this is a fascinating debate. I listened to my good friend, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Stenholm], talk about the scientists. I do not think you have to be a scientist, rocket or otherwise, to read the plain language of the Constitution: ``The actual enumeration,'' those are not tough words, ``shall be made within 3 years after the first meeting of the Congress.'' And then a constitutional scholar, the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Watt], brought in the entire text. He said, ``in such a manner as they,'' meaning Congress, ``shall by law direct.'' Well, you cannot by law amend the Constitution. You cannot pass a statute and erase the first three words of article I, ``the actual enumeration.'' It is a stretch to ask us to trust the sampling of the population to an administration that has shown, at best, a reckless disregard for the letter and the spirit of the law. It goes beyond the Constitution. We have a statute. Title 13, section 195, says, ``Except for the determination of population for purposes of apportionment of Representatives in Congress among the several States, the secretary shall, if he considers it feasible, authorize the use of the statistical method.'' It specifically excludes counting by sample, by guess, a determination, ``for the purposes of apportionment.'' We want to count everybody. If they are under the bridges, go down there and count them. You are getting paid to count them.…
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the constitutional requirements for population enumeration and the use of statistical methods in apportionment.
Share
More from Henry Hyde
I think our politics has suffered. I hope not a mortal blow, but certainly a serious blow. The name calling, the negativity, the throwing of mud, the institution of the White House, the presidency, and Congress itself. People are looking…
you know, in all contentious discussions, there are a set of imaginary barricades, and people get on one side or on the other. On one side of the barricades, the hypothetical barricades, are people's main concern of prison welfare. They…
that is what I think of the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos). Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out that substantial compliance is accorded to the Secretary of State, so if 38 of the 39 are complied with, the 39th could have been…
someone once said brevity is the soul of eloquence. I shall attempt to emulate that by saying we are happy to accept this excellent amendment.





