Congressional Apportionment Amendment

[A18]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.J.RES.53:

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by counting the number of persons in each State who are citizens of the United States.

I think this is a good idea. Illegal immigrants would no longer skew apportionment in favor of the sun belt.

[KEmperor]

Sure, why not?

[minionofmidas]

Legal as well as illegal immigrants. And these do make up a majority of the immigrant population.
The question isn't currently even asked on the shortform Census (and as a result, the exact no. of US citizens appears to be unknown...). Of course that could be easily remedied.
Would that be done in districting as well? In that case I'd strongly advise against it.

[A18]

Districts are drawn according to whatever regulations the Congress imposes. Nothing would change in that regard. All the amendment does is change the method of apportionment.

In a republic, I believe it makes sense to only count citizens of the United States.

[minionofmidas]

It does...either way makes sense.

[Emsworth]

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by counting the number of persons in each State who are citizens of the United States.

I think this is a good idea. Illegal immigrants would no longer skew apportionment in favor of the sun belt.

This is indeed a very good idea. Neither legal nor illegal immigrants should be counted.

[??????????]

How many Electoral votes would CA, TX and FL lose? I have heard on the radio that it would be CA = Minus 3-5 Texas = Minus 3-5 Florida =  Minus 2.

[A18]

http://www.lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050628/OPINION01/506280321/1086/opinion

U.S. Rep. Candice Miller calls her idea to modify political head counting "almost ridiculously simple."

If only it was simple to make the Mount Clemens Republican's idea the law of the land.

Miller wants to change a single word in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Instead of counting "persons" for political apportionment, Miller wants the Census Bureau to count "citizens." The implications are huge - and positive for Michigan.

Thanks to the counting of people who are not citizens - either illegal immigrants or legal visitors - states such as California and Texas get increased power in the U.S. House. Who pays? States like Michigan.

A Congressional Research Service study cited by the Deseret Morning News in Utah found that a "citizens-only" count would leave California with six fewer seats in the current House; Texas, Florida and New York, each would lose a seat, too.

Meanwhile, the citizens-only method would give Michigan and eight other states an additional House seat.

But this isn't parochialism. As Miller told National Public Radio, her "simple" idea follows a fundamental American principle:

"(O)ur system ... is supposed to be based on a fundamental caveat: one man, one vote. And we have illegal aliens who, of course, cannot vote or shouldn't be voting, and yet they are included for purposes of drawing congressional districts."

The unfortunate thing about Miller's idea is that the people who benefit from the status quo stand astride the road to reform. A constitutional amendment requires the backing of three-quarters of the states and the support of two-thirds of each house of Congress.

In the current House, California, Texas, Florida and New York hold 139 of the 435 seats. Presuming those states voted as a bloc, Miller would have to win 98 percent of the remaining House votes to meet the constitutional standard.

The math clearly works against Miller and other backers, such as Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland.

That doesn't mean they should stop trying - or stop looking for other avenues for reform.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

CA already gets massively screwed by the federal government without losing 6 House seats and electoral votes.

[??????????]

CA already gets massively screwed by the federal government without losing 6 House seats and electoral votes.

California is one of the richest states in the Union. Quit bitching already.

[Sam Spade]

CA already gets massively screwed by the federal government without losing 6 House seats and electoral votes.

Texas and Florida would get screwed almost as badly, if not worse.

This is mainly about Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York not wanting to lose Congressional seats and electoral votes.

I personally don't blame them.

[minionofmidas]

Me and Kevinstat actually did the math once. Its Cali minus six, Texas Florida New York Arizona minus one or two each IIRC.
Gains are widely and somewhat randomly distributed = states currently narrowly off their next district getting an extra one.

[opebo]

Why shouldn't immigrants be counted?  Or maybe they should be 2/5ths of a person.. or whatever the ratio was in the constitution.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

CA already gets massively screwed by the federal government without losing 6 House seats and electoral votes.

California is one of the richest states in the Union. Quit bitching already.

The cost of living is high, and we get back only about 80 cents per dollar that we send to the feds.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

CA already gets massively screwed by the federal government without losing 6 House seats and electoral votes.

Texas and Florida would get screwed almost as badly, if not worse.

This is mainly about Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York not wanting to lose Congressional seats and electoral votes.

I personally don't blame them.

CA is already very screwed. FL actually gets back more than its share from the feds, and TX only loses slightly.

[Peter]

Britain uses registered voters to make its apportionment of constituencies, though we are all effectively automatically registered through some administrative scheme.