Friday, February 13, 2009

Comments on Belmont Club
"Like a fire bell in the nighte"


To Mr. Byron York,

Regarding,
"Which means the census flap might well be an early test for congressional Democrats. Do they believe in accountability and oversight or not?"

The answer is "No." Always happy to help.

Remember that the administration intends to flood the census rolls with illegal aliens lured by the porkulus bill. These will be used to skew the reapportionment towards retaining Democratic districts. It is worth reviewing the Wiki regarding the 14th Amendments sec.1, that does not explicitly grant birthright citizenship to the children of illegals and sec. 2 that does explicitly address the need to tie apportionment to the number of citizens allowed to vote. Using non-citizens to increase a State's representation dilutes the vote of citizens and should be actionable under the 14th Amendment. Is there a lawyer in the house who could please comment?

Back in 1990 I walked around for a few weeks doing census interviews. This is a process that should be treated as a sacred rite with multiple layers of inspection and extreme penalties for fraud, particularly if on the part of staff. The extraordinary casualness of the census and the voting process are the two greatest vulnerabilities in the American polity.

Maybe we should count everyone, dye their finger blue, and then verify that they have a secure ID, and finally verify Selective Service status, in the same process. Failure to register would result in the loss of citizenship rights.

I am becoming ever more persuaded by the idea that no one should be allowed to vote for an election at either level of government if they derive the bulk of their income from that same level of tax authority. The only exception that I can see would be for all enlisted members of the armed forces and officers called to active duty for periods of less than 3 years or during hostilities. I have heard the proposal to draw a distinction between regular civil servants and those engaged in public safety but do not believe that such a distinction could be practically retained.

No comments: