August, 08 2018, 12:00am EDT
![Common Cause](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012655/origin.jpg)
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jay Riestenberg, Deputy Communications Director, 202-736-5741, jriestenberg@commoncause.org
Groundswell of Opposition Tells Commerce Department to Scrap the Citizenship Question on 2020 Census
Common Cause joined more than 250,000 individuals and organizations to urge the Commerce Department to remove the citizenship question from the 2020 Census, citing the threat to census accuracy in all communities that will undermine the fair allocation of political representation, public resources, and private investment for the next decade. The organizations represent millions of people from every state and the District of Columbia, as well as diverse urban and rural communities.
WASHINGTON
Common Cause joined more than 250,000 individuals and organizations to urge the Commerce Department to remove the citizenship question from the 2020 Census, citing the threat to census accuracy in all communities that will undermine the fair allocation of political representation, public resources, and private investment for the next decade. The organizations represent millions of people from every state and the District of Columbia, as well as diverse urban and rural communities.
Census stakeholders from a broad range of sectors and geographic areas voiced their concerns about the proposed addition of a new, untested citizenship question as part of a 60-day public comment period before the Census Bureau (an agency of the Commerce Department) finalizes major 2020 Census operations and questionnaire content. Under the public comment process, the Commerce Department must consider and respond (at least in summary terms) to the submissions prior to seeking clearance from the Office of Management and Budget for the 2020 Census plan and questionnaire.
Common Cause and its network of 30 state offices organized nearly 17,000 individual comments to the Commerce Department in opposition to the citizenship question being added to the 2020 Census. Common Cause also submitted comments on behalf of the organization's 1.2 million members and activists, which you can find here.
"Everyday Americans are speaking up for an impartial and accurate Census. Adding a citizenship question will weaponize the census against communities of color, diluting their right to political representation and cutting them off from public spending," said Karen Hobert Flynn, president of Common Cause. "Experts across the political spectrum, and now over 100,000 Americans, have weighed in against the addition of the question. It is well past time for Secretary Ross to remove the citizenship question from the 2020 Census."
"This egregious citizenship question is a political effort to weaponize the census to redefine American democracy for a narrow set of people, and it must not stand" said Vanita Gupta, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference Education Fund. "The Trump administration is trying to fundamentally change what this country is, and aspires to be, by creating different classes of people. The Constitution requires the Census to count each and every person - and the inclusion of this question will sabotage that solemn duty. But it is clear that a diverse community of people and organizations from across the nation are committed to protecting and demanding a fair and accurate census so that no one is left behind."
"We're proud to see so many Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders take the initiative to voice their opinion about the extreme harm the citizenship question is likely to have on getting an accurate census count of our communities," said John C. Yang, president and executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC. "With so many in our community who are either children of immigrants or immigrants themselves, this might be the first time they are participating in a census. We need to be sure that a potentially toxic, untested and unnecessary question does not deter our community from being counted accurately."
"Americans across the country have made clear their unequivocal opposition to the politicization of Census 2020 through the addition of a citizenship question," said Arturo Vargas, chief executive officer of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund. "If implemented, this harmful and costly decision would have far reaching implications for Latinos and all Americans, depressing response rates and threatening the fair and equitable distribution of political representation and billions of dollars in federal funding. As policymakers at all levels -- federal, state and local -- our nation's Latino officials rely on a full and dynamic picture of who is residing in their communities in order to focus critical resources and act in the best interests of their constituents. We will continue to fight against the addition of this question in both Congress and the courts to ensure that Latino policymakers are able to do their jobs effectively and that the U.S. Census Bureau's mission of counting every single person living in this country each decade, regardless of age, citizenship, ethnicity or race, is not compromised."
"The addition of a citizenship question to the census is yet another attack on immigrants from this administration," said Jennifer Bellamy, legislative counsel at the ACLU. "Experts agree that the question's inclusion will dramatically reduce the participation of immigrant communities, stunting their growing political influence and depriving them of economic benefits. The impact of lower response rates for communities and states with large immigrant populations will be catastrophic and far-reaching, affecting education, transportation, health care, and voting power. We must stop this question from being included, and ensure that the true purpose of the census--to count all people living in the United States--is protected."
"The census is an essential tool for understanding and shaping our country's economic and social realities," said Thea Lee, president of EPI. "Adding an untested, disruptive, and controversial question, which will certainly deter key groups from participating in the decennial count, is policy malpractice. The administration should listen to the tens of thousands of policymakers, economists, sociologists, and members of the public who have weighed in, and withdraw its flawed proposal immediately."
"The addition of a citizenship question targets Black communities and other communities of color," said Rashad Robinson, president of Color of Change. "Trump and his cronies Jeff Sessions and Wilbur Ross at the Commerce Department are changing the rules with the simple goal: to make Black people, people of color and our communities invisible. If they can say we don't exist through the Census, then they can chip away at our right to vote, at fair inclusion of our communities in critical resources and make the American Dream that much harder to realize. This is a long held project of the same forces that defend white nationalists who march in American cities and chip away at school integration and voter protection -- more than ever we must stand up, push back and hold those who enable this behavior accountable."
" Donald Trump is trying to use the census to rig elections for Republicans until 2030," said Heidi Hess, co-director ofCREDO Action. "If a discriminatory citizenship question is included in the 2020 census it could result in a major undercounting of immigrant communities. It's a desperate attempt to supercharge right-wing gerrymandering and voter suppression - and the public sees right through it."
"A fair and accurate Census is crucial to equitable distribution of our nation's resources and political power for the next decade, and the last-minute, haphazard addition of a question designed to diminish participation from communities already at high risk of being undercounted must not be permitted," said Carolyn Fiddler, communications director at Daily Kos. "The government has a constitutional duty to correctly count every person living in the United States, regardless of citizenship status, and questioning respondents' citizenship will depress participation and skew counts in already-underserved populations. We call on the Department of Commerce to keep this untested, unnecessary question off of the 2020 Census."
"Thousands of MomsRising members submitted comments to the Secretary of Commerce because we recognize that a discriminatory question that drives down participation in the Census and forces an undercount of immigrants would cause grave harm," said Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, executive director and CEO of MomsRising, the online and on-the-ground organization of more than one million mothers and their families. "This is another disgraceful attack on immigrants - another example of the Trump administration using racism and xenophobia to divide us. The moms of America want discriminatory questions removed from the Census so we can get an accurate count, which in turn will support fair distribution of health, housing, education and other resources to our communities.
"It's critical that the census provide an accurate picture of every community in our country," said Marge Baker, executive vice president of People For the American Way. "Adding an untested, politically motivated question about citizenship dangerously undermines that goal. Adding this question to the census won't help anyone learn more about the makeup of our country, but it will make more people nervous about participating in the census. That may be good news for political activists who want to dilute the power of communities of color, but it's very bad news for our country as a whole and for anyone who cares about our democracy."
"Adding a citizenship question to our census threatens to erase immigrants from our country's records," said Bridgette Gomez, director of Latino leadership and engagement at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "If you aren't accounted for, you do not exist as far as resource distribution is concerned. We know immigrants already have a very difficult time accessing health care, as lack of health insurance and fear of detention and deportation have driven communities farther and farther into the shadows under the Trump administration. At Planned Parenthood, we believe that no one's access to services should be compromised because they belong to an immigrant family or community. We strongly condemn the Trump-Pence administration's addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 census. And we are committed to fighting alongside a bipartisan group of former census directors, our communities, and partners to speak against this injustice."
"Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross directed the Census Bureau to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census form for one reason only: To intimidate and frighten recent immigrants - including both citizens and noncitizens - so they don't fill out their census form. In overwhelming numbers, Americans are denouncing his not-so-disguised anti-immigrant cruelty and demanding the question be removed, so the Census can meet its constitutional obligation to deliver a true and accurate count," said Robert Weissman, president, Public Citizen.
"The American people will not tolerate the Trump Administration exploiting the census in order to carry out their racist and xenophobic policies," said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club. "Donald Trump cannot decide which communities receive support, and which don't have access to clean air and water. It's reprehensible that Donald Trump would try to blatantly undermine the Constitution. But together, with our allies and the hundreds of thousands of Americans across the country that have already spoken, we will protect the integrity of the census, protect our democracy, and protect our communities and the environment."
To view this release online, click here.
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest, and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process.
(202) 833-1200LATEST NEWS
Critics Warn Manchin-Barrasso Permitting Bill 'Is Taken Straight From Project 2025'
"You thought Project 2025 was just a threat after the election? It's actually happening *right now,*" said one climate campaigner.
Jul 26, 2024
Climate and environmental defenders on this week implored U.S. senators to block a permitting reform bill introduced this week by Sens. Joe Manchin and John Barrasso that one campaigner linked to Project 2025, a conservative coalition's agenda for a far-right overhaul of the federal government.
Common Dreamsreported Monday that Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Barrasso (R-Wyo.)—respectively the chair and ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee—introduced the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) noted that although the proposal "includes several positive reforms for the accelerated development of transmission projects," it also advocates "limiting opportunities for communities to challenge projects, loosening oversight for drilling and mining projects, extending drilling permits and fast-tracking [liquified natural gas] permits, and several other provisions friendly to fossil fuel giants."
"This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
These are nearly identical policies to what's proposed in Project 2025's Mandate for Leadership. The plan, which was spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, calls for "unleashing all of America's energy resources," including by ending federal restrictions on fossil fuel drilling on public lands; limiting investments in renewable energy; and rolling back environmental permitting restrictions for new oil, gas, and coal projects, including power plants.
While Manchin has been trying—and failing—to pass fossil fuel-friendly permitting reform legislation for years, Brett Hartl, director of public affairs at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that his "Frankenstein legislation is taken straight from Project 2025, and it's the biggest giveaway in decades to the fossil fuel industry."
Hartl said the bill "deprives communities of the power to defend themselves and gives that power to Big Oil by making it harder for communities to challenge polluting projects in court," and "prioritizes the profits of coal barons over public health."
"And it mandates oil and gas extraction in our oceans," he continued. "The insignificant crumbs thrown at renewable energy do nothing to address the climate emergency."
"Monday was the hottest day in recorded history," Hartl noted. "It's shocking that as the climate emergency continues to break records around us, the Senate continues to fast-track the fossil fuel expansion that is killing us. This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
Hartl added that "to preserve a livable planet," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) "must squash this legislation now."
Manchin—who has said this will be his last term in office—has been a steadfast supporter of the fossil fuel industry, partly because his family owns a coal company. The senator says his permitting reform bill "will advance American energy once again to bring down prices, create domestic jobs, and allow us to continue in our role as a global energy leader."
However, Allie Rosenbluth, Oil Change International's U.S. manager, warned Thursday that "this bill is yet another dangerous attempt by Sen. Manchin to line the pockets of his fossil fuel donors, sacrificing communities and our climate along the way."
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else," she continued. "It would unleash more drilling on federal lands and waters, unnecessarily rush the review of proposed oil and gas export projects, and lift the Biden administration's pause on new LNG exports."
"We urge Congress to reject this proposal and commit to action that protects frontline communities from the impacts of fossil fuel development and the climate crisis," Rosenbluth added.
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else."
NRDC managing director of government affairs Alexandra Adams said Wednesday that "this bill is a giveaway for the oil and gas industry that will ramp up drilling and environmental destruction at a time when we need to be putting a hard stop to fossil fuels."
"We cannot afford to roll back so many of our bedrock environmental and community legal protections and offer a blank check to the oil and gas industry," she stressed. "We need new solutions for permitting if we are going to meet our clean energy potential and address the climate challenge. But this is not it."
"This bill would altogether be a leap backward on climate, health, and justice if passed into law," Adams added. "The Senate should reject it and look toward alternative solutions already being considered."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Nothing To Eat': War-Torn Sudan Faces Mass Famine as Military Delays Aid
Both parties in Sudan's civil war are to blame for a looming mass famine, experts say, and the military's blocking of U.N. aid at a border crossing with Chad exacerbates the problem.
Jul 26, 2024
Sudan's military is blocking United Nations aid trucks from entering at a key border crossing, causing severe disruptions in aid in a country that experts fear may be on the brink of one of the worst famines the world has seen in decades, The New York Timesreported Friday.
The border city of Adré in eastern Chad is the main international crossing into the Darfur region of Sudan, but the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), the state's official military, which is engaged in a civil war with a paramilitary group called the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has refused to issue permits for U.N. trucks to enter there, as it's an RSF-controlled area.
U.S. and international officials have issued increasingly alarmed calls for steady aid access to help feed the millions of severely malnourished people in Darfur and other areas of Sudan.
Last week, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the United States ambassador to the U.N., said that the SAF's obstruction of the border was "completely unacceptable."
Both warring parties in Sudan continue to perpetrate brazen atrocities, including starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. This piece focuses on the SAF's ongoing obstruction of essential aid. The situation is catastrophic. The policy is criminal. https://t.co/FKhqQh3EI9.
— Tom Dannenbaum (@tomdannenbaum) July 26, 2024
The Sudanese who've made it out of the country and into Adré reported dire and unsafe conditions in their home country.
"We had nothing to eat," Bahja Muhakar, a Sudenese mother of three, told the Times after she crossed into Chad, following a harrowing six-day journey from Al-Fashir, a major city in Darfur. She said the family often had to live off of one shared pancake per day.
Another mother, Dahabaya Ibet, said that her 20-month-old boy had to bear witness to his grandfather being shot and killed in front of his eyes when the family home in Darfur was attacked by gunmen late last year.
Now the mothers and their families are refugees in Adré, where 200,000 Sudanese are living in an overcrowded, under-resourced transit camp.
In addition to those that have made it out of the country, there are 11 million people internally displaced within Sudan, most of whom have become displaced since the civil war began in April 2023.
An unnamed senior American official told the Times that the looming famine in Sudan could be as bad as the 2011 famine in Somalia or even the great Ethiopian famine of the 1980s.
In April, Reutersreported that people in Sudan were eating soil and leaves to survive, and The Washington Postcalled it a nation in "chaos," reporting that World Food Program trucks had been "blocked, hijacked, attacked, looted, and detained."
In late June, a coalition of U.N. agencies, aid groups, and governments warned that 755,000 people in Sudan faced famine in the coming months.
The U.S. last week announced $203 million in additional aid to Sudan—part of a $2.1 billion pledge that world leaders made in April, which some countries have not yet delivered on.
Some officials including Thomas-Greenfield, who has dubbed the situation in Sudan "the worst humanitarian crisis in the world," have called for the U.N. Security Council to allow aid delivery into the country even in the absence of SAF approval; it's believed that Russia would veto such a measure.
Sudan's civil war has seen a great deal of international interference. Amnesty International on Thursday published an investigatory briefing showing that weapons from Russia, China, Serbia, Turkey, Yemen, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had been identified in the country. And The Guardian on Friday reported that the passports of Emirati citizens had been found among wreckage in Sudan, indicating the UAE may have troops or intelligence officers on the ground, though the UAE denied the accusation.
The International Service for Human Rights on Friday warned that both the SAF and RSF were engaged in wrongful killings and arrests, especially targeted at lawyers, doctors, and activists. The group called for an immediate cease-fire.
The SAF and Sudanese government figures have cast doubt on international experts' claims about famine in the country.
Keep ReadingShow Less
JD Vance Doubles Down on Attack on 'Childless Cat Ladies'
Vance "meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children."
Jul 26, 2024
After days of condemnation from critics including actress Jennifer Aniston and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, U.S. Sen. JD Vance was given the opportunity on Thursday to clarify his remarks from 2021 in which he said the Democratic Party was run by "childless cat ladies."
Instead, the Ohio Republican and running mate of former President Donald Trump assured SiriusXM host Megyn Kelly on "The Megyn Kelly Show" that while he has "nothing against cats," he meant what he said in terms of "the substance" of his argument.
Vance made it clear, said Aaron Fritschner, deputy chief of staff for Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), "that he meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children."
The comments in question were made by Vance to then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson when Vance was running for the Senate.
Calling out Buttigieg—who, the secretary disclosed this week, was struggling at the time to adopt a child with his husband—and Vice President Kamala Harris, a stepmother of two and the Democratic Party's presumptive presidential nominee, Vance said people without biological children "don't really have a direct stake in" the future of the country and therefore shouldn't hold higher office.
In separate remarks that same year, Vance said parents should "have more power" at the voting booth and that "if you don't have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn't get nearly the same voice."
He also specifically categorized people who don't have children as "bad" in an interview in 2021, saying the government should "reward the things that we think are good" and "punish the things that we think are bad," with people taxed at a lower rate if they have children.
While a spokesperson for Vance told ABC News that the senator's taxation proposal was "basically no different" than the child tax credit supported by the Democratic Party, Democrats who have pushed for the credit have heralded its proven ability to slash child poverty rates and help families afford groceries, childcare, and other essentials, rather than viewing the tax savings as a way to reward people for procreating.
In his interview with Kelly on Thursday, Vance attempted to pivot away from his own comments, saying his point was to criticize "the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-child" and claiming without evidence that the Harris campaign had "come out against the child tax credit"—a signature policy of the Biden-Harris administration.
"I'm proud to stand for parents and I hope that parents out there recognize that I'm a guy who wants to fight for you," said Vance. "The Democrats, in the past five, 10 years, Megyn, they have become anti-family. It's built into their policy, it's built into the way they talk about parents and children. I don't think we should back down from it, I think we should be honest about the problem."
Vance and Kelly went on to lament the anxiety "hardcore environmentalists" and progressive lawmakers such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) have expressed about the damage fossil fuel extraction is doing the planet, accusing them of pushing people to forgo having families—but said nothing about Republican policies that have made child-rearing less accessible.
In recent years, the entire Republican caucus in Congress was joined by conservative then-Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia in blocking the extension of the enhanced child tax credit, which had been credited with cutting the national child poverty rate in half. Republicans also allowed a pandemic-era universal school meal program to expire, while several Democratic-led states have passed state-level programs to ensure all children can have meals at school, regardless of their family's income.
Under Republican abortion bans, numerous stories have cropped up of pregnant people who have been forced to carry pregnancies to term despite finding out that their fetuses had fatal abnormalities and would die soon after birth—as have stories of children who were forced to give birth or had to cross state lines in order to get abortion care.
As with his position that nonparents should be "punished" for not having children, "who else does 'pro-child/family' Vance think should 'face consequences and reality' by way of curtailing choices, rights, and freedoms?" asked writer Alheli Picazo. "Women and girls who become pregnant through rape/incest."
University of North Carolina law professor Carissa Byrne Hessick said that one could test "empirically" Vance's claim that Democratic policies are anti-family.
"But I haven't heard the GOP talk much about things that would help my family and my kids," she said, "like reducing childcare and tuition costs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular