{"id":22349,"date":"2019-12-23T15:44:39","date_gmt":"2019-12-23T20:44:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=22349"},"modified":"2019-12-23T15:44:41","modified_gmt":"2019-12-23T20:44:41","slug":"illegal-immigration-voting-census-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2019\/12\/23\/illegal-immigration-voting-census-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"Vote Rigging Via Mass Immigration"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The famous Prussian military strategist Carl von\nClausewitz emphasized in his classic book, On\nWar<\/em>, that \u201cwar is the continuation of politics by other means.\u201d Similarly,\none could argue \u2013 based on an analysis just released by the Center for\nImmigration Studies \u2013 that the policies of open borders and mass, unchecked\nimmigration constitute electoral interference by other means. That\u2019s because\nthe mere presence of non-citizens, including illegal aliens, will affect both\nthe representation Americans receive in Congress and each state\u2019s electoral\nvotes during a presidential election.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nnumbers<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The December 19 study<\/a>, co-authored by Steven A. Camarota and Karen Zeigler, predicts that, based on the upcoming 2020 national census, 26 seats in the House of Representatives will be reapportioned. Of these, 24 will be in states won by Donald Trump in 2016. This will be largely due to mass-immigration-fueled population growth in states where a majority of non-citizens settle, most of which are \u201cblue\u201d or Democratic-leaning. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of states that went for Trump in 2016, only the \u201cred\u201d\nstate of Texas and the \u201cswing\u201d state of Florida will receive four and three\nadditional House seats respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study emphasizes that \u201cbut for the presence of all\nimmigrants and their minor children in other states,\u201d the following states \u2013 of\nwhich all but two were won by Trump \u2013 will each lose a seat in 2020: Alabama,\nArkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota,\nMississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina,\nTennessee, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Michigan and Pennsylvania would\nlose two each, and Ohio \u2013 three. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The counting of illegal aliens alone would mean that Ohio,\nAlabama, and Minnesota each would lose a seat to California, Texas, and New\nYork respectively. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Naturally, this will also impact the number of Electoral College<\/a> votes each state receives, which is a sum of the number of senators (two per state) and House representatives. Thus, states with larger foreign-born populations would see their number of Electors increase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Punishing\nstates with smaller foreign-born populations <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Texas\u2019 gains notwithstanding, CIS\u2019s calculations clearly show that one side will reap the overwhelming majority of the benefits of reapportionment driven by mass immigration and swelling foreign-born populations. Without a doubt this is one of the key reasons why the Democrats have been pushing \u2013 with the support or acquiescence of cheap labor corporatist Republicans \u2013 open borders and mass immigration. After all, during the 2018 midterm elections, almost 90 percent<\/a> of House districts with a foreign-born population above the national average were won by Democrats.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regardless of who benefits, however, counting illegal\naliens \u2013 and perhaps all non-citizens in general \u2013 is problematic because it\ndilutes the votes of U.S. citizens. That is because it gives states that\nattract more non-citizens \u2013 including \u201csanctuary\u201d jurisdictions \u2013 an unfair\nadvantage over states with smaller foreign-born populations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A persuasive case can be made that the Department of Commerce \u2013 which is responsible for conducting the census \u2013 can indeed exclude illegal aliens<\/a> from the census population count (and that the Constitution did not mean for them to be included in the first place). Unfortunately, the DOC has so far refused to do so, for which it was sued by the state of Alabama and Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL). Alabama certainly had a good reason to sue, for counting illegal aliens would deprive it of a congressional seat and an Electoral College vote. The bottom line is that states with small foreign-born\/non-citizen populations, and in particular those with less illegal alien inhabitants, should not be punished by losing representation. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The famous Prussian military strategist Carl von Clausewitz emphasized in his classic book, On War, that \u201cwar is the continuation of politics by other means.\u201d Similarly, one could argue \u2013 based on an analysis just released by the Center for Immigration Studies \u2013 that the policies of open borders and mass, unchecked immigration constitute electoral<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":76,"featured_media":5190,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[7],"tags":[1745,1498,1524,222],"yst_prominent_words":[2019,7253,7407,7412,5970,7404,2013,2008,7405,2420,7408,3282,7402,7409,7406,2373,1945,7403,7401,7411],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22349"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/76"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22349"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22349\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22350,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22349\/revisions\/22350"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5190"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22349"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22349"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22349"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=22349"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}