Census - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

rahl · 08-27-2009, 01:52 PM

I had a business trip today and while driving I thought I would listen to some talk radio to see what all the fuss is about. On both beck and rush I heard them say to either not respond to the 2010 census or to only fill out the number in the household and that's it. What is the purpose of this?

shakran · 08-27-2009, 01:57 PM

They're trying to scare the dumber individuals in our society into thinking that the big bad government is using the census to spy on you. Minnesota Representative Michelle "Loony Tunes" Bachman (the same woman who thinks Obama is not only Muslim, but is in fact an actual terrorist) is the one that first spouted this theory. They seem to be trying to parrot her.

SecretMethod70 · 08-27-2009, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakran

They're trying to scare the dumber individuals in our society into thinking that the big bad government is using the census to spy on you. Minnesota Representative Michelle "Loony Tunes" Bachman (the same woman who thinks Obama is not only Muslim, but is in fact an actual terrorist) is the one that first spouted this theory. They seem to be trying to parrot her.

What he said.

Frankly, anyone who listens to this advice gets what they deserve. They'll end up being underrepresented in the results and potentially lose congressional districts and voices in congress.

The_Dunedan · 08-27-2009, 02:03 PM

Resistance to filling out the new, longer Census form goes back for at least the last two cycles. Various elements within the libertarian/anarchist community were urging the same type of monkeywrenching last time around, and were denounced by the O'Reilly/Beck/Limbaugh/Hannity crowd as paranoid, anti-American, anti-government crackpots.

Some folks object to the increasingly invasive nature of the questions (with newly-increased penalties for noncompliance). Others worry about the politicization of the Census (and since it's now under direct White House control, with ACORN doing a lot of the leg-work and promotions, they may have a point), with particular concern about its' potentially being used in politically- or racially-biased gerrymandering. The concern about ACORN is overblown, IMO, but given their recent and shameless Obama partisanship and willingness to engage in issue-specific advocacy and endorsement (in direct violation of the law as a 501 tax-exempt organization) I wouldn't be surprised at all if they -tried- to effect the Census in some way. Thankfully, ACORN seems to be almost as incompetent as they are corrupt, so this one doesn't really worry me personally.

samcol · 08-27-2009, 02:09 PM

If they ask me I'm only going to say the number of people and that's it. There's no reason to go more in depth.

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 02:11 PM

I think they have two concerns...the one stated above by Dunedan that the longer form (the American Community Survey) is too intrusive (perhaps) and unconstitional (false)

And that ACORN is "doing alot of the leg-work and promotions" or being given a grant by Census (Michelle Bachman claim)....also false. ACORN is one of more than a thousand organizations, including the American Baptist Churches of the South, Boys and Girls Clubs, National Civic League...that have agreed to be Census "partners" and promote the Census.

Personally, I think Beck, Limbaugh are ultimately cutting of their nose to spite their face since the data is used not only for reapportionment, but also for federal grants to state/locals, etc.

The more Bech/Limbaugh followers who chose to break the law (yes, it is breaking the law to refuse to fill out the long form or to fill it out falsely), the less of their followers will be counted.

rahl · 08-27-2009, 02:13 PM

From the little bit that I heard on the radio, they were saying if you ignore the census and you have some legal punishment for it that it would get thrown out because it's unconstitutional. If this isn't true could beck and rush be in some sort of legal trouble themselves for giving bad legal advise?

samcol · 08-27-2009, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rahl

From the little bit that I heard on the radio, they were saying if you ignore the census and you have some legal punishment for it that it would get thrown out because it's unconstitutional. If this isn't true could beck and rush be in some sort of legal trouble themselves for giving bad legal advise?

The only thing you are legally obligated to give them is the number of people in your house, not all the other bogus questions.

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by samcol

The only thing you are legally obligated to give them is the number of people in your house, not all the other bogus questions.

Not according to the law.

Quote:

§ 221. Refusal or neglect to answer questions; false answers

(a) Whoever, being over eighteen years of age, refuses or willfully neglects, when requested by the Secretary, or by any other authorized officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof acting under the instructions of the Secretary or authorized officer, to answer, to the best of his knowledge, any of the questions on any schedule submitted to him in connection with any census or survey provided for by subchapters I, II, IV, and V of chapter 5 of this title, applying to himself or to the family to which he belongs or is related, or to the farm or farms of which he or his family is the occupant, shall be fined not more than $100.

(b) Whoever, when answering questions described in subsection (a) of this section, and under the conditions or circumstances described in such subsection, willfully gives any answer that is false, shall be fined not more than $500.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, no person shall be compelled to disclose information relative to his religious beliefs or to membership in a religious body.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1...1----000-.html

Beyond the fine, your Congressional district will potentially lose big bucks (for the next 10 years), in the form of federal tax dollars returned to cities/states in numerous grant programs, if the undercount is significant enough by those who feel the need to protest.

The ultimate irony would be for Michelle Bachman's district to be so undercounted as a result of refusal of her loyal constituents to answer any questions to the point that she is re-districted out and loses her Congressional seat.

Cimarron29414 · 08-27-2009, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Not according to the law.

An as of yet unchallenged and (in my opinion) unconstitutional law. The Constitition states that the people will be counted for the purpose of apportionment. It does not state that you count their race, gender, income, religion, favorite color, dog's middle name, etc.

I for one will answer the enumeration question only. I may be fined. I will pay the fine and then sue.

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

An as of yet unchallenged and (in my opinion) unconstitutional law. The Constitition states that the people will be counted for the purpose of apportionment. It does not state that you count their race, gender, income, religion, favorite color, dog's middle name, etc.

I for one will answer the enumeration question only. I may be fined. I will pay the fine and then sue.

What the Constitution says is:

The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.

The law is codified.

roachboy · 08-27-2009, 02:41 PM

i understand what the dunedan said--i don't agree with it, particularly not the nonsense about acorn, but whatever---but i wonder if there's something more to this action from the far right. what are they worried about exactly? the census is a useful policy tool at all levels of government: it's good to know populations, its good to know more information rather than less if you want to fashion coherent policy. don't you think?

because of what i worked on academically, i know more about the ways in which census data is used in the french context than in the american--there it's one of the more base-level datasets for the technocratic aspects of policy formation and implementation. it's also an ideological grid, but any survey no matter who does it is an ideological grid one way or another.

so i don't get it. is there more to these objections than what dunedan outlined?
btw this is a real question.
i genuinely am baffled by it.
maybe if i end up not spending the next couple days tied up with a music festival, i'll do some research, but haven't yet.

Cimarron29414 · 08-27-2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

What the Constitution says is:

The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.

The law is codified.

Enumeration means 1,2,3,4,5... "manner" means "how will you count them - door to door, survey, phone (obviously not relevant at the time). It doesn't mean what they can do it means they have the freedom as to HOW they can count.

samcol · 08-27-2009, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Not according to the law.

Beyond the fine, your Congressional district will potentially lose big bucks (for the next 10 years), in the form of federal tax dollars returned to cities/states in numerous grant programs, if the undercount is significant enough by those who feel the need to protest.

The ultimate irony would be for Michelle Bachman's district to be so undercounted as a result of refusal of her loyal constituents to answer any questions to the point that she is re-districted out and loses her Congressional seat.

I stand corrected. However, I thought that the only thing you had to provide was the number of people in the house due to what it says in the constitution. The other thing that solidified this in my mind was the countless people I've heard of that only answered the number of household members and were never fined or arrested.

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

Enumeration means 1,2,3,4,5... such manner means "how will you count them - door to door, survey, phone (obviously not relevant at the time). It doesn't mean what they can do it means they have the freedom as to HOW they can count.

Good luck on your court challenge!

BTW, I agree the long form is cumbersome and potentially intrusive, but I see the value of the data and dont see the nefarious intent projected by some (not you).

rahl · 08-27-2009, 02:47 PM

What beck was going on about was that the information would be redundant. He claimed that questions like how many square feet your house is or how man bedrooms is already a matter of public record and therefore doesn't need to be answered. I myself have never completed a census before. Not for any reason in particular, I don't think I ever received any info on it. I have been a homeowner for 4 years and haven't had any legal ramifications yet.

Cimarron29414 · 08-27-2009, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

i understand what the dunedan said--i don't agree with it, particularly not the nonsense about acorn, but whatever---but i wonder if there's something more to this action from the far right. what are they worried about exactly? the census is a useful policy tool at all levels of government: it's good to know populations, its good to know more information rather than less if you want to fashion coherent policy. don't you think?

because of what i worked on academically, i know more about the ways in which census data is used in the french context than in the american--there it's one of the more base-level datasets for the technocratic aspects of policy formation and implementation. it's also an ideological grid, but any survey no matter who does it is an ideological grid one way or another.

so i don't get it. is there more to these objections than what dunedan outlined?
btw this is a real question.
i genuinely am baffled by it.
maybe if i end up not spending the next couple days tied up with a music festival, i'll do some research, but haven't yet.

My answer in the simplest form is that the census in its current form is used to grow government - specifically the federal government. As you are aware, I oppose federal growth of the government.

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by samcol

I stand corrected. However, I thought that the only thing you had to provide was the number of people in the house due to what it says in the constitution. The other thing that solidified this in my mind was the countless people I've heard of that only answered the number of household members and were never fined or arrested.

I would guess it is highly unlikely that you would be fined, unless you go on Limbaugh and brag about it, and certainly wont be arrested.

The negative implications are of the federal tax dollar distribution formulas.

Cimarron29414 · 08-27-2009, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by samcol

I stand corrected. However, I thought that the only thing you had to provide was the number of people in the house due to what it says in the constitution. The other thing that solidified this in my mind was the countless people I've heard of that only answered the number of household members and were never fined or arrested.

Don't dispair. The law he states is just that, a law. It is not "the Constitution." Laws get overturned all the time. Don't change your intent. I will happily pay $100 to fight this law. I already have two constitutional lawyers willing to fight the fine for free.
Who knows how far we can take it.

BTW, last census, I listed all of my family as "Native Americans", as we were all born here. I'll bet I just pissed some of you off.

biznatch · 08-27-2009, 02:52 PM

So what's the underlying "fear" or downside to this Census? Is it not wanting to give too much information to the government?

I wouldn't mind letting them know basic information. Hell, if you pay taxes, you're giving the IRS quite a bit of info on yourself already, right?

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 03:03 PM

In fact, there is a change for 2010:

Quote:

Goodbye Long Form

In the past, most households received a short-form questionnaire, while one household in six received a long form that contained additional questions and provided more detailed socioeconomic information about the population.

The 2010 Census will be a short-form only census and will count all residents living in the United States as well as ask for name, sex, age, date of birth, race, ethnicity, relationship and housing tenure – taking just minutes to complete.

The more detailed socioeconomic information is now collected through the American Community Survey. The survey provides current data about your community every year, rather than once every 10 years. It is sent to a small percentage of the population on a rotating basis throughout the decade. No household will receive the survey more often than once every five years.

2010 Census: 2010 Census is Different

If you get the American Community Survey (pdf - 14 pages of questions), you might have reason to bitch..but it is still required by law.

roachboy · 08-27-2009, 03:09 PM

just because information exists at one administrative level doesn't mean that other levels have access to it.
you should look into what a problem it is to collect crime statistics nationally as a function of this information fragmentation. similar situation--though not as extreme--with epidemological information. and god knows what chaos there was when information sharing did happen effectively--why there were all those spies for the dept of agriculture about at one point providing soil and geological data and doing ph tests for farmers & gardeners---what were they really up to?

around here there are lots of fishermen. as an industry, regional fishing pursued rational self-interest in a relatively unregulated context to the point that they fished themselves out of a livelihood--you know, rationally using draggers that rationally destroyed the ecosystems that the fish they depended on required to reproduce. when the feds stepped in to put a stop to it, alot of fishermen blamed the regulations put in place to stop the wholesale destruction of the regional aquatic habitat for the problems that they had themselves created in the first place. so people think all kinds of stupid stuff, even in the face of reality, when it's right next to them.

are there questions about political affiliation on the census?

ottopilot · 08-27-2009, 03:12 PM

Congress has “directed” in Title 13 that the Census be carried out by the Bureau of the Census “as an agency within, and under the jurisdiction of, the Department of Commerce.” 13 U.S.C. 2. The Secretary of Commerce is directed to carry out the duties of this title and while he can delegate “the performance of such functions and duties,” he can only do so to “officers and employees of the Department of Commerce.” 13 U.S.C. 4.

If the Director of the Census now reports to the White House instead of the Secretary of Commerce, and the Census is not carrired out by officers of the Department of Commerce, penalty for non-compliance would be difficult to prosecute. Execution of the census without Commerce Dept. oversight is likely in violation of federal law and should be challenged.

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

If the Director of the Census now reports to the White House instead of the Secretary of Commerce, and the Census is not carrired out by officers of the Department of Commerce, penalty for non-compliance would be difficult to prosecute. Execution of the census without Commerce Dept. oversight is likely in violation of federal law and should be challenged.

Another myth. The White House intent is to be in the loop, not the agency to which the Census Director reports.

ottopilot · 08-27-2009, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Another myth. The White House intent is to be in the loop, not the agency to which the Census Director reports.

I just cited where federal law dictates who is legally required to conduct the Census, and it doesn't say a word about intent for any outside influence to be "in the loop". It is intentional that law prohibits such influence.

I'm afraid the only myth here is yours. I sincerely hope that this will be challenged in federal or the Supreme Court.

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

I just cited where federal law dictates who is legally required to conduct the Census, and it doesn't say a word about intent for any outside influence to be "in the loop". It is intentional that law prohibits such influence.

I'm afraid the only myth here is yours. I sincerely hope that this will be challenged in federal or the Supreme Court.

Every person in the Executive Branch is accountable to the President.

The myth that Obama intends to micro-manage the Census and circumvent the Secretary of Commerce is right up there with ACORN getting federal grants to conduct the Census.

roachboy · 08-27-2009, 03:38 PM

for what reason is a challenge important?
i still have no idea what the point of this action is...maybe someone would be kind enough to fill me in?

mixedmedia · 08-27-2009, 04:02 PM

I can't help but giggle that anyone would think they are accomplishing anything by boycotting the census. What a bunch of self-important nonsense.

dc_dux · 08-27-2009, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414

BTW, last census, I listed all of my family as "Native Americans", as we were all born here. I'll bet I just pissed some of you off.

Probably means more federal $$$ went to Native Americans, assuming others did the same.

dippin · 08-27-2009, 04:27 PM

This idea is so absurd that only people who have never had to do any data management or were ever involved in any survey can buy it.

Let's assume for a moment that Obama is 100% willing and able to manipulate it to his advantage: why would he manipulate it at the micro level? At the individual level? Which would involve thousands upon thousands of interviewers? Besides, manipulating a census in real time at the micro level would require a sort of quasi-omniscience that is impossible to achieve. If he wanted to manipulate it, it would be much easier to do so through misleading "assumptions" when managing the data, and in that case truthfully answering the census would make the task much harder.

In fact, the census is the best way of influencing policy and letting the government know about your situation.

As for why Beck et al are actually doing this, my guess is that this is a preemptive attempt to delegitimize it. The biggest political problem facing capital R republicans is demographic. With a significant increase in minorities and urban areas (as most expect) redistricting could be very damaging to their political aspirations.

highthief · 08-27-2009, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

I can't help but giggle that anyone would think they are accomplishing anything by boycotting the census. What a bunch of self-important nonsense.

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner.

FuglyStick · 08-27-2009, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

I can't help but giggle that anyone would think they are accomplishing anything by boycotting the census. What a bunch of self-important nonsense.

THAR COMIN FER MA GUNNNNNNZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously, though, it's just a bunch of petulant foot stamping by conservatives who are determined to make a case over every federal issue now that Democrats are in charge (where was this uproar when the Patriot Act went into effect?)

The_Dunedan · 08-27-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Seriously, though, it's just a bunch of petulant foot stamping by conservatives who are determined to make a case over every federal issue now that Democrats are in charge (where was this uproar when the Patriot Act went into effect?)

Some folks have been making an uproar since long before that, and have certainly included the monstrous USA PATRIOT Act in the aforesaid; folks like William Norman Grigg, who was fired from his position at the John Birch Society for his steadfast opposition to the actions of the Bush Regime. J. J. Johnson also comes to mind, likewise Dr. Ron Paul (14th Dist. TX).

n0nsensical · 08-27-2009, 08:50 PM

Lets hope they really do disappear.

ASU2003 · 08-30-2009, 10:24 AM

Shouldn't they just go ask the NSA for the info?

I mean, aren't we getting to the point where the government already knows all of this information? Can't they create the census with their own computers each year without input and expense from physically counting everyone? The local government knows who lives in which house and all the info on it, the IRS knows who you work for, the banks report how much money you made each year in interest, if people die, they get reported, the DMV knows if you have a driver's license and your picture, the schools know who the kids parents are, the police have information on criminal histories.

The only people that might not be counted are people who are really poor, people living overseas, and people who move a lot (without buying homes).

Daniel_ · 08-30-2009, 11:53 AM

I love the fact that the same people who fear that the government know everything about them from monitoring the internet, phones, banking systems and so on are also frightened that the government are asking them questions about how many people live in their houses.

As has been said above, if the US census is used in the same way as the UK one, it will be used to apportion funding around the country and within each state.

hotandheavy · 08-30-2009, 01:29 PM

This podcast explains why we should be concerned about the census:

http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/182..._100.3_KTLK-FM

Derwood · 08-30-2009, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotandheavy

This podcast explains why we should be concerned about the census:

http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/182..._100.3_KTLK-FM

summary please?

FuglyStick · 08-30-2009, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotandheavy

This podcast explains why we should be concerned about the census:

http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/182..._100.3_KTLK-FM

Cut and paste op-ed. Fail.

reconmike · 08-30-2009, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FuglyStick

THAR COMIN FER MA GUNNNNNNZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this simalar to? Dose stopid mofos think webe puting our heaters on dis paper!!!!!!

I will answer what I think is not intrusive, besides that I will leave it blank.

08-27-2009, 01:52 PM	#1 (permalink)
rahl Junkie Location: Ohio	Census I had a business trip today and while driving I thought I would listen to some talk radio to see what all the fuss is about. On both beck and rush I heard them say to either not respond to the 2010 census or to only fill out the number in the household and that's it. What is the purpose of this? __________________ "Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

08-27-2009, 02:09 PM	#5 (permalink)
samcol Junkie Location: Indiana	If they ask me I'm only going to say the number of people and that's it. There's no reason to go more in depth. __________________ It's time for the president to hand over his nobel peace prize.

08-27-2009, 02:11 PM	#6 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	I think they have two concerns...the one stated above by Dunedan that the longer form (the American Community Survey) is too intrusive (perhaps) and unconstitional (false) And that ACORN is "doing alot of the leg-work and promotions" or being given a grant by Census (Michelle Bachman claim)....also false. ACORN is one of more than a thousand organizations, including the American Baptist Churches of the South, Boys and Girls Clubs, National Civic League...that have agreed to be Census "partners" and promote the Census. Personally, I think Beck, Limbaugh are ultimately cutting of their nose to spite their face since the data is used not only for reapportionment, but also for federal grants to state/locals, etc. The more Bech/Limbaugh followers who chose to break the law (yes, it is breaking the law to refuse to fill out the long form or to fill it out falsely), the less of their followers will be counted. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 08-27-2009 at 02:15 PM..

08-27-2009, 02:13 PM	#7 (permalink)
rahl Junkie Location: Ohio	From the little bit that I heard on the radio, they were saying if you ignore the census and you have some legal punishment for it that it would get thrown out because it's unconstitutional. If this isn't true could beck and rush be in some sort of legal trouble themselves for giving bad legal advise? __________________ "Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

08-27-2009, 02:41 PM	#12 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i understand what the dunedan said--i don't agree with it, particularly not the nonsense about acorn, but whatever---but i wonder if there's something more to this action from the far right. what are they worried about exactly? the census is a useful policy tool at all levels of government: it's good to know populations, its good to know more information rather than less if you want to fashion coherent policy. don't you think? because of what i worked on academically, i know more about the ways in which census data is used in the french context than in the american--there it's one of the more base-level datasets for the technocratic aspects of policy formation and implementation. it's also an ideological grid, but any survey no matter who does it is an ideological grid one way or another. so i don't get it. is there more to these objections than what dunedan outlined? btw this is a real question. i genuinely am baffled by it. maybe if i end up not spending the next couple days tied up with a music festival, i'll do some research, but haven't yet. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

08-27-2009, 01:57 PM	#2 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	They're trying to scare the dumber individuals in our society into thinking that the big bad government is using the census to spy on you. Minnesota Representative Michelle "Loony Tunes" Bachman (the same woman who thinks Obama is not only Muslim, but is in fact an actual terrorist) is the one that first spouted this theory. They seem to be trying to parrot her.

08-27-2009, 02:03 PM	#4 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Resistance to filling out the new, longer Census form goes back for at least the last two cycles. Various elements within the libertarian/anarchist community were urging the same type of monkeywrenching last time around, and were denounced by the O'Reilly/Beck/Limbaugh/Hannity crowd as paranoid, anti-American, anti-government crackpots. Some folks object to the increasingly invasive nature of the questions (with newly-increased penalties for noncompliance). Others worry about the politicization of the Census (and since it's now under direct White House control, with ACORN doing a lot of the leg-work and promotions, they may have a point), with particular concern about its' potentially being used in politically- or racially-biased gerrymandering. The concern about ACORN is overblown, IMO, but given their recent and shameless Obama partisanship and willingness to engage in issue-specific advocacy and endorsement (in direct violation of the law as a 501 tax-exempt organization) I wouldn't be surprised at all if they -tried- to effect the Census in some way. Thankfully, ACORN seems to be almost as incompetent as they are corrupt, so this one doesn't really worry me personally.

08-27-2009, 02:47 PM	#16 (permalink)
rahl Junkie Location: Ohio	What beck was going on about was that the information would be redundant. He claimed that questions like how many square feet your house is or how man bedrooms is already a matter of public record and therefore doesn't need to be answered. I myself have never completed a census before. Not for any reason in particular, I don't think I ever received any info on it. I have been a homeowner for 4 years and haven't had any legal ramifications yet. __________________ "Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"

08-27-2009, 02:52 PM	#20 (permalink)
biznatch Junkie Location: France	So what's the underlying "fear" or downside to this Census? Is it not wanting to give too much information to the government? I wouldn't mind letting them know basic information. Hell, if you pay taxes, you're giving the IRS quite a bit of info on yourself already, right? __________________ Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread

08-27-2009, 03:09 PM	#22 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	just because information exists at one administrative level doesn't mean that other levels have access to it. you should look into what a problem it is to collect crime statistics nationally as a function of this information fragmentation. similar situation--though not as extreme--with epidemological information. and god knows what chaos there was when information sharing did happen effectively--why there were all those spies for the dept of agriculture about at one point providing soil and geological data and doing ph tests for farmers & gardeners---what were they really up to? around here there are lots of fishermen. as an industry, regional fishing pursued rational self-interest in a relatively unregulated context to the point that they fished themselves out of a livelihood--you know, rationally using draggers that rationally destroyed the ecosystems that the fish they depended on required to reproduce. when the feds stepped in to put a stop to it, alot of fishermen blamed the regulations put in place to stop the wholesale destruction of the regional aquatic habitat for the problems that they had themselves created in the first place. so people think all kinds of stupid stuff, even in the face of reality, when it's right next to them. are there questions about political affiliation on the census? __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

08-27-2009, 03:12 PM	#23 (permalink)
ottopilot let me be clear Location: Waddy Peytona	Congress has “directed” in Title 13 that the Census be carried out by the Bureau of the Census “as an agency within, and under the jurisdiction of, the Department of Commerce.” 13 U.S.C. 2. The Secretary of Commerce is directed to carry out the duties of this title and while he can delegate “the performance of such functions and duties,” he can only do so to “officers and employees of the Department of Commerce.” 13 U.S.C. 4. If the Director of the Census now reports to the White House instead of the Secretary of Commerce, and the Census is not carrired out by officers of the Department of Commerce, penalty for non-compliance would be difficult to prosecute. Execution of the census without Commerce Dept. oversight is likely in violation of federal law and should be challenged. __________________ "It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo

08-27-2009, 03:38 PM	#27 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	for what reason is a challenge important? i still have no idea what the point of this action is...maybe someone would be kind enough to fill me in? __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

08-27-2009, 04:02 PM	#28 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	I can't help but giggle that anyone would think they are accomplishing anything by boycotting the census. What a bunch of self-important nonsense. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

08-27-2009, 04:27 PM	#30 (permalink)
dippin Crazy, indeed Location: the ether	This idea is so absurd that only people who have never had to do any data management or were ever involved in any survey can buy it. Let's assume for a moment that Obama is 100% willing and able to manipulate it to his advantage: why would he manipulate it at the micro level? At the individual level? Which would involve thousands upon thousands of interviewers? Besides, manipulating a census in real time at the micro level would require a sort of quasi-omniscience that is impossible to achieve. If he wanted to manipulate it, it would be much easier to do so through misleading "assumptions" when managing the data, and in that case truthfully answering the census would make the task much harder. In fact, the census is the best way of influencing policy and letting the government know about your situation. As for why Beck et al are actually doing this, my guess is that this is a preemptive attempt to delegitimize it. The biggest political problem facing capital R republicans is demographic. With a significant increase in minorities and urban areas (as most expect) redistricting could be very damaging to their political aspirations.

08-27-2009, 08:50 PM	#34 (permalink)
n0nsensical Junkie Location: San Francisco	Lets hope they really do disappear. __________________ "Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." --Abraham Lincoln

08-30-2009, 10:24 AM	#35 (permalink)
ASU2003 immoral minority Location: Back in Ohio	Shouldn't they just go ask the NSA for the info? I mean, aren't we getting to the point where the government already knows all of this information? Can't they create the census with their own computers each year without input and expense from physically counting everyone? The local government knows who lives in which house and all the info on it, the IRS knows who you work for, the banks report how much money you made each year in interest, if people die, they get reported, the DMV knows if you have a driver's license and your picture, the schools know who the kids parents are, the police have information on criminal histories. The only people that might not be counted are people who are really poor, people living overseas, and people who move a lot (without buying homes).

08-30-2009, 11:53 AM	#36 (permalink)
Daniel_ Evil Priest: The Devil Made Me Do It! Location: Southern England	I love the fact that the same people who fear that the government know everything about them from monitoring the internet, phones, banking systems and so on are also frightened that the government are asking them questions about how many people live in their houses. As has been said above, if the US census is used in the same way as the UK one, it will be used to apportion funding around the country and within each state. __________________ ╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗ Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air, And deep beneath the rolling waves, In labyrinths of Coral Caves, The Echo of a distant time Comes willowing across the sand; And everthing is Green and Submarine ╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

08-30-2009, 01:29 PM	#37 (permalink)
hotandheavy Upright Location: Western WI	This podcast explains why we should be concerned about the census: http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/182..._100.3_KTLK-FM