David Vitter is... right?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Yes, I suppose he is. Along with Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT), Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) has introduced an amendment that would, according to USA Today, "exclude illegal immigrants from the population count used to allocate congressional seats after the 2010 Census. It also would require the Census to ask people whether they are citizens."

Well, I like the first part, not the second. I generally favour amnesty for illegal immigrants, with a path to eventual citizenship, but it doesn't make sense to include them when it comes to representation in Washington. Permanent residents, yes; illegal immigrants, no.

I do not, however, think that illegal immigrants should be excluded from population counts broadly. It's important to know how many people live in a specific place, after all, not least because the provision of services depends to a significant degree on actual population count. In this respect, illegal immigrants are still residents, like it or not.

Actually, I don't mind the second part either. What's wrong with asking about citizenship? Shouldn't a jurisdiction know how many of its inhabitants are citizens and how many are not? (Only citizens can vote, after all, and only citizens can run for public office. I lived in the U.S. for a long time, with a Green Card, and wasn't able to vote.) I realize that this "would raise more questions in the public mind about how confidential the Census is," according to the head of one Latino organization, but, as long as there would be no requirement for proof of permanent residency, I don't see a problem here, unless the government were to take the list of non-citizens and use it to root out illegal immigrants.

I may be missing something here, but it just doesn't seem like such a bad idea.