H.R.151 - Equal Representation Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R. 151, the Equal Representation Act, proposes to amend Title 13 of the United States Code to include a citizenship question on the decennial census. It also mandates the Secretary to make publicly available the number of persons per state, disaggregated by citizenship status. The bill further seeks to modify the apportionment of Representatives to be based on the number of United States citizens instead of all persons, amending the Act of June 18, 1929.
Expected Effects
If enacted, H.R. 151 would change how the population is counted for the purpose of congressional apportionment, potentially shifting representation among states. This could lead to altered political power dynamics at the federal level. The inclusion of a citizenship question on the census could also affect response rates, particularly among non-citizen populations.
Potential Benefits
- Potentially more accurate representation of citizens' interests.
- Increased transparency through detailed reporting of citizenship data.
- May lead to a more focused allocation of federal resources based on citizen population.
- Could strengthen the concept of civic responsibility and engagement.
- May provide a clearer picture of the citizen versus non-citizen population distribution.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential undercounting of the total population due to fear or distrust among non-citizens.
- Possible legal challenges based on the 14th Amendment's interpretation of 'persons'.
- Increased costs associated with implementing and processing the citizenship question.
- Risk of decreased census response rates, leading to inaccurate data.
- Potential for political manipulation of citizenship data.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is debatable. Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment discusses the apportionment of representatives among the several states “according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.” The proposed change to base apportionment on citizenship rather than the total number of persons could be challenged as a violation of this amendment. However, proponents may argue for a different interpretation of 'persons'.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).