GOP AG nominee opposes Trump census plan
Tuesday, Apr 3, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From last week…
State Sen. Kwame Raoul, the Democratic nominee for Illinois attorney general, joined his party’s “chorus of opposition” Thursday to the Trump Administration’s plans to include a question about citizenship in the 2020 census.
Raoul said the move is illegal and would undermine efforts to get an accurate census count because the citizenship question will discourage some immigrants from participating.
By jumping on the issue early, Raoul is seeking in part to draw policy differences between himself and Republican nominee Erika Harold, but also to connect her more closely to Trump. Harold’s campaign declined to respond to questions Thursday about her position on the census dispute.
In a state where Donald Trump is regarded as largely unpopular, any opportunity for Illinois Democrats to legitimately make him the issue in the 2018 mid-term election is seen as a plus, and the president continues to oblige.
* Today…
Republican attorney general nominee Erika Harold said Monday she opposes including a citizenship question on the 2020 census, splitting with both the Trump administration and Gov. Bruce Rauner.
In a delayed response to her Democratic opponent, state Sen. Kwame Raoul, who staked out a similar position last week, Harold argued it is too late to add the citizenship question because it was not tested in advance through the Census Bureau’s planning process.
“The Census Bureau therefore cannot meet the Constitutional burden of ensuring an accurate count of everyone in the United States — which is the census’s fundamental Constitutional purpose,” Harold said.
“While politicians on both sides of the aisle are attempting to convert this census debate into a political debate about immigration policy, the real legal issue is Congress’s Constitutional obligation to obtain an accurate count of everyone in the United States—regardless of citizenship status,” she added.
* Greg Hinz…
In a follow-up phone interview, Harold said that had the bureau gone out and tested the impact of the question, as it does with other queries, rather than unveiling it at the last moment, she might hold a different view. But that is not the case, she said.
“I think there are legitimate questions about an undercount to the overall population” created by such a question, Harold told me. “At this point, I wouldn’t have (added) a question.”
She said, “Upholding constitutional principals is one of the most important rules” for an attorney general.
- Montrose - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:35 am:
That’s a smart position for her to take and a smart way for her to take it.
- Steve - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:40 am:
The Census Bureau has a history of asking intrusive questions on the long form yet some people are upset because people in America on tourist visas shouldn’t be counted.. Go figure.
- Hamlet's Ghost - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:41 am:
Peter Roskam, do you agree with Erika Harold on this?
- Violet Seepage - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:43 am:
That’s actually a wise position by Ms Harold–based on law and common sense. This AG race might turn out to be interesting.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:43 am:
Harold will need to be very crafty, like this, and pick issues where it makes logical sense to mirror her opponent while not seemingly ignoring the base or embracing anti-Trump positions.
Where Harold will have blowback is where her own conservative positions might not mirror where the state sees a position in a statewide voice. Any time Harold can be where it seemingly is moderate, but far from a moderate political tilt, Harold will be best served taking stances like this whenever she can.
- Aannoonn - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:46 am:
Can someone explain to me why this is a big issue? I know the census asks a variety of questions including race, sex, etc. Isn’t it of value to understand how many citizens vs. non-citizens there are in the country?
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:53 am:
Some people, or groups, like to make everything on earth a big issue (when it benefits them). This question has been on the census. Was never a big deal until this administration. Figure it out.
- NeverPoliticallyCorrect - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:54 am:
Harold is doing the smart thing but this is just another example of expidient politicians more concerned with votes than advocating for the right thing. In a census where we ask so much suggesting that the issue of citizenship shouldn’t be there is silly. As a previous person commented, we might as well just ask if you are a person at this address and end there.
- Steve - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:54 am:
When Illinois voters have a choice between Kwame and Erika, unless Erika “differentiates” herself on the issues, why not vote for Kwame ? This is a Blue state. What’s the purpose of Erika’s run if she’s a me too candidate?
- Anon - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:56 am:
Aannoon, the concern is that having the government (via form or in-person visits) asking about citizenship may result in non-citizens refusing to participate. States and cities with high non-citizen counts could lose seats in the US House or federal dollars (for grants allocated based on population). That’s the real concern at issue for both sides.
- DriXander - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:59 am:
Aannoonn, the main concern is a citizenship question, which hasn’t been on the Census since 1950, will result in undercounting. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-censuss-new-citizenship-question-could-hurt-communities-that-are-already-undercounted/ Here’s an IL-specific take from the Trib: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-census-citizenship-question-trump-20180328-story.html
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:59 am:
==we might as well just ask if you are a person at this address and end there.==
That’s the entire point of the census. To get a count.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:01 am:
==This question has been on the census. Was never a big deal until this administration. ==
Umm, this Administration just added it to the census. That question hasn’t been asked since 1950.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:04 am:
==Non-citizens shouldn’t count towards representation or grants.==
What about green card holders? They aren’t citizens. Should my wife have not been counted for the 20 years she wasn’t a citizen and only held a green card?
A census is meant to be a count. Period.
- Anon - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:14 am:
To those who say the question has not been asked, that is not entirely accurate. Citizenship was asked on the long form and the subsequent survey used by the Census. It has not been on the short form sent to most households. In 2010, the US went exclusively with the short form.
- BlueDogDem - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:14 am:
INS has all records pertaining to green card holders. Simple sharing of data. We all know the census is much more than ‘ just a count’
- Amalia - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:19 am:
she has to take every small slice she can, so this is smart. Yes, it’s a way to get people not to answer. if you think this issue is on the same intrusive level as race and sex, you have no sense of the fear of someone showing up at your door and sending you to another place, one where you may not have been for years and years. Severe undercount would leave cities across the US without enough money to provide services. Our elected officials cannot fight this census problem hard enough.
- Chris P. Bacon - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:27 am:
There’s one thing Rauner and Harold will remain united on, losing.
Erika Harold never would have gotten the nomination in the first place if more Republicans knew she didn’t even vote for Trump in the General. She confirmed that in an interview last year. Said she wrote in a name. Harold of course also benefited from an opponent who ran a very weak campaign.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:29 am:
–The Census Bureau has a history of asking intrusive questions on the long form yet some people are upset because people in America on tourist visas shouldn’t be counted.. Go figure.–
Yeah, that’s the objective here, Steve: trying to figure out who’s here on tourist visas.
Geez, that’s weak.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:36 am:
===never would have gotten the nomination in the first place if more Republicans knew ===
And if the sky was green, grass might be blue.
- Practical Politics - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:46 am:
Harold’s opponent (Gary Grasso) had credentials as an elected official and a practicing attorney. His statewide campaign, however, was conducted on a shoe string budget. Harold benefited from her celebrity status and Rauner’s money. On closer examination, her resume’ is thin. She holds a law license from a prestigious law school, but hasn’t really practiced too much law (at one time listing herself as “retired”).
- Chris P. Bacon - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 10:56 am:
====And if the sky was green, grass might be blue.===
Fair enough.
Just sayin’ there’s going to be some buyer’s remorse in the GOP base over this position on the census, and others.
- Lake County Voter - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 11:12 am:
Would it change her mind if someone told her the census counts gay people too?
- Lake County Voter - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 11:15 am:
== Erika Harold never would have gotten the nomination in the first place if more Republicans knew she didn’t even vote for Trump in the General. She confirmed that in an interview last year. Said she wrote in a name. ==
As an independent voter, I find this move from GOP politicians very calculating and sad. If you find Trump abhorrent and dangerous, you have one option, and it’s not a cagey, cowardly dodge like this.
- Put the fun in unfunded - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 11:17 am:
Here’s the 2000 long form questionnaire. It asks about citizenship. https://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/d02p.pdf
- DarkHorse - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 11:36 am:
Can anyone find me a voter who says: “I was gonna vote for Kwame, but now that Harold agrees with him on the Census, I’ll vote for her”? This stance by Harold is calculated get get the endorsements of editorial boards, so in that it’s helpful.
- Lake County Voter - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 11:49 am:
== This stance by Harold is calculated get get the endorsements of editorial boards, so in that it’s helpful. ==
She could deliver one of her classic 45 minute rants about teh evil gays and still walk out of there with every editorial board, thanks to Bruce Rauner.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 12:05 pm:
==We all know the census is much more than ‘ just a count’==
Yeah, it is. But the primary purpose of the census is to count the number of people in the country. The rest is just data collection that has absolutely nothing to do with the purpose of the census.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 1:59 pm:
When it was on the census before - is there any evidence it caused people to be undercounted?
Or is all this based on conjecture, assumption and political emotion?
It’s a good question. We need to know. Quit speculating about how it will impact the census when there isn’t any proof that it ever did impact them before.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 4:14 pm:
Don’t be daft VMan. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure out why the Trump Administration wants to add this question. It’s political. To suggest otherwise shows a woefully inept understanding of the current climate.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 8:35 pm:
So you have no proof that the question impacted earlier census reports, but you believe it will this time because you can read the President’s mind revealing some kind of a political plot.
Yet you insult me?
- Graduated College Students - Tuesday, Apr 3, 18 @ 9:48 pm:
===So you have no proof that the question impacted earlier census reports, but you believe it will this time because you can read the President’s mind revealing some kind of a political plot.===
ICE wasn’t liable to kick down your door back in 1950 and before. That’s also changed.