Are conservatives blowing the Census?

posted at 2:20 pm on April 1, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

As the federal government ramps up its hiring at the Census Bureau to complete the decennial obligation, conservatives have also ramped up the debate over its use and its composition.  A movement to refuse to answer the race/ethnicity question has already gained some steam, while some have counseled against answering the questionnaire at all.  Rep. Patrick McHenry, a conservative Republican from North Carolina, scolds such advocates for failing to adhere to the Constitution — and for inadvertently damaging conservative prospects in the future:

I’m not worried about ACORN rigging the count – we already succeeded in kicking them out of the census. I’m not worried about the President’s attempt to run the census out of the White House – we beat that power grab back last year. I’m not even worried about privacy – this year’s 10-question census form is the shortest in memory.

No, what worries me is blatant misinformation coming from otherwise well-meaning conservatives. They are trying to do the right thing, but instead they are helping big government liberals by discouraging fellow conservatives from filling out their census forms.

Early census returns are showing that conservatives have been measurably less likely than liberals to return their census forms. A recent article in the Houston Chronicle points out that conservative Texas is way behind the national average in returning census forms and some of the lowest rates are in Texas’ most conservative counties. [Update: Since the Houston Chronicle article was published, the average national census participation rate has increased to 52 percent and the rates in each of the counties mentioned in the article have increased to the following, still very low, rates: King County, 25 percent; Briscoe County, 33 percent; Culberson County, 22 percent; Newton County, 30 percent.]

Few things make will make Nancy Pelosi happier than large numbers of conservatives failing to respond to the census. If we do not respond, we will not be counted and if we are not counted, then we effectively will not exist. That would reduce conservatives’ power in elections, allow Democrats to draw more favorable congressional boundaries and help put more tax-hiking politicians in office.

McHenry doesn’t have much patience for the complaints about demographic questions, noting that the Constitution gives Congress the authority to draft the questions, and that such questions go back to the very first Census efforts in the US:

History also makes clear that this argument is completely unfounded. Every census in U.S. history has asked for more information than a simple count. In fact, the most private question on this year’s form asks for an individual’s race and that question has been asked by every census since the 1790 census conducted under then-President George Washington. To suggest that this question or others like it make this year’s census unconstitutional is absurd.

I suspect that the motivations back then may have been a little different than those in recent Censuses, but the point is well taken.  As McHenry says, conservatives tend to argue for a strict-constructionist reading of the Constitution.  The Census is one of the few federal exercises that actually has a basis in the Constitution these days, and the language appears to give Congress very wide latitude in conducting it:

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. (Article I, Section 2, Clause 3)

I’m always a little suspicious of questionnaires on ethnicity, but the Census has a Constitutional mandate — and it has far-reaching consequences.  People in states where conservatives outstrip liberals could be committing political suicide if a boycott effort results in shortchanging those states in Congressional representation to the benefit of states like California, New York, Washington, and Massachusetts.  It seems better to ensure that an accurate count gets taken by a concerted effort to count conservatives than the results a boycott or a “slowcott” would produce.

Of course, people may disagree on this topic.  Here’s a poll for Hot Air readers, which I hope covers the range of responses:


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Besides, not everyone files for taxes. Lots of people live on less than $12,500 a year, believe it or not. And children do not file either.

Terrye on April 1, 2010 at 3:11 PM

Maybe, but we ALL have a birth certificate or SS card on file. My race is right there on my BC along with my mother & fathers’. If they want to know my info so bad, they can find it.

What kills me is that people probably have no problem checking “What race are you” box on a doctor’s application or any other form out there.

I bet you people give your SSN to anyone who puts a line on a form asking for it.

WTF does your Dentist or Doctor or Realtor need your SSN?

Having said all that, this census is a crock of unconstitutional BS questions.

uknowmorethanme on April 1, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Terrye,

Please point to examples of previous presidents that

– attended a decisively anti-Semetic and anti-American
church for 20 years
– received millions in illegal donations from non-US
citizens online
– was ACORN’s lawyer
– tried to take control of the census directly under the WH
– nationalized health care
– nationalized student loans
– nationalized the auto industry
– nationalized the banking industry

If you don’t think he is capable of fudging the data to advance his goals….well so be it. But you are being naive to trust this man.

angryed on April 1, 2010 at 3:23 PM

The main use of the 2010 census is to redraw the district lines for the House of Representatives. An under count of your community/district is not going to be in your favor in the long run, especially for those House districts that are in demographic transition.

As a genealogist, I work with census data all the time. It is a very useful tool in research and helps to bring your ancestor to life. As a matter of fact there is a 72 year privacy law that prevents the release of information. The 1930 census was released in 2002, the 1940 will be released in 2012. This 2010 census won’t be made public until 2082.

Today’s census is really not that intrusive as far as personal data collection. And as far as the Community survey is concerned, in 2082 some lucky descendant of someone who filled out the questionnaire will be very happy to have found it and the other 90% of the population will just be flat out of luck with just a name, age and race.

Personally, I wouldn’t be recalcitrant to answer. It’s stuff they can find out if they want, anyway.

blatantblue on April 1, 2010 at 3:04 PM

You’re right. There is nothing on the form that the government can’t find out about you if they want to. They issue you a SS# for that specific purpose.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 3:24 PM

I put down “American”, seeing as I was born here. I find it confusing in this “post-racial” era that the government has to have a question about ‘race’.

Here’s a question they could have asked:

DO YOU FIND THE GOVERNMENT OPPRESSIVE AND REACHING BEYOND WHAT WAS ENVISIONED BY THE FOUNDERS? YES NO

I’d be interested in the results.

GarandFan on April 1, 2010 at 3:27 PM

Personally, I wouldn’t be recalcitrant to answer. It’s stuff they can find out if they want, anyway.

blatantblue on April 1, 2010 at 3:04 PM

So why don’t they? Why spend all this money when the info is lying around just waiting to be collected?

angryed on April 1, 2010 at 3:27 PM

Terrye on April 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM

No, the Constitution calls for an enumeration. All that is mentioned in the the Constitution is number of people in the house and the ages.

In case you don’t understand the meaning of enumeration, Websters defines it as “to ascertain the number of”. That means a count. That is ALL congress is charged with collection via the Constitution and that is all the information I will give them. Now, if my STATE requires more, I will give them that because any right not expressed in Article 1 is reserved for the states.

Wolftech on April 1, 2010 at 3:29 PM

We all claim to believe in the Constitution. Yet, many choose to try thwarting it because we don’t like those in power. I don’t like Dems and liberals, as you might be aware, to a level that would get me banned from here for expressing my views in full.

I find this census fair and honest, and quite limited. Remember, those who know me after so long, I’m terribly cynical and often full of sarcasm.

It costs us nothing at all to be honest with the questions. As a matter of fact–since liberals make an art of unintended consequences, we Cons might be facing a boon if we play our cards right.

Our Constitution depends a lot on personal honesty and integrity. At its inception, the Constitution spoke to men who were willing to pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. To Divine Providence, their Word was bond, in belief that the Most High demands no less. A Holy God will not tolerate a man breaking his word, no matter some lofty goal.

Liberals claim such, they claim a moral high ground. But, in their twisting, they have no problem lying to gain that imaginary pinnacle.

The Pub Party, being so vilified–and, worse, we Cons and Christians–have to do our thing smarter and better than those other guys.

Rebellion doesn’t always win. But honesty and values never fail.

Just an idea, friends.

(steps down and takes away my soapbox)

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 3:30 PM

A “count” is a number. I assumed it meant the number of living, breathing human beings in my home and that’s what I answered honestly.

SKYFOX on April 1, 2010 at 3:31 PM

I just gave # of people in home and race(American)… There is no way I’d give birth dates for myself and my kids, or their names…

reshas1 on April 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Under the race category I checked all the boxes and wrote in:
AMERICAN MONGREL

Seriously, I really did.
True story :)

SalHansen on April 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

I answered what was required by the Constitution, wrote refused on all the other questions and attached a copy of Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 2.

Wolftech on April 1, 2010 at 2:58 PM

I invite the Census protestors to be wary of the argument about what is and is not required, Constitutionally.

The very first Census Act (March 1790) said the following:

“…..they [District Marshalls] are hereby authorized and required to cause the number of inhabitants within their respective districts to be taken; omitting in such enumeration Indians not taxed, and distinguishing those bound for service for term of years, from all others; distinguishing also the sexes and colours of free persons, and the free males of sixteen years and upwards from those under that age;……

Name of head of household, number living in the house, sex, colour. Not that much different than this years’ census questions.

Failure to cooperate would result in a $20 fine, roughly $500 today.

BobMbx on April 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

If, for the love of God, we lose seats and LOSE ELECTORAL VOTES because of these shenanigans…..

Apologetic California on April 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM

“We were fortunate to receive the short form this year, the long form 10 years ago with the Bush administration. We filled out the short form completely and returned it promptly. ”

BUSH was not President in the year 2000. Clinton was the President.
I “honestly” answered the census by stating how many live in my home. That was it! If they want to schedule a visit for more information I’ll tell them that they are more than welcome to comeby and that I will be videotaping the interview and posting it online. The constitution requires a count, that’s what they got, nothing more.

margretto on April 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM

I guess this means that if and when a Republican wins then the Democrats are justified in not filling it out because they would naive to think that a Rethuglican would actually leave the data as they got it

Terrye on April 1, 2010 at 3:15 PM

In 1990 and 2000, I answered only the number in my household. That is ALL I have ever answered regardless of which political party is in power.

Wolftech on April 1, 2010 at 3:35 PM

Really? Oh….ok. So, Pakistani is a race distinct from the Afghan race?

BobMbx on April 1, 2010 at 2:46 PM

Actually, yeah.

Darth Executor on April 1, 2010 at 3:35 PM

upinak on April 1, 2010 at 2:48 PM

Sounds like a great dawg. I like both breeds.Just curious about how it happened!

katy the mean old lady on April 1, 2010 at 3:36 PM

I lied on the race question for myself and my family. My race and the race of my family is not the governments business.

paulsur on April 1, 2010 at 3:37 PM

I wrote in “American” but I filled in the form right away.

joe_doufu on April 1, 2010 at 3:37 PM

Apologetic California on April 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM

All that they need is the NUMBER. That is what I gave them. My race or if I own the house or rent does not affect that and has zero bearing on population.

Wolftech on April 1, 2010 at 3:38 PM

This census is different from my past two. In one–10 years ago–20? They asked my income. I refused to answer, so they sent a taker.

This census doesn’t have such questions. Are Cons involved in this? I luuuuuuv that notion!

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 3:38 PM

BobMbx on April 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Again, the census act fall outside of the powers of the originally laid down by the constitution. If they make it an amendment, that is fine. But since it is not, and it is beyond what is laid down as a specific power in the Constitution for the legislative branch, it is not constitutional whether it has been challenged in court or not. As such, it is a states right. Yes, I know I am splitting hairs on this, but sometimes a line needs to be drawn… this far and NO farther.

Wolftech on April 1, 2010 at 3:41 PM

I felt the same way about filling out my census form “ahead of time” but did it anyway. If I had any courage I just would have filled out #1 (number of persons). #2 threw me for a loop — “what do you mean are there any ADDITIONAL people in the house I left out of #1??? I just filled that out 15 SECONDS AGO!!!”

I skipped #3 and #4 (own/rent/mortgage and phone#) kept the personal information about the occupants to a minimum. Our town has a yearly census form that confirms our names and genders so I’m pretty used to that, and I chose to give ages for each (not birthdates) and be honest on the latino & race questions. We’ll be moving soon, and our kids will be on their own by the time of the next census anyway so I figured it was a wash.

I actually was an Enumerator for the 2000 Census and that form was much more confusing. Our area is primarily “unspecified white” but has a three-generation deep demographic group that refer to themselves as either “Portuguese” or “Cape Verdean” and quite vehement about either one while strongly resisting the other descriptor (on an individual basis) AND STILL WANTING TO BE CLASSIFIED BY RACE — as in “race=white, ethnicity=Portuguese” or “race=black, ethnicity=Cape Verdean” or “race=black, ethnicity=Cape Verdean”. It was an form-completing nightmare.

On an unrelated note, almost everyone I worked with on the 2000 Census was either witless or a drug addict. Fun times.

zenscreamer on April 1, 2010 at 3:42 PM

You’re right. There is nothing on the form that the government can’t find out about you if they want to. They issue you a SS# for that specific purpose.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 3:24 PM

Right. That’s why many of us feel that this is unnecessary at this point in time. The government already owns us.

Yes, yes, it’s a Constitutional requirement. But it’s all so fixed.

Not picking a fight with you, but the point many are making is that we might do a better job of tracking illegals, for instance, than bringing the weight of the Feds on American citizens. But, that’s how it always goes, right?

Cody1991 on April 1, 2010 at 3:43 PM

I put “American” for me and left it blank for my wife and kids. Am I going to a secret federal prison camp?

29Victor on April 1, 2010 at 3:43 PM

On an unrelated note, almost everyone I worked with on the 2000 Census was either witless or a drug addict. Fun times.

zenscreamer on April 1, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Just the kind of people I want knowing where I live, how much money I make, how many kids I have and their birthdays, oh and my phone number too.

Maybe they should outsource the data entry to prisons and let felons get all that info as well.

angryed on April 1, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Again, the census act fall outside of the powers of the originally laid down by the constitution. If they make it an amendment, that is fine. But since it is not, and it is beyond what is laid down as a specific power in the Constitution for the legislative branch, it is not constitutional whether it has been challenged in court or not. As such, it is a states right. Yes, I know I am splitting hairs on this, but sometimes a line needs to be drawn… this far and NO farther.

Wolftech on April 1, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Just a quick question:

Who was in the first Congress?

Too slow. I’ll answer: The folks who conceived, argued, wrote, agreed to, and then convinced the various states to ratify it.

If ever there was a Congress who had an intimate knowledge of what was and was not within the bounds of the Constitution, it was those guys who wrote the Census Act of 1790.

Duh.

BobMbx on April 1, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Terrye on April 1, 2010 at 3:11 PM

I agree, it’s not about saving money, it never is with the feds.

And the feds write the laws so they can have the IRS share info with the census bureau if they want. It’s the same damn information.

For the few people who don’t file (and most do, even poor, because of tax credits, etc), that information could have been gathered by exception.

If we were concerned with saving money and why should we be? It’s not like we’re many trillions in debt or anything.

NoDonkey on April 1, 2010 at 3:47 PM

BobMbx on April 1, 2010 at 3:46 PM

Not every member of the first Congress of the United States was a member of the Constitutional Congress. While many were, not all, therefor your snark holds no real water.

Wolftech on April 1, 2010 at 3:52 PM

I put “American” for me and left it blank for my wife and kids. Am I going to a secret federal prison camp?

29Victor on April 1, 2010 at 3:43 PM

If so, I’ll see you there. You bring the chips, I’ll bring the dip.

Abby Adams on April 1, 2010 at 3:58 PM

Constitutional Congress.

Wolftech on April 1, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Never heard of it.

The U.S. Constitution empowers the Congress to carry out the census in “such manner as they shall by Law direct” (Article I, Section 2).

That’s all the water that needs to be carried.

BobMbx on April 1, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Right. That’s why many of us feel that this is unnecessary at this point in time. The government already owns us.

Yes, yes, it’s a Constitutional requirement. But it’s all so fixed.

Not picking a fight with you, but the point many are making is that we might do a better job of tracking illegals, for instance, than bringing the weight of the Feds on American citizens. But, that’s how it always goes, right?

Cody1991 on April 1, 2010 at 3:43 PM

It’s really not an either/or issue. The census is mandated by the Constitution. The Congress decides what information is collected.

I’m personally more concerned about the cherry-picking of the enumeration and it’s impact on historical data. I’m more concerned that the long form, community survey, is being used in a targeted manner to yield desired results, than in a random survey manner. I’m more concerned that the administration of this census was moved into the White House under Rhamn when it’s always been a separate Bureau under the Dept of Commerce.

I’d be more concerned that creating the illusions of conspiracy about the collection of the information is just a distraction.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 4:02 PM

Maybe they should outsource the data entry to prisons and let felons get all that info as well.

angryed on April 1, 2010 at 3:46 PM

They tried to already. It was called ACORN.

Guardian on April 1, 2010 at 4:04 PM

I answered the census, and it’s a real shame that it’s main focus was on race. Who cares what race you are, focus on the number of people in the home and their ages. Race should have nothing to do with whether or not your area gets money or other benefits.

Torch on April 1, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Right. That’s why many of us feel that this is unnecessary at this point in time. The government already owns us.

Sorry I messed up my quote.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 4:05 PM

What is so hard about just being honest? Why are so many thinking they can act like libs and win, and think that’s okay?

No one becomes better by acting as does his enemy.

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 4:06 PM

I don’t know if it has been said yet, but I want to see people discard different race labels. We are all humans, period.

The next is ethnicity, if you were born here then you are American, period. That does not mean you have no heritage but what your ethnic origins are should not make any difference on your future and how you are treated.

pwdrhnd23 on April 1, 2010 at 4:07 PM

The census is mandated by the Constitution. The Congress decides what information is collected.

The Constitutional Mandate is on Congress, not the people.

I answered, but Congress could have easily collected this information without conducting this wildly expensive, outdated census.

This Democrat “administration” is just going to screw with the data anyway. Since it’s going to be phoney data, we could have done this much cheaper.

NoDonkey on April 1, 2010 at 4:08 PM

I mean, seriously–if some guy mocks me because he beats his wife and I don’t, I become ‘better’ by following his example to hit the woman I love?

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 4:09 PM

I received the initial letter telling me the form was going to be sent but not the form itself. Rush was encouraging us to put Americans in the race slot. Would they take that to mean that a white person did that? *L*

Eyvonne on April 1, 2010 at 4:09 PM

In states like MN not turning in your census could result in losing a seat in Congress.

Race = Other > American

Dasher on April 1, 2010 at 3:10 PM

Question…..what the he!! does race have to do with losing/gaining a seat in Congress??? I think number in household would be the defining point on number of seats alloted. Pls correct me if I am wrong.

sicoit on April 1, 2010 at 3:12 PM

.
That’s why I had two paragraphs.

Dasher on April 1, 2010 at 4:11 PM

The census says this, first line:

The Census must count every person living in the United States on April 1, 2010.

If my calendar is correct, today is April 1, 2010. So, people should have the latitude to send it in after that date, as who knows if someone could have moved today. I think you should see the people sending in the form increase within the next week.

As for the questions themselves, here is a history of previous Census questions, with the very first one:

Gauthier, Jason G., Measuring America: The Decennial Censuses From 1790-2000, (US Bureau of the Census/Dept of Commerce), Washington: US Government Printing Office, 2002, Appendix A, Page A-1.

Part 1 – https://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/pol02marv-pt1.pdf

Part 2 – https://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/pol02marv-pt2.pdf – Census Questionnaires

Part 3 – https://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/pol02marv-pt3.pdf

Part 4 – https://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/pol02marv-pt4.pdf

Part 5 – https://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/pol02marv-pt5.pdf

What needs to be addressed is the cost of taking the Census this year. The cost has tripled from ten years ago, costing $45 per person. How is that justified if we are mailing in the results? Shouldn’t it be cost of postage, 35 cents?

Year Population Census Cost Cost per person
1790 3,929,214 $44,377 1.13 cents
1800 5,308,483 $66,109 1.24 cents
1810 7,239,881 $178,445 2.46 cents
1820 9,633,822 $208,526 2.16 cents
1830 12,866,020 $378,545 2.94 cents
1840 17,069,458 $833,371 4.88 cents
1850 23,191,876 $1,423,351 6.14 cents
1860 31,443,321 $1,969,377 6.26 cents
1870 38,558,371 $3,421,198 8.87 cents
1880 50,155,783 $5,790,678 11.54 cents
1890 62,979,766 $11,547,127 18.33 cents
1900 76,303,387 $11,854,000 15.54 cents
1910 91,972,266 $15,968,000 17.07 cents
1920 105,710,620 $25,117,000 23.76 cents
1930 122,775,046 $40,156,000 32.71 cents
1940 131,669,275 $67,527,000 51.29 cents
1950 151,325,798 $91,462,000 60.44 cents
1960 179,323,175 $127,934,000 71.34 cents
1970 203,302,031 $247,653,000 $1.22
1960 179,323,175 $127,934,000 71.34 cents
1970 203,302,031 $247,653,000 $1.22
1980 226,542,199 $1,078,488,000 $4.76
1990 248,718,301 $2,492,830,000 $10.02
2000 281,421,906 $4.5 Billion $15.99
2010* 308,983,000 $14 Billion $45.31

Patriot Vet on April 1, 2010 at 4:11 PM

I completed and returned the census the day after I received it. And … I answered all the questions on it, including the race question.

Of course … on the race question … I checked “other” and listed my race as American.

The race question wasn’t that silly back in George Washington’s day – but today it is. By the way – what race is Barack Obama? He’s 50% Black and 50% White – I suppose he’ll list “African-American”. I take this to mean that the AFRICAN comes from his Dad, and the AMERICAN – comes from his White Mom. If both your parents are White – you cannot claim to be an “African American” – I think then you are just “American”.

Nuff said on that I think.

HondaV65 on April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM

As an Irish, English, French, Native American, I answered…

Blended

Jvette on April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM

The Constitutional Mandate is on Congress, not the people.

NoDonkey on April 1, 2010 at 4:08 PM

Ok, we can play semantics.

The Constitution mandates the collection of the data every 10 years. The Congress is the vehicle for the legislation that lays out what information is collected and how.

Eyvonne on April 1, 2010 at 4:09 PM

Considering that the majority of Rush’s audience is white who live in conservative districts, that probably wasn’t a very good plan.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 4:17 PM

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 4:02 PM

I didn’t send back the community survey, and when the worker came by I basically told her to get off.

What I’m trying to convey is that there is a growing distrust of the federal government. That’s always been the case, and I know this from incidents in my family. My grandparents’ farm was taken by the feds for some project. They were self sufficient and proud, but eminent domain for a project that later turned into a swamp left them in penury and dependent upon my parents. They were left without their own home and lived with us. We didn’t mind and were glad to have them, but they didn’t feel that way. When my grandmother died she said that she felt disgraced and betrayed by her own country.

When the government steps in there is no stopping them. You may feel that you’re doing a good job, but many of us know that nothing good comes from a government that intrudes on your life. Nice to know that you work for someone who controls everyone, right?.

Good for you. But never be proud. The same thing can happen to you.

Cody1991 on April 1, 2010 at 4:19 PM

HondaV65 on April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM

Race and other distinctions are subjective, how a free person chooses his or her own definition of self.

Many gays will define themselves as gay before they’ll define their other features. It’s all silly in the end.

Polarization, anyone?

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 4:21 PM

HondaV65 on April 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM

Is there a box for a half-white half wit?

Cause that’s what Barry Checked.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 4:17 PM

It’s an important distinction because the Constitution was never intended to be a vehicle Congress could use to shove people around.

Congress now views the people as their subjects. Congress divine right comes from Gaia rather than God, that’s the only difference between them and the aristocracy.

NoDonkey on April 1, 2010 at 4:22 PM

upinak on April 1, 2010 at 2:48 PM

I grew up with a newf and, if I didn’t live in an apartment, I’d have one right now.

I’m guessing that a mix of a basset hound and a newf created the most loyal dog ever to walk the face of the earth.

JadeNYU on April 1, 2010 at 4:22 PM

Can I get a troll here? I’m itching for a fight.

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Nice to know that you work for someone who controls everyone, right?.

Good for you. But never be proud. The same thing can happen to you.

Cody1991 on April 1, 2010 at 4:19 PM

I have no idea what you’re talking about.. I don’t work for anybody.. I’m a genealogist.. look it up.

It’s an important distinction because the Constitution was never intended to be a vehicle Congress could use to shove people around.

Congress now views the people as their subjects. Congress divine right comes from Gaia rather than God, that’s the only difference between them and the aristocracy.

NoDonkey on April 1, 2010 at 4:22 PM

How does Congress use the census to ‘shove people around’?

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 4:29 PM

Can I get a troll here? I’m itching for a fight.

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Truly. Where are the little ba$tards? I’m in on hell of an ugly mood, and I’d like a troll to show up.

Tomorrow is NFP – Non Farm Payroll numbers. Watch for the administration – another appearance from the Celebrity in Chief – to crow about a positive number. When it happens remember that it’s false. The numbers will be propped up by temporary census workers and probably more government jobs.

Cody1991 on April 1, 2010 at 4:29 PM

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 4:29 PM

Try not filling it out. There are criminal penalties.

I filled it out myself and feel others should do the same, but to me, non-compliance should not be penalized.

NoDonkey on April 1, 2010 at 4:31 PM

I myself check other under race…

Then I fill in “HUMAN”

I want to see them argue the point!

AFSOC_Commando on April 1, 2010 at 4:34 PM

We put the name of the primary resident, how many people lived here and that our race is American.

Beyond that, it’s none of the government’s business.

Enumerating is all the Constitution allows Congress to do. It should not be an open door through which nosy social engineers can extract all manner of private information.

powerpro on April 1, 2010 at 4:36 PM

Only one out of two citizens are returning this garbage because the whole census process has been unnecessarily corrupted/confused by government and people don’t trust what they are hearing from any side, especially a government that they don’t trust at all.

ACS has confused the entire issue. Also short and long forms, supposedly sent “randomly”, are also red flags to most of us.

Also, knowing that the “gov workers” of today can be a dispicable and corrupt ACORN-esque idiot, doesn’t help matters.

Of course we are paranoid about the race info, due to numerous reasons.

They should have (past and present) just sent a short form to everyone that is required by law and enforced – (name, number of residents).

THEN they can send out all the other forms they want, and ask politely for more information, BUT let it be CRYSTAL CLEAR that there is no obligation whatsoever to fill these out.

nottakingsides on April 1, 2010 at 4:37 PM

I’m not sure I get all of the commotion. I filled out the form for my family yesterday. Name, address, how many in the house, sex, age and race.

Big friggin’ deal.

cannonball on April 1, 2010 at 4:37 PM

NoDonkey on April 1, 2010 at 4:31 PM

Well, this is America. I don’t really care what you do.

I’m just pointing out that there is a lot of paranoia that has been created about the census that is not based in fact and can have detrimental effects on representation in our government. The issue to be concerned about is the cherry-picking of the data in targeted demographic areas because my understanding this that community survey is going to be used to ESTIMATE the population and there is not an intent to actually COUNT the population for the purposes of redrawing districts and reallotments of electoral votes.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 4:37 PM

Cody1991 on April 1, 2010 at 4:29 PM

They don’t come so quickly and easily any more; they’re limited by HA Admin at long last.

Last night, Denier almost got banned for trying to hijack the thread, accusing us immediately of racism. AP was quick on it, so they’re limited at long last.

But I want a fight, too, a debate. I’m sick of them being so insipid, so locked-on on their ideas they refuse to listen to us.

AnninCA was livid last night, which I find telling of her. When defeated on their slanders, libs have no place to go.

Dave Rywall went off on RepubChica one afternoon, saying she can’t be American because she doesn’t use an “American’ moniker. I went straight to Admin on that post of his. Guess what? Ten minutes later he was throwing out furious invective but couching his curses.

Oh, so telling!

I say to answer the census questions honestly; no harm to us. This census is more limited than those I experienced in the past. This time, the government isn’t asking my income.

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 4:40 PM

The only reason they wanted to know what Race everyone is, is so they can gerrymander the districts so they can keep their minority Districts safe.

Sporty1946 on April 1, 2010 at 4:40 PM

Why the hulabaloo over the ethnicity part?

ernesto on April 1, 2010 at 2:24 PM

No problem – race: human, Indy 500, Other/non of your business…

It’s all about redistribution of producers’ hard earned money. PC gone nuts, like so much else…

Fill out how many are in the dwelling – that’s what determines if conservative/liberal districts… how many representatives will be.

Schadenfreude on April 1, 2010 at 4:43 PM

All in all, given past census occasions, this one is far less intrusive. Government (for once?) isn’t asking our annual income or how many rooms in our houses.

Hope, maybe, that Constructionism is still in play under our Constitution?

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 4:54 PM

I responded. I’m the only offical Texan born on Mars now.

Limerick on April 1, 2010 at 4:54 PM

I’m just pointing out that there is a lot of paranoia that has been created about the census that is not based in fact

Perhaps, but I find it entirely understandable.

We have a con man for a president, who lied repeatedly during the campaign and had the lies backed up by our worthless media.

The Democrat Congress does nothing BUT lie. The Speaker of the House cannot for the life of her, utter a sentance that doesn’t have at least two or three blatant lies. Same for the Senate Majority Leader.

So why should anyone trust this Congress and this president on anything? They are demonstrably corrupt liars.

Again, I filled out the stupid form because they already have all of this information, but I can certainly understand people who don’t want to and this Congress has no moral authority over us at this point.

Morally bankrupt people should not be in the position of telling anyone else what to do, but that’s also the fault of the idiots who keep electing them.

NoDonkey on April 1, 2010 at 5:00 PM

It’s really sad that many of you have been conditioned to think it’s cute to put “American” in the race category, or to skip information that you don’t prefer.

I hope you know that if you turn in the form and it is not filled out COMPLETELY and PROPERLY (“American” is not a proper “race” as far as they are concerned), you WILL be red flagged, and you then become a target for harrassment.

Either fill it out completely and properly (as they want) or don’t send it in at all.

Screwing around with the info you put on the form is much worse than not sending it in at all.

nottakingsides on April 1, 2010 at 5:04 PM

Haven’t filled out this racist waste of time for 30 years and ain’t about to start.
Minnesota was a lefty state then and it still is so what’s the point!

chickasaw42 on April 1, 2010 at 5:07 PM

nottakingsides on April 1, 2010 at 5:04 PM

Agreed, and I’m a hard-core Constructionist.

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 5:08 PM

Haven’t filled out this racist waste of time for 30 years and ain’t about to start.
Minnesota was a lefty state then and it still is so what’s the point!

chickasaw42 on April 1, 2010 at 5:07 PM

Changing minds?

Liam on April 1, 2010 at 5:09 PM

Free index search for 1880 Census at ancestry.com

http://search.ancestry.com/search/db.aspx?dbid=6742

Type in your surname and whatever else you might know about your ancestor line for a list then you can view info.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 5:17 PM

I, like many others, filled in the questions marking the ethnicity/race question as “Other – American”. I do not believe this can “hurt” conservative numbers, conservative causes or is in any other way “shooting us in the foot”.

I cannot abide racism and do not believe that our governments should be the leading proponents of racism – which is what this question is directly pointed at.

::shrugs::

Fatal on April 1, 2010 at 5:18 PM

I’m always a little suspicious of questionnaires on ethnicity, but the Census has a Constitutional mandate — and it has far-reaching consequences.

They have a Constitutional mandate for an enumeration. That means a counting. Look it up in the dictionary. They have no mandate for the collection of other data. The Constitution says that Congress can specify how the enumeration takes place, but not that it can do things beyond enumeration.

For instance, Congress could say that at 10am on April 1st, every citizen is to stand outside their home, to be counted by monkeys who ride by on bicycles. Or they could require you to register in person or by mail or electronically or by becoming a fan of America on Facebook. That’s the HOW.

But they can’t say that people must provide irrelevant demographic information. Race should have nothing to do with assigning slots for representatives.

Mark Jaquith on April 1, 2010 at 5:39 PM

Early census returns are showing that conservatives have been measurably less likely than liberals to return their census forms.

This is easy to explain.

The census asks “Who lives at this residence on April 1, 2010?”

That question could not be factually answered until today.

You could fill it out with your wishes and hopes about what will be, but not about what is true. Not until today.

Ask yourself which poltical ideology is more likely to act on hope, and which is more likely to act on truth, and you know why the census forms returned prematurely are politically skewed.

Give it a few weeks and see if it doesn’t even out.

Rev Snow on April 1, 2010 at 5:41 PM

Mark Jaquith on April 1, 2010 at 5:39 PM

BINGO!

Fighton03 on April 1, 2010 at 5:43 PM

‘murrican..

VoyskaPVO on April 1, 2010 at 5:43 PM

From michellemalkin.com:
A Texan census worker:

“I wanted to confirm the email regarding the census. I also participated in the address canvassing last summer. I am a retired engineer and thought this would be good for some coffee money and exercise. We were trained for a week with full pay. Then our team started the job. I am in Texas and our city was estimated to take six weeks. After one week we were past the halfway point and then the problems began. First we were told to slow down. Next we began having a one hour “progress” meeting each day. We were told to take at least five minutes per house. I could have drawn the map by hand faster. The last tactic was to start layoffs.
I volunteered to be laid off. Some of the people working had been without work for some time and really needed the money.
I can only guess that some high level manager was not willing to finish sooner and compromise his high paying job.”

THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE BEING SCAMMED TO DEATH BY THIS ADMINISTRATION.

Cybergeezer on April 1, 2010 at 5:47 PM

I filled out the form completely and accurately, except for my phone number (which is listed anyway). There’s no point in giving more ammunition to those who want to use statistical models rather than true enumeration to conduct the census. If you are not counted, you are not represented, and with Congressional redistricting at stake before the 2012 election, it is vital to be represented.

doppelganglander on April 1, 2010 at 5:47 PM

We don’t receive mail at our house. The mailbox is welded shut.

We didn’t receive a census form to our PO Box, even though it’s our address of record, even with the IRS and DMV.

I have no objections to answering the short form basics for the reasons of apportionment, but I am NOT going to answer the long form. Last time we got the long form, and I just answered “NA” for most of it.

So, how does one get a census form if one was not received in the mail?

YTZGal on April 1, 2010 at 5:49 PM

YTZGal on April 1, 2010 at 5:49 PM

I would call the county clerk as the census is compiled by county.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 5:52 PM

Why is it that us little people are always the ones that have to follow the Constitution?

At any rate, I believe that the Constitution states that the government is supposed to take a census. I don’t believe it includes an obligation on the part of the Citizen to partake?

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 1, 2010 at 6:09 PM

I filled out the census form the day I received it and mailed it back the next day. That was about 2 weeks ago. Today I received a second census form in the mail to fill out. Do I fill out the second form and mark it ‘Duplicate’ or do I ignore it?

meci on April 1, 2010 at 6:20 PM

I took the time to look up the 1790 Census, the one everyone who had a hand in the drafting of the Constitution filled out. Then I filled out my census form, completely.

At any rate, I believe that the Constitution states that the government is supposed to take a census. I don’t believe it includes an obligation on the part of the Citizen to partake?

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 1, 2010 at 6:09 PM

Well, then dont b#tch when they come to your house and waste your tax money trying to get the accurate count.

Squid Shark on April 1, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Do I fill out the second form and mark it ‘Duplicate’ or do I ignore it?

meci on April 1, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Sounds to me like your idea of marking Duplicate on the second one and sending it in is a good idea.

Texas Gal on April 1, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Well, then dont b#tch when they come to your house and waste your tax money trying to get the accurate count.

Squid Shark on April 1, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Yeah, God forbid we should do something to make them waste our money.

Where you been, pal?

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 1, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Mark Jaquith on April 1, 2010 at 5:39 PM

You killed it. Bravo!

The Race Card on April 1, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Do I fill out the second form and mark it ‘Duplicate’ or do I ignore it?

meci on April 1, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Sounds to me like your idea of marking Duplicate on the second one and sending it in is a good idea.

I got a 2nd one, too. The instructions specifically say NOT to fill out the second one, but throw it away. I think they decided the low turn-in count meant that enough people threw away their forms that they should re-send them.

So, how does one get a census form if one was not received in the mail?

YTZGal on April 1, 2010 at 5:49 PM

The government knows about your house, and that it wasn’t enumerated yet. There is no question that you will be on some schmoe’s visit list. Fun fun fun!

zenscreamer on April 1, 2010 at 6:53 PM

If conservatives don’t respond to the census, conservatives won’t be represented? Wow, that would be a strange feeling……

JeffinOrlando on April 1, 2010 at 7:10 PM

Yeah, God forbid we should do something to make them waste our money.

Where you been, pal?

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 1, 2010 at 6:48 PM

So you are becoming part of the problem, not the solution.

Good job, I hope you enjoyed sticking it to the man…

Squid Shark on April 1, 2010 at 7:11 PM

I’m actually working for the census. Mine is one of the several million “jobs created” that Obama will crow about tomorrow. I took the job mostly to see the inner workings of the organization. The waste of money would make you cry. But if I’ve learned one thing it is please, please fill out the form and be counted. The system seems biased against rural (i.e. conservative) areas. No forms are sent to post office boxes for example.

The main purpose of the census is to ensure that the citizens are appropriately represented in the House of Representatives. So if you live in a conservative area, be sure to be counted.

BitterClinger on April 1, 2010 at 7:19 PM

I still haven’t gotten my Census yet. What’s up with that?

SoulGlo on April 1, 2010 at 7:53 PM

The race question was confusing to my husband’s family. They are from Pearsall,TX since Texas was a republic. (They can trace their ancestory back to 1800′s) The places they have moved to are Sinton,TX or Houston,TX. They look Mexican and have not relatives in Mexico. So how long until they are considered American? Or would they ever be considered American? Will they always be Hispanic?

meMC on April 1, 2010 at 8:50 PM

Well, I would love to fill out the census form, except none has gotten to us [and neither the "warning" letter].

No biggee. I mean, our house has existed at this physical location for over 100 years, but I’m sure they have their reasons for not being able to locate us.

meep on April 1, 2010 at 9:05 PM

We didn’t even get a census form and at 39, I never have. We live in a neighborhood and we have been in this home almost 11years.

conservativemama on April 1, 2010 at 9:21 PM

I listed my race as Merman.

Eprider on April 1, 2010 at 9:28 PM

We’re a nation of mutts. My blood type is Bennetton.

Marking my ethnicity as “American” seemed appropriate.

sulla on April 1, 2010 at 9:31 PM

The questions weren’t really a problem. And the Constitution CLEARLY gives them to ask questions as they see fit. But they left off ‘American’ as a race/ethnicity. So, I helped them out. I added it.

Pablo Snooze on April 1, 2010 at 10:03 PM

Whoops! ” . . . gives them THE RIGHT to ask . . . ” Sorry.

Pablo Snooze on April 1, 2010 at 10:04 PM

I wonder about the math involved not responding to the census. For example, say you live in district and state that is HEAVILY Democratic. Boston For instance. If the population of Boston is 15% conservative, If all of them did not respond the City would show a large drop in population, MA would likely lose one rep, picked up elsewhere in the country. In fact, if concervatives made up 30% of the MA population, havingthem all not register with the census would cause MA to loose several seats to other states tat tend more Red.

Now if you are in a Conservative state, like TX, this wouldn’t work. Even if you were in a group of liberal districts, the loss of a rep would be hard to offset by hoped for drop in the representation in the liberal districts.

I am not advocating failing to file. Just pointing you that it might not be all downside

OBQuiet on April 1, 2010 at 10:07 PM

Every ten years I fill out the Census, and for the race question I select other and write “American”.

For one thing I have far too much mixed blood to claim anything, for another I resent the division of Americans into subgroups. I am an American, and the group identity I have is “American”, not white, and not Indian.

I feel that filling out the census form in this way is a statement that is heard. As my understanding is that at least 10% of the census every ten years answers “American” in the race box.

Sackett on April 1, 2010 at 10:29 PM

I filled out AMERICAN in the race box under “other”, and also omitted the phone number.

karenhasfreedom on April 1, 2010 at 10:34 PM

Husband wanted to fill in American, but I wouldn’t let him. To me that’s a red flag for conservative household in other words trash bin. I do not trust this administration.

redridinghood on April 1, 2010 at 10:36 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4