A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The "Make It Count Act" requires the 2030 decennial census and all future censuses to include a question asking if individuals are citizens, nationals, lawful aliens, or unlawful aliens. The Secretary must make the number of persons in each of these four categories per state publicly available. The bill changes how Representatives and electoral votes are apportioned by excluding noncitizens from the count. It also prevents states from redistricting for Congress more than once after an apportionment, unless ordered by a court. These redistricting limits do not apply to state or local office elections.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +5
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill requires the Secretary to make disaggregated citizenship data publicly available.
- Scored +4
Does this give the federal government more power?
The federal government takes direct control over census questions and the formula for apportionment.
- Scored +3
Does this give the government more power to monitor people inside the country?
The requirement to track citizenship status of all household members increases government surveillance of residents.
The opposite· 3 of 7
- Scored -9
Would immigrants be better off under this?
Immigrants are excluded from the apportionment count and must disclose their legal status on the census.
- Scored -7
Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this?
Noncitizen exclusion from apportionment likely reduces representation in states with high Hispanic populations.
- Scored -5
Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated?
Excluding noncitizens from apportionment may disproportionately reduce representation for areas with high immigrant populations.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Public Data Access: Section 2(g)(2) requires the Secretary to make publicly available the number of persons per state disaggregated by citizenship status, providing specific census statistics.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Exclusion from Representation: Section 3(a) modifies the apportionment of Representatives and electoral votes to exclude individuals who are not citizens of the United States, meaning they are not counted for the purpose of determining how many Representatives a state receives.
- Redistricting Restrictions: Section 4(a) prohibits states from carrying out more than one Congressional redistricting after an apportionment, unless a court requires it to comply with the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would immigrants be better off under this? — Immigrants are excluded from the apportionment count and must disclose their legal status on the census. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Noncitizen exclusion from apportionment likely reduces representation in states with high Hispanic populations. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban areas often have higher noncitizen populations, potentially losing congressional representation.
- Education And Technology
- Does this give people more control over their personal data? — The bill mandates the collection of sensitive citizenship data for all residents.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this give the government more power to monitor people inside the country? — The requirement to track citizenship status of all household members increases government surveillance of residents.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — The bill increases data collection on unlawful aliens via the census. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Excluding noncitizens from apportionment may disproportionately reduce representation for areas with high immigrant populations.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires the Secretary to make disaggregated citizenship data publicly available. Does this give the federal government more power? — The federal government takes direct control over census questions and the formula for apportionment. Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — Requiring residents to disclose citizenship status on the census may be viewed as an intrusion of privacy. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill limits the ability of states to redistrict their congressional districts more than once per decade.
- 1/21/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.