Editor, Daily Press:

Had the Daily Press editorial in the July 7 edition been written by someone who is 30 years old or younger, I would have taken it in stride and ignored it. After all, they have never been exposed to anything resembling a course in social studies or history or government while attending our public schools (with the passable exception of some parts of Oklahoma and the rest of the South).

But when something like this piece is written by a supposedly well-educated editor of a newspaper, it is very disappointing to those of us with any historical perspective. The Supreme Court does have the final say, but they have yet to rule on whether the federal government can include the citizenship question on the census. The case has been sent back to the lower court for additional hearing. And only those on the far left consider John Roberts to be a conservative. From my perspective, he is nothing of the sort, and was not considered so when he was put on the court by any but the left.

I would be very pleased if the editor would be so kind as to delineate for us all the "less-expensive - and less intrusive - ways of determining citizenship," since no one else seems to be able to articulate such an animal. No ways ever conceived by mankind seem to be suitable or acceptable to those on the left, and especially now that they are attempting to outlaw singling out and apprehending criminal aliens. And let us not forget that all "illegal immigrants" are here illegally. Their first act on arrival to this country was to break the law by entering illegally. As such, they are not citizens of this country and are not covered by any constitutional protections, other than those created from thin air by liberal judges (unconstitutionally) or by Congress. And even those are extra-Constitutional and are by definition unconstitutional.

For those who have not read the Constitution, the 10-year census is designed to determine representation in Congress (the House of Representatives) based on the citizenship numbers in a given area, and nothing else constitutionally. Non-citizens are not counted in those numbers except for those who have immigrated and have legal status. But even these immigrants cannot vote legally in federal elections. There is no provision in the Constitution or the amendments for counting non-citizens without legal status, and this same question has been asked on the census for most of the history of this country.

Fire, police and emergency services are local services and are only loosely-based on census data. However, since young people across the country are now mostly ignorant of the Constitution and the functioning of our government, they fall easy prey to equally-ignorant people with a microphone. Such people are now free to say whatever they please without fear of correction, unlike even 10 years ago.

Dr. Jonathan C. Jobe

Crescent Valley

Recommended for you