live and die" by the Constitution. The Constitution is like the rules of boxing. As long as the rules are enforced, one should abide by it. But if your opponent is punching you "below the belt" and not being called for it ... I would suggest punching him "below the belt" as well - just to keep things even and fair. The Constitution is ignored by both parties - to the detriment of the public. What makes us SUPREMELY stupid about this is ... by allowing "our" party to violate the (Constitutional) restraints on the freedom and liberty of those we oppose, we open the door to the "other" party to violate OUR liberties. That's how we voluntarily give away our freedom and rights. Written by kpf
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
uh ... "give" not "get" (get a s#it??? dat sound preverted actually) Written by dag nab it
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
KJ, Angel, read the next sentence after the one which mentions a billion dollars to redo the census. THAT'S where I get the 400 billion a year figure from. These clowns spend 787 billion on BS, more hundreds of billions on BS - much of which is going to foreign banks - "how much" the Federal Reserve WILL NOT TELL CONGRESS - and I'm supposed to get a s#it about a SINGLE billion dollars?????? Written by oh please, get real
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Ron, Ron, Ron, where to begin. I do not claim to be a conservative, and think as poorly of the GOP as the Democratic Party – but for different reasons. You say we shouldn’t “mess with the constitution” as concerns the census. Are you aware that the Supreme Court of the United States of America ruled that slaves count as 2/3rd of a person for the census? They - in their infinite wisdom - sure enough did. So I guess you think they are incapable of error or misjudgment???? Or do you think it was wrong for the U.S. to ALLOW slavery? YOU CAN’T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS – either the government is incapable of error, or they are as capable of misjudgment as any collection of human beings are (I’ll go with the second one, me cher). Stephen’s article states that if we do not have a census until 2020 this would “…result in a 400 billion dollar loss to United States citizens, per year until the census is determined and money is allocated by the federal government since funding to the states is based upon the census count.” My question is “How is this money LOST” – does it disappear??? Is the money NEVER THERE due to no census??? … no …. that’s not it. It means that the government will not PROVIDE 400 billion dollars a year to the states due to the increased (but not counted) population. “Not distributed” is NOT the same as “lost.” What else besides distributing this money could be done? We could not print 400 billion dollars each year and not devalue to dollar and/or not have deficit spending that adds to the debt. Or .. we could collect 400 billion a year in taxes for ten years and use it to pay off 4 trillion dollars of our debt (which is 12 trillion now, if I am not mistaken). I made these points previously simply because it irritated me to hear people speak of “LOST” money – not because I give a rat’s a$$ whether or not illegals are counted. Actually, as long as they ARE counted in EACH state – OR – NOT COUNTED in EACH state, well, either one sounds okay to me, I really don't care. Written by kpf
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Vincent Barabba served as head of census from (1973-1976 and 1979-1981). So, that means he was there during Nixon, Ford (two Republicans), Carter (Democrat) and Reagan (Republican). Written by Lawrence
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Kpf, you want to have it both ways. You want to say that you are a strict constructionist, but, when it comes time to look directly at the constitution and not make up law, you say, well, the other side makes up law, so we should be able to do so soo. That is called hypocrisy. If you live by the constitution, you die by it. Also, isn't it interesting that you are saying don't spend any money, but, when it comes time to lose perhaps a trillion dollars based upon what the US Census Bureau is saying, you don't care. We have other ways of dealing with illegal aliens. Enforcement of the laws on the books. Let us not ruin the constituion by making up laws we know are unconstitutional at the amazing cost that will just substantially increase the debt so your xenophobia and Vitter's is satisfied. Either you are a conservative and believe is budget cutting and strict construction of the constituion or you are a conservative when it becomes convenient to your argument. You lash out at people for spending money and not following the law, but, when so you can cram it down the throats of the other side, you forget your own values. Read what the former director says. You think he is crazy? Both parties for years since the beginning of the US have followed "persons". Now, you, and Vitter, so it fits your political fears want to change the law and bust the budget. Man, that is so non-conservative. Written by Ron
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
KP asks, "Does it mean that $400 billion a year less will be collected in taxes?" No-- as the article says,
"according to the US Census Bureau, it would add an estimated one billion dollars to redo the census and a minimum of at least two years to rework the entire process." ..... what part about "re-doing it costs mucho bucks" do you not understand? Kerry if you agree with the Constitution-- then you agree that it is clear that all "PEOPLE" are to be counted-- not all "citizens.".... Quite simply, David Vitter is the new David Duke.... Two Davids. Written by KjunLady
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Just as those who cry "the will of the people" would not want "the people" deciding things by direct vote (they are "full of it" in other words) so too many who will cry "unconstitutional" about one chosen issue or another would not want congress to be limited to only those things that the Constitution allows. Keep in mind the Constitution does in fact "limit" what congress can do (or that was it's intent). Instead both parties think all that is needed is to "have the votes" to pass any legislation, whether "constitutional" or not. Much of what congress does is outside the Constitution (taking money from one citizen for the benefit of another citizen is not a power given to the Federal government ANYWHERE in the Constitution; also ONLY congress can declare war - yet starting with Korea congress has allowed Presidents to send troops overseas to engage in warfare - the fact that these military engagements are an "undeclared war" in no way means it is not a violation of the Constitution - so why decry Vitter's actions on the census as a violation of the Constitution? Give some other reasons why it is a bad idea, but not that it is "unconstitutional" as the Constitution - due to those who claim it is a "living" document - is in fact all but dead. Written by kpf
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Frankly, Stephen, dear, Mr. Mayfield leaves much to be desired - “Tourism and Cultural” candidate - where has tourism and culture gotten us. The state that we are in - which is deplorable. Other forms of business are not to be found. Mr. Mayfield may take his trumpet and strut right out of town and not be missed. Let's get some leadership in City Hall - and quality is missing in Mr. Mayfield.
Now, it is also time to listen to Mr. Vitter. Too bad his detractors will be missing the reality of the facts of illegal aliens. Mr. Vitter should help those trying to come into this country through the legal means and hold them up as an example to all. Written by RhettsWife
on 11/1/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I think Vitter is not following the constitution. It is a shame that our Congrssional delegation and everyone else just missed this one. Written by Even
on 10/31/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
We should follow the Constitution always, not "pick and choose" and decry unconstitutional actions only when it suits our purposes. I'm ALL for STRICTLY following the Constitution - but I doubt that those who are crying "unconstitutional" over this one issue are. Written by kpf
on 10/31/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Vitter's amendment is all about illegal aliens. He is using them as scapegoats so he wins an election. The constitution is what it is. All of his blustering is a lot of bull since he cannot change anything even if the Senate voted on his stupid Amendment. Maybe Vitter should go back to law school and read the constitution. Even he said it is an uphill battle. Even if the Supreme Court made up law and did not follow the constitution, it would take years and I agree with the authors of these columns will probably cost Americans over 400 billion per year in distributions to the state. As the TP said today, Louisiana could still keep its reps based upon the census. This is a bunch of crap and grandstanding. he should follow the law. Written by Oh, Gee
on 10/31/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Sen. David Vitter R-LA-Bennett R-UT have been offering an amendment to the Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations bill that would require the U.S. Census Bureau to add questions regarding immigration & citizenship status of 20 to 30 million plus illegal immigrants and families in the 2010 decennial census. If these questions are not asked it is certain that--ALL--these illegal aliens will be counted in the census and states will lose billions of dollars in federal funds to states infamously designated as SANCTUARY STATES such as CALIFORNIA and gain Congressional seats (and electoral college votes) due to this counting of illegal aliens.DEMAND FROM YOUR SENATORS THAT SEN. VITTERS’ AMENDMENT BE INCLUDED. Only citizens and permanent residents should be counted. Just may be citizens and legal residents should--abstain--from being counted in the 2010, if the Democrats insist in illegal immigrants who broke our sovereignty laws.
Vitter stated," If the current census plan goes ahead, the inclusion of non-citizens toward apportionment will artificially increase the population count in certain states, and that will likely result in the loss of congressional seats for nine other states, including Louisiana,” CALL YOUR SENATOR OR REPRESENTATIVE AT 202-224-3121 AND DEMAND NO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT SHOULD BE ENUMERATED IN THE 2010 CENSUS
Sen. Harry Reid D-NV, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi D-CA, once again is trying to weaken or table illegal immigrant amendments, that included E-Verify, County police training program 287 G. Reid and his co-conspirators are well versed in the act of undermining any immigration enforcement laws already on the books, or that have been prepared for the Senate chambers. Both these states are heavily populated with millions of illegal aliens, with their treasuries wrecked by incompetence as Democratic leaders and many other politicians pander to the financial demands of foreign nationals
Why do US citizens and permanent residents have to keep on repeating the same mantra, until their blue in the face? THIS IS NOT ABOUT BIGOTRY OR RACISM, as the Democratic-Marxists-Socialists like people to think?
This not about a persons indigenous population, their religion or anything else. For years Americans have been picking up the progressive tab for the impoverished people from across the globe. IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE PEOPLE FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SOUTHERN BORDER. What it is about is the "Rule of LAW." That you don't just steal into a sovereign country and expect to be welcomed. Nor expect to be respected for demanding rights that doesn't exist for illegal immigrants. Personally some of my family members from Europe spent years trying to get a entry visa. So why should foreign nationals just slip by the US Border Patrol, or equally as insidious over-stay there tourist visa, knowing full well there here to stay. That's why I joined NUMBERSUSA, JUDICIAL WATCH to be aware what's happening behind closed doors in Washington? Written by Brittanicus
on 10/31/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Perhaps I am missing something here with this "loss" of 400 billion dollars a year if we use the "old census" numbers. What exactly does that mean? Does it mean that $400 billion a year less will be collected in taxes? Or does it mean that $400 billion a year will be spent on other things - or even used to pay down the debt? Does it mean that $400 billion a year would be taken out of circulation offsetting the effects of inflation? Or is this $400 billion less the Federal government will not be providing to the states? Considering this money is either "more taxes" and/or "deficit spending" perhaps Senator Vitter is doing this country's taxpayer's a great service? Written by kpf
on 10/31/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Eddie,
I disagree with you. When they amended the constitution, there were in intransigents all over. We are talking immediate post-civil war. That is when the country was in reconstruction and people were moving all around to get back to families and to find new beginnings. Certainly, there was immigration going on back then, especially Chinese immigrants after the Gold Rush. The number of Chinese people who came to America exploded after the Civil war. Congress could have specifically said “citizens” when voted upon that clause of the the 14th Amendment but it said persons as it relates to reapportionment. If you read the letter, he says, “Every census since the first has included citizens and noncitizens alike. Presidential administrations of both parties have repeatedly upheld the interpretation that the apportionment and census clauses of Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution and Section 2 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, as well as the 1790 Census Act and its successors, require that every person resident in the country, no matter his legal status, must be included in the census count. The census provides a clear and detailed picture of the entire population. It is not only the foundation of our nation's representative democracy, it is also the basis for the distribution of over $400 billion every year in federal funds to state and local areas. In short, the census is what unites us.” I think that says it in a nut shell. If you chance try to change the way that the census is counted, there is no basis for the 400 billion every year that we get from the US government. There is no authority in Congress or the Constitution to use old numbers. Obviously, the census told Bayoubuzz there would be a loss of 400 billion dollars per year. Are we willing to risk this for a number of years? Are we willing to risk the plain reading of the constitution? It is a shame that our Congress people did not address this after Katrina or at any time before when we were having the brain drain. Also, how do you determine the number of illegal aliens unless you get a baseline of all people in the US and in each state which is what the census does. That is what Bayoubuzz has been saying for the past couple of days. I also think that Senator Vitter while trying to get votes on the “right” is driving an issue that takes us to a dead end and great damage. If he was on the ball, he should have brought this issue up years ago when we could have tried to challenge it then or even try to pass a constitutional amendment. It is suspicious that he now is trying to send it up the flag pole right before his election while the census is at the tail end of the process. Let him start now to change the constitution. What he is doing now is trying to make up law as he goes along. The reality is, we go by what the constitution says which is what Vincent Barabba is saying.
Written by Johnny
on 10/31/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I am in complete agreement with Mr. Barabba, that every person resident within the U.S., and whatever their LEGAL status, should be included in the Census, and this conclusion is wholly consistent with the Federalist Papers, particularly those of Madison (#40, 41, and 58) which speak of counting "inhabitants" (with no mention made of "citizens"). Indeed, the status of slaves and those other than free people were considered, but there is no specific reference anywhere limiting the count to "citizens" in this context. Yet, the definition of inhabitant, then as now, contemplates residence in a permanent and lawful sense. Legal immigrants here on valid visas permitting residence, whether Green card, L-1, H-1 or other residence permitting types, should, in addition to citizens, also be counted because they are lawful residents and, therefore, inhabitants. Any interpretation of inhabitant that would include counting those here ILLEGALLY or in a transient or tourist status would frustrate the Constitutional intent that the Census be made of "inhabitants" (i.e., legal residents) only, as well as the public policy motivating the Census in the first palce. Such ideas are absurd in their conception. Does anyone seriously believe that an occupying army of beligerents, here under conditions of war, should be included if their presence in this country happened to occur in a Census year, or that the terrorists that attacked the World Trade Center and were here on temporary visas or no visas at all should be counted? Or should every international visitor here legally, but in a transient or tourist status and housed for a week or so in New York city or Los Angeles also be counted? Written by Not SoFastEddie
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Funny you mention the figure of 800 billion dollars. That is what our annual interest payment on the debt is projected to be in 2019. $800,000,000,000 a year ... in interest .... each and every year. "What's wrong with deficit spending?" "Economics is boring." okey-dokey Written by kpf
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Chabert,this is a Vitter thing becausse he is taking us and the country down a path of losing 400 billion dollars per year. He has not thought this out at all. I would take what the former head of the Census says over Vitter anyday. I would take what the Census Dept says about this anyday. Read the letter. If anything, thank goodnness that Bayoubuzz has brought out the incredible loss to this country Vitter's actions would take us. Four hundred billion dollars per year. If you or Vitter want this loss around your neck, go at it. I think it is absolutely reckless for Vitter to even propose such a thing without his doing his homework. It tells me he is totally reckless. Did he even talk to census? Did he talk to the director? Vitter wants the credit. He must take the blame for being absolutely reckless. You claim about the stimulus and health care and the costs. 800 billion dollars for two years. And, who knows, it might even be more before this gets resolved which means billions more. Written by Clarion
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
So your real objection is that David Vitter suggested it. Even if it causes Louisiana to lose a congressional seat: that's better than letting Vitter get any credit, right? Stupid on your part, and of the part of BayouBuzz: Vitter hatred is clouding your thinking.
It is fundamentally wrong to allow disproportionate representation in the U.S. House of Representatives to Texas, Arizona, California and Georgia because the federal government is not controlling our borders. Maybe that does not seem too important to you: but it will after the next census (with or without illegals) when Louisiana gets reapportioned, and Orleans parish loses much of its representation in the Louisiana House and Senate, and gets its vote in its congressional district diluted. Written by chaubert
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Chaubert,you are talking like someone who wants to make up the constitution as we go along. This is all about politics and re-election for David Vitter. Bash those illegal aliens. Ignore those blacks. Makes for great issues. the constitution is very clear. Read it sometime. but, if you want to reinvent the constitution or have judges make it up as they go along, go right ahead. Your argument is absurd. The constituion says persons not citizens. Even the former head of the census says that various presidents of both parties have viewed it as such. did you read his piece? Now, if David Vitter wants to make up law as he goes along so he can get the right wing angry at illegal aliens, that is his call. So much for strict construction David Vitter. We are complaining about the stimulus and health care, well, our federal government is going to not send about 800 Billion dollars or more to us for two years if we delay the census which is what would happen. Written by Clarion
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
God help New Orleans if Mayfield is elected. He's an egotistical strutting Nagin clone with no experiance except his mediocre trumpeting and his dissasembly of the library system. Written by Noladude
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Especially with that ditzy deSotoofmyear on the bench.... Talk about destroying the nation from within.... Everybody Mambo!!!!!!!!!! Written by
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
It is foolish to say this is legally clear. At the time the constitution was written, there were no illegal immigrants. And for most of our history, the country has either had legal unlimited, or limited legal immigration. It is only very recently that we have had unlimited, illegal immigration. It is highly unlikely that the framers of the Constitution would have intended to allow the number of illegal immigrants to be included in deciding congressional representation. The constitution did not even allow fully claiming slaves when deciding congressional representation, so they surely would not have included illegals.
This issue is not legally clear until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on it. It is disengenuous to claim that it would be making new law: there has never been a case on this topic before, so the Supreme Court would not be overturning any precedents. Written by chaubert
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
