One Citizen, One Seat Act
H.R. 5743, the One Citizen, One Seat Act, would require the Census Bureau to revise the 2020 decennial census population counts by state to include only United States citizens. The Secretary of Commerce would need to provide each state with its revised citizen-only population within 60 days of enactment. Beginning 60 days after that distribution, no federal grant could be awarded to a state unless the state uses the revised citizen-only tabulation for all purposes for which the original tabulation would have been used, and does not use the tabulation for any other purposes. In effect, the bill ties federal funding and, potentially, congressional representation to a citizen-only population count rather than to the full count of all residents. The bill is framed as a method to base outcomes (including House seats) on citizen counts. It would alter how population-based allocations and funding are calculated, likely reducing states with large noncitizen populations in both representation and certain federal funding formulas, while increasing relative standing for states with larger citizen populations.
Key Points
- 1The bill requires the Census Bureau to revise the 2020 decennial census state population tabulation to count only United States citizens (citizen-only population).
- 2The revised citizen-only tabulation must be provided to each state within 60 days after enactment.
- 3Starting 60 days after a state receives the revised tabulation, no federal grant may be awarded to that state unless it uses only the revised citizen-only tabulation for all purposes for which the original tabulation would have been used, and does not use the tabulation for any other purposes.
- 4The change would affect how population-based allocations are used, including the allocation of House seats (the “One Citizen, One Seat” framing suggests seats would be based on citizen counts).
- 5The bill could face constitutional and legal challenges given the constitutional requirement that apportionment is based on “persons” rather than citizens, and potential conflicts with longstanding interpretations of census data and representation.