>>However, the U.S. Constitution specifically calls for counting "people." Every census before has used the total number of people to allocate House seats. A citizen-based allocation would shift 3-4 seats to states with fewer immigrants.<<

Vitter’s proposal is unconstitutional. The Census has never been done the way he is suggesting. Whether people are citizens, they live in the US and need services. Remember most of the non citizens are here legally. The GOP is just trying to get a larger share of the pie.

>> If the U.S. Constitution demands that "people" be counted,  that means every warm body within the borders of the U.S.  <<

The way I see it, the laws the House of Representatives pass apply to citizens and non-citizens alike, with a few exceptions like voting laws.  This is particularly important when it comes to distributing funding to states according to population.  Mr. Vitter may not like it, but legal and non-legal immigrants DO impact state budgets, and states with large non-citizen populations should have increased representation accordingly.

All the data you need is at the Census website, but you have to dig.  To find the number of non-citizens in each state:

Citizenship status is down the page.  For the U.S.

PLACE OF BIRTH, CITIZENSHIP STATUS AND YEAR OF ENTRY
Native	263,558,111	+/-78,951
Male	49.1%	+/-0.1
Female	50.9%	+/-0.1
Foreign born	37,679,592	+/-78,975
Male	50.3%	+/-0.1
Female	49.7%	+/-0.1
Foreign born; naturalized U.S. citizen	16,028,758	+/-35,384
Male	46.6%	+/-0.1
Female	53.4%	+/-0.1
Foreign born; not a U.S. citizen	21,650,834	+/-74,931
Male	53.1%	+/-0.1
Female	46.9%	+/-0.1
Population born outside the United States	37,679,592	+/-78,975
Entered 2000 or later	27.6%	+/-0.1
Entered 1990 to 1999	29.4%	+/-0.1
Entered before 1990	43.1%	+/-0.1

>>Whatever happened to the strict constitutionalists on the Republican side? If the U.S. Constitution demands that "people" be counted, that means every warm body within the borders of the U.S.<<

They feel that they can make the Constitution say and do anything they want as long as it is to their benefit.

Remember, this is the Party of George W Bush II.

Path-->>However, the U.S. Constitution specifically calls for counting "people."

Persons and not all persons are counted for apportionment.

Sarah Palin for 2012 - 2014 ½ :
When the going gets tough, quit.

>> Obvious. <<

Your point is to prove you can find microscopic nits?  Yeah, that's obvious. 

Sarah Palin for 2012 - 2014 ½ :
When the going gets tough, quit.

Sarah Palin for 2012 - 2014 ½ :
When the going gets tough, quit.

<<<Vitter’s proposal is unconstitutional.>

I don't believe it has been substantiated that his proposal is unconstitutional.

I believe that if bill was enacted and signed by the president that the census-takers ask the question of whether a person is a citizen, it would be constitutional to ask such a question.

Congress and the president would have to act positively to do what Senator Vitter wants and it is highly unlikely that that will occur but if that did happen, I believe it would be constitutional for the census to contain such a question and it would be constitutional for congressional and electoral representation to be based only upon the total number of citizens in each state and each congressional district.

Keith